PDA

View Full Version : Matrox's next Denial



ChrisDent
27th April 2001, 07:28
E3 is May 17-19 and Matrox has reserved some floor space.

Will matrox actually say something interesting or just reinforce "the fact" that the G800 (and probabably the G550) was the product of some deranged website (and deranged hex dump progs).

Jorden
27th April 2001, 08:56
As far as I read around, you have misread something, Chris. The G550 is real, whereas the G800 didn't make it (yet) http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

Besides, E3, isn't that a gamers convention? Maybe they show the G550 doing Matrox Matrix Skinning http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif (edit: G550 MMS... hmmm)

Jord.

[This message has been edited by Jorden (edited 27 April 2001).]

rylan
27th April 2001, 13:47
Just wondering.. why would Matrox even be going to the E3 gaming convention?
I mean, gamers don't take Matrox seriously anymore... if the G550 is what we've been hearing then they'll get laughed at. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/frown.gif

J1NG
27th April 2001, 17:44
Yes, well... have you looked at the price? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

J1NG

I know NOTHING ok? I'm just speculating here... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Ali
29th April 2001, 17:07
How come the G550 is real? Its just as much of a rumour as the G800.

The only evedence we have of its reality is the word of some web site that got some Matrox rep drunk.

As far as the G800 goes, we have John Carmack and that Amega guy to go by.

The both exist in the drivers, but neither have been officialy anounced by Matrox. Therefore they are BOTH RUMOUR!

The newest card of Matroxs that isnt a rumour is the G450eTV.

Ali (who beleived 100% that Matrox would announce the G800 at Cebit, and now doesnt beleive anything that isnt on the Matrox web site).

Jon P. Inghram
29th April 2001, 17:41
JPI, (who belived 100% that Amiga would announce the G800 at the St. Louis Amicon, and now doesn't belive anything about a new Matrox card)

Gary Hendershot
30th April 2001, 10:38
Well, once Matrox decided to ditch the G-800, it became a no-show (probably forever), so it wasn't someone's fantasy, at least for a while.

As for names, of course Matrox will continue to come out with new models on a semi-regular basis, but NONE will likely ever be called the G-800. One could surmise that the cancelled "G-800 Project" probably left a few Matrox engineering staffers and management just a bit unhappy and would likely associate the phrase "G-800" with "failure." So, I would never expect any future graphics adaptor from Matrox to ever be called "G-800" just from a psychological standpoint.

Ali
30th April 2001, 13:28
We do not know the G800 has been cancelled. We only know that a pissed Matrox rep might have said it was cancelled.

Besides, even if the origional G800 is no longer going to be relesed, there must have been a lot of technology developed for it, and that is sure to turn up somewhere.

What if the G800 was so much better than anything else by any other manufacturer that Matrox decided to wait till the Geforce4 until the release it. The G550 sounds like it would be an ok card for now.

Remember quotes:
Carmack: Bandwidth problem solved.
SDK consol: 180M Triangles/Sec
Matrox: We will rule 3D Gaming in 2002

Sounds quite promissing to me, but I will probably get a stop gap card in the mean time (with a BIOS that doesnt clear itself all the time). If the G550 is cheap enough, then Ill get that, otherwise its a Kyro2 for me. (with a mystique 170 for the second head).

Ali

Mad Maxtrox
30th April 2001, 14:55
The "G-550" class card is real. The specs are up for interpretation. Just wait a month. All you diehard "M" fans will buy the card. The frustrating restriction would be only 32M Ram. In the business arena, 2 x 21" monitors running 1880x1440x32bit need more. A 64M card would be somewhat outside of their target cost, but very attractive to the professional community.

Ali
30th April 2001, 17:31
Where are the G550 specs up?

Also, what are you talking about needing 64MB to display 1880x1440x32? My old Mill1 4MB would display 1600x1200at probably 16bit, I cant remember the colour depth I use to use.

So saying 1880x1440x32 needs 2X as much memory would equate to 8Mb per head. Say Im wrong, and you need 4X as much memory, then you are up to 32MB for both heads to display at 1880x1440x32.

64Mb is mainly a marketing thing at this stage. There are probably some games with enough textures to use 64MB, but it would be much smarter to use compression, and go back to 32Mb. You could use the saved money getting faster 32Mb rather than slower 64Mb (for the same price point).

Im sure there is a pretty table somewhere that would state how much video RAM you need for each resolution, but I cant be bothered looking just now.

Ali

Wombat
30th April 2001, 20:00
1880x1440x32 works out to 10+MB /head by my math.

dZeus
1st May 2001, 01:38
64MB _would_ be very nice for peolpe driving a 19"+ monitor and a tv/another monitor.

Currently, I can't use anything higher than 1024x768x32 when watching a DVD on TV out through DVD-MAX. With any higher resolution, there's not enough videomemory free for usage of overlay (which is required for DVD playback) and DVD-MAX.

Especially when driving 2 monitors in independant resolutions mode, you won't get too much of a performance hit when playing games if you have 64MB.

[GDI]Raptor
1st May 2001, 02:47
But the big question still remains:
when will we se this card?

At E3?

------------------
- [GDI]Raptor

Indiana
1st May 2001, 14:13
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by [GDI]Raptor:
But the big question still remains:
when will we se this card?

At E3?

</font>

Sure. But the real question is: E3 which year? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif
(Sorry, couldn't resist...)

rylan
1st May 2001, 14:31
Indiana: lol.. I was thinking the same thing.

I honestly can't see Matrox announcing a buisness class card at a gaming convention. Unless it is middle of the pack in 3D power or higher, nobody at that show will give a crap, unless buisness OEM people are there.

As I said in another forum, I have a feeling that by the time the 'G550' is released and actually _available_ to the end user, it won't even be what is considered 'low-end' of the 3D card market.

Alec
1st May 2001, 14:55
Wombat,

1880x1440x32 needs at least 10575K of Ram in a videocard. So... you were right.

EvilDonnyboy
1st May 2001, 16:55
Hmmmm. If I understand the rumors right, the G550 may be performing something in the range between a GF2 MX and a GF2 Pro. And from what I hear, it may be priced between $150 and $200.

Now thats way too much. The Kyro 2 will rivial the GF2 Ultra (in certain cases) and will be costing the around same price. So it appears like the G550 won't be too competitive in the gamer's market in that price range.

But i'll be getting one no matter what. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

rubank
2nd May 2001, 05:05
Maggi,

the rumourbuffer eats up 100 Kb of my head every day, so for the last 1 1/2 years 54,8 Mb ELM (Embodied Local Memory) is gone! I canīt wait much longer! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

rubank

Maggi
2nd May 2001, 05:33
LMAO ... now that must look funny !

dZeus
2nd May 2001, 05:53
Maggi, I was more thinking about desktop use of that kind of resolutions... so 3d with tripple buffering is not really an option at that resolution (yet http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif ).

However, multiple overlay surfaces like when used with DVD playback also eat video memory like mad.

Maggi
2nd May 2001, 07:38
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by dZeus:
Maggi, I was more thinking about desktop use of that kind of resolutions... so 3d with tripple buffering is not really an option at that resolution (yet http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif ).

However, multiple overlay surfaces like when used with DVD playback also eat video memory like mad.</font>

but you can also use triple buffering for 2D ... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Mad Maxtrox
2nd May 2001, 13:46
Maggi is correct! Triple buffering is becoming typical. 64M with HiRes Dual Heads would be awesome, and not much of a design rework. So, lets convince "M" to offer as an option soon.

By the way, anyone thinking that matrox is going to officially "leak" specs before an official launch doesn't understand the dynamic business of board design and the needed ability to chance specifications and features up to the last minute.

dZeus
2nd May 2001, 14:27
can you give examples on 2D applications/situations which use double/tripple buffering? I'm eager to learn! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

btw. hardware alpha-blending also eats RAM http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif another reason for 64MB on the next M card

Maggi
2nd May 2001, 16:32
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Wombat:
1880x1440x32 works out to 10+MB /head by my math.</font>

true, but that's 10MB per buffer, ie. using triple buffering eats it all up on one head already !

I'd love to get it with 64MB please ... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

impact
3rd May 2001, 00:33
Double buffering in 2d is great, because it allows you to have flicker-free graphics. A cup of Java maybe? (http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/2d/images/doublebuffering.html)

villerk
3rd May 2001, 02:08
I'd really love to know if it is really, I mean really, worth waiting for the G550? I could get a G400 MAX DH with about 150 USD (or G450). Should I wait juuust for a couple of weeks more (like I have http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/mad.gif ) or buy a G400 MAX and stick with it, as it has extremely good drivers? G550, at first, would lack a support for nearly everything decent. After a month or so they would be good enough to use! (That's the usual case... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/tongue.gif )