Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

pick one

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • pick one

    after seeing one of the news clips claiming how matrox is trying to pack a lot of features and still sell their next product at a good price, a thought came to me. What would y'all rather have:

    1)card with cool features and performed mediocre and is priced mediocre-ly
    2)card with cooler features and stellar performance with a higher price to reflect this.

    Out of these two options only, which are you more likely to go for?

    no question in my mind, number 2 all the way.
    First Love:
    • Lite-On FS020 enclosure w/4 120mm Panaflos and soon a 172mm Nidec
    • MSI 694D Pro w/ BIOS 1.6
    • 2x800E cC0 Pentium 3 w/ 2xVolcanoII
    • SyncMAX(NEC) PC166 VCM SDRAM 4x128mb w/ CAS = 1
    • nVidia Quadro2 Pro, but Matrox at heart
    • And other non-important stuff like hard drives and a dvd drive
    • Pineapples


    Second Love:
    1990 Toyota Celica GT

  • #2
    i will only go for the best of the best.
    option 2 all the way..
    PIII 1Ghz|AbitSa6R|512mb Kingston|Matrox Parhelia 512 Retail|80gb WD & 30gb IBM 75gxp|Diamond MX300 A3d 2.0|36xcdrom|6x32AopenDVD|Sony DRU500A|Intel Pro 10/100 S|IIyama Vision Master Pro 450 | Celly 300a@450 'server' powered by a G400MAX

    Comment


    • #3
      D Final answer!
      System 1:
      AMD 1.4 AYJHA-Y factory unlocked @ 1656 with Thermalright SK6 and 7k Delta fan
      Epox 8K7A
      2x256mb Micron pc-2100 DDR
      an AGP port all warmed up and ready to be stuffed full of Parhelia II+
      SBLIVE 5.1
      Maxtor 40g 7,200 @ ATA-100
      IBM 40GB 7,200 @ ATA-100
      Pinnacle DV Plus firewire
      3Com Hardware Modem
      Teac 20/10/40 burner
      Antec 350w power supply in a Colorcase 303usb Stainless

      New system: Under development

      Comment


      • #4

        No. 2 !
        <font size="1">
        Celeron II 700 @ 1,1 GHz
        ASUS CUSL2-C, Bios 1009 final
        Alpha 6035MFC, 60 -> 80mm adapter
        2 x 80mm Papst Cooler 19/12dB
        256 MB PC133 Crucial 7E (CAS2)
        Maxtor Diamond MAX VL40
        ATI Radeon 8500 64MB @ Catalyst 3.0
        Hauppauge WinTV TV-Card
        Iiyama Vision Master Pro 400
        Plustek Optic Pro U12B
        HP Deskjet 959C
        Plantronics LS1 Headset
        all on W2k Professional SP2
        </font>

        Comment


        • #5
          I think it depends. Most of us Matrox Users have flash monitors, and dont mind spending more money on a good Video card.

          If I only had a 15 or 17 inch monitor, then option1.

          As I think most of us have 19, 20, 21 inch monitors, I would say option2.

          Playing at 800X600 on a 17 inch monitor looks the same as 1024X768 on a 21 inch (more or less). That means to get high quality output, we need 1280 at playable frame rates. That means a fast video card.

          Im personally an option2 person, but I can see how most people are option1 people.

          I can also see that Matrox will make more money off option1, as turn over will be MUCH higher. Nvidias best selling video card at the moment is the TNT M64 from what Ive heard. That must tell you something.

          Ali

          Comment


          • #6
            I say go all the way or just don't bother!

            ------------------
            "Wedge! Pull out! You're not doing any good back there!"
            Suggestive Star Wars line from Return of the Jedi
            Titanium is the new bling!
            (you heard from me first!)

            Comment


            • #7
              Option 2!

              Comment


              • #8
                I've got enough mediocrity in my life... #2!

                Comment


                • #9
                  <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Ali:
                  I think it depends. Most of us Matrox Users have flash monitors, and dont mind spending more money on a good Video card.

                  If I only had a 15 or 17 inch monitor, then option1.

                  As I think most of us have 19, 20, 21 inch monitors, I would say option2.
                  </font>
                  I *only* have a 17 inch Eizo monitor, but I'd still pay for a better card.

                  Option two for me too. :-)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    #2
                    According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Gimme a number 2 please!

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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        #2 mixed with #1, I would like a card faster than a Geforce6, but still cheaper than a Kyro2.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          #2.

                          Why do it half-assed when you can go all the way?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'd go for #2 but I don't think the next-gen card will be profiled as either of your survey cards.
                            <TABLE BGCOLOR=Red><TR><TD><Font-weight="+1"><font COLOR=Black>The world just changed, Sep. 11, 2001</font></Font-weight></TR></TD></TABLE>

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I think the next matrox card would go perfectly with my nice 19".

                              I cant for the life of me imagine Matrox to produce a card (however cheap it might be) with worse performance than my G400Max.

                              =)

                              ------------------

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X