View Full Version : So what do you think of the Kyro ?

29th January 2001, 00:40
I'm still waiting for the final product to be reviewed, but so far it seems quite interesting.
Tile based rendering seems like the way to go.

1st February 2001, 16:06
The Kyro II is one of the two alternatives I`m considering (second is ATI Radeon DDR) if Matrox is not going to deliver a new card this year.

Does anybody know how the image quality of the Kyro based cards is ?


[This message has been edited by MK (edited 02 February 2001).]

1st February 2001, 23:15
The tests I've read pretty much agreed that the 2D and 3D quality was better than nVidia's, so that's a plus http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

2nd February 2001, 05:05
My view on the Kyro is that the idea is great, the bang for buck is good, but at the end of the day, what's the support like? I don't see anybody behind the name that is going to deliver in terms of support and drivers as well as the more established companies.

4th February 2001, 10:17
I`m doing a lot of 2D work for my studies, therefore I`m worried about picture quality in case my next card is not from Matrox.

Is the ATI Radeon compareable or equal to the G400 in terms of 2D quality in 1024 x 768 x 32 @ 100Hz ?


(Already had BAD experiences with quality & NVidias chips, so Im not going to get one of these)

EPoX BX7+100, Celeron II 566@850 MHz (8.5x100), 128 MB PC133, G400 16MB SH (Bios 1.3-22,PD 6.10), on board Highpoint U-ATA100 RAID controller, IBM DPTA 20,0GB U-ATA100, Iomega ZIP100, SB PCI128, Mitsumi CR-4801TE, Pioneer 36x slot-in, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 400, Plustek OpticPro 9636T, HP 930C, Win`98 SE

The Rock
4th February 2001, 12:45

The Radeon is VERY comparable in 2D quality to Matrox, according to friends of mine who have them. Matrox still rules at 1280x1024 and 1600x1200, but at 1024x768, you won't be disappointed with a Radeon. I'll know more when I find some sucker to buy my GeForce 2 and replace it with a Radeon. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif


4th February 2001, 13:34
never heard of the kyro. where can i get some information about it?

4th February 2001, 14:44
Himself is right. Tile rendering is an excellent idea. But someone elso should be doing it apart from videologic/Imagination Tec, or whatever they are named this week.

Neon250 was their previous card (as the G200 was for Matrox) and their last driver for it is from sep 1999. How pathetic.

4th February 2001, 18:39
Matrox did have a tile based card once. Remember the m3D? It was Ok for its time (just after the Voodoo1), and was MUCH cheaper.

From memory it needed a big CPU to runnit well though (P133 or higher) http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

It was based on the NEC PowerVR1 chipset, which was the first version of the Kyro.

I had a friend who bought one of these (the m3D), and it was quite good. He bought it for $10 and got a $15 rebate. Wouldnt you love to be paid $5 to have a video card.

I have heard that the Kyro has issues with ladders in most games though. Because it does hidden surface removal, and most games put ladders over a background, the areas between the rungs is left black. Not sure if this will get fixed, but it sounds like a game patch would be needed rather than a driver update.


5th February 2001, 05:58
The Rock - thanks for the info. If I would be sure about the 2D quality of the Kyro (with was repeatedly reported as excellent, even THG =( says it`s better that nVidias) and would be sure about the future driver support, I`m really tending towards a Kyro II (STG 5000).
It will be presented at GDC/CeBit featuring T&L, DDR, etc. ! It really has impressing specs and the price will be rather reasonable.

Topha - you can have a look at the Kyro at Sharkeyextreme. The link is: http://www.sharkeyextreme.com/hardware/articles/kyro_in-depth/

But first lets see what Matrox is going to present ... :-)


[This message has been edited by MK (edited 05 February 2001).]

5th February 2001, 06:49

I have my desktop at 1600x1200x16 @75Hz right now with a Radeon on a 17" monitor. If I could somehow take a screenshot of it I could show you what it's like. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif I have seen the bad 2D of my friend's MX, black text on white looks like it was printed on wool or something, there is a cross pattern throughout, could be the monitor or could be video card, no idea. It reminds me of the TNT 1 I had for some reason. All I know is that I don't get that here, I didn't get that with the V3 the Radeon replaced either.

5th February 2001, 20:02
Himself - I had the same experience with a TNT ! After 3 weeks I threw the crap out of my system and put the G200 back in, that was soon replaced by the G400.

Your informations are really useful ! This puts ATI Radeon in second position - after Matrox G[whatsoever]. :-))


EPoX BX7+100, Celeron II 566@850 MHz (8.5x100), 128 MB PC133, G400 16MB SH (Bios 1.3-22,PD 6.10), on board Highpoint U-ATA100 RAID controller, IBM DPTA 20,0GB U-ATA100, Iomega ZIP100, SB PCI128, Mitsumi CR-4801TE, Pioneer 36x slot-in, Iiyama Vision Master Pro 400, Plustek OpticPro 9636T, HP 930C, Win`98 SE

[This message has been edited by MK (edited 06 February 2001).]

5th February 2001, 20:12
Now THAT is FUNNY!!!


5th February 2001, 20:32
Rags - what do you mean ?


5th February 2001, 20:53
LOL Matt look what have you started this time! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/biggrin.gif

Himself makes himself out to be the all knowing god of computer hardware and yet he runs 1600x1200 (16 bit LOL) on a 17" monitor!
Now that is funny! http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

6th February 2001, 06:25
*sigh* I really don't know where you get that crap. Where can you say you've seen me put my opinion forward as being better than anybody else's, or any excess ego in general? How well are you yourself doing in that regard?

1600x1200 isn't for everybody, I know, I am just pointing out that I have compared cards at that resolution on a 17" monitor. I typically use 1280x1024, but on occasion I like 1600x1200.

6th February 2001, 08:44
When anyone comes out slamming BBz claiming they don't know shit or that they need to explain to us what the deal is when in fact they know much much less will get a responce like that. Be what it may, I personally don't care how you take it. But remember this, even if we feel like having fun, you always manage to find that anal retentive side of yourself and shove it down our throats. Lighten up and you won't get this kind of responce.

6th February 2001, 17:23
Back to the topic !

Just in case somebody is interested: I did an in depth research on the Kyro the last 2 days and visited several Kyro related websites and forums:

http://eu.st.com/stonline/prodpres/graphic/kyro/index.htm [chipmaker]
http://www.videologic.com/ [developers]
http://www.imgtec.com/ [head of Videologic]
http://www.powercolor.com.tw/ [manufacturer]

http://www.mitrax.de/ [german]
http://www.paraknowya.de [english]


[The GOOD:]
- outstanding 3D quality
- good 2D quality
- speed nearly equal or faster as GF256 at 1024x768 in non T&L-optimized games
- really cheap concerning the performance
- Win2k driver seems to be better than the one for Win9x/ME
- rendering architecure has a bright future

[The BAD:]
- heavy T&L optimized games do not run that fast
- only one high qual manufacturer (= Videologic in contrast to Powercolor & the rest which have bad tech support)
- IMHO drivers still have far too many bugs
- new driver revisions fix some newer bugs but sometimes bring back some old ones(!?!)
- no Matrox-like long lasting driver support (at least at the moment)

But things may change rapidly. ST Microelectronics has announced the presentation of the successor, the Kyro II, in March at the CeBit. Considering the fact that the Kyro is playing in the region of the GeForce256, the specs of Kyro II are more than impressing: T&L unit, DDR-RAM, 4 Rendering pipelines, 166Mhz core, 0.18 micron ! Here you will find the details:


I can`t wait to see what Matrox, ATI and STM will present on the CeBit Hannover / GDC Las Vegas. March looks promising ...


[This message has been edited by MK (edited 07 February 2001).]

6th February 2001, 19:05
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Originally posted by Greebe:
When anyone comes out slamming BBz claiming they don't know shit or that they need to explain to us what the deal is when in fact they know much much less will get a responce like that.

How about a "response" like this. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

As for the rest of it, quit your whining, you ask for it with all the BS. You and Rags are always refering to nVidiots or slamming any positive mention of non Matrox hardware. Quit the hype already, you've made your mystic predictions already, repeating it is boring. So what if people upgrade to something else, going by the G400, any "G800" will be there for the next few years so they can always buy one down the road if it's any good. You think that nobody but current Matrox owners will buy one, is that it? Otherwise, what's the big deal what people do? Nobody can have a discussion about other cards without the beta boy brigade making snide remarks. (And possibly more than once using different MURC accounts, I wouldn't put it past them.)

6th February 2001, 22:59
More Kyro pre-/reviews:


8th February 2001, 03:14
As far as I can see the Tile Based approach is well suited to dual (or more) chip cards as each of the chips have a low power consumption, and it should be reasonably easy to split the tiles between multiple chips.

Ah well, I really hope that the Kyro 2 will be introduced at CEBIT http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

8th February 2001, 08:44
CHHAS - the Kyro II will be presented at the CeBit (refer to the x-bit-labs news link I provided a post before). What I hope is that this competition leads to reduced prices ...

For the last 2 or 3 months, I considered the Kyro (II) as a potential replacement for the G400 in case Matrox does not show up with a new gaming orientated card.

But after I read all the Kyro forums I have to admit, that it is out of competition for two reasons.
First is the bad condition of the drivers which have problems with several games and even with my favourite one: Colin McRae Rally 2.0 !
Secondly, I have heard that there is no long lasting driver support - as soon as the new silicon is sold, the driver development of the old chips is discontinued !

CHAAS - don`t you care about driver related issues or do you give it a try anyway ?

But STM`s next chip will be damn fast - the Kyro II will clearly outperform GF II GTS Ultra and will reach if not beat GeForce 3.



8th February 2001, 09:13
Excuse me?! FYI you were the one that has been rampantly slamming Matrox for quite some time now and it's not just Rags and I who think the same of your thoughts.

Since your mystical crystal ball must be flaking out bad lately, for when it comes to anything M you seem to think they are dead in the water and won't see the light of day for a long while, if ever.

Sure Byron toot your little anti Matrox horn, sounds like a fine thing todo, but if your looking for the reason for the delays look to the manufacture you're normally tooting for (nV). It is they whom have caused it and I might add in the lowest, most dispicable way.

Like they say, Birds of a feather... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

8th February 2001, 10:01
MK - I think I'll wait for Kyro 2 to show up before I consider buying a new card. My G400 is holding up well. But who knows, I've bought things on impulse before http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/wink.gif

8th February 2001, 16:32
CHHAS - I will wait for the new Matrox product before I consider to buy a new card !

MK ;-)