Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kyro / G400 image quality

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

  • Kyro / G400 image quality

    I just got my G400 back for a friend, and hooked it up to my new Samsung Syncmaster 900SL. I can now switch between my G400 and my Kyro to compare the image quality.
    Sadly it's not much of a contest. The G400 is so much better it almost hurts. I can run 1600x1200 with good quality on the G400, where the Kyro looks like I sweared grease on the screen. Even in 1024x768 the difference is visible, but not as much.

    Why can't we have the best of everything in one card ? (Not to say that the Kyro is the best 3D card, but it's clearly faster than the G400)

    C'mon Matrox, a lot of people are waiting for whatever you're developing now
    "That's right fool! Now I'm a flying talking donkey!"

    P4 2.66, 512 mb PC2700, ATI Radeon 9000, Seagate Barracude IV 80 gb, Acer Al 732 17" TFT

  • #2
    CHHAS,

    I know what you're saying...
    I traded my G400MAX for my friend's
    Asus V6800 for a weekend. The GeForce was quite a bit faster...my friend also mentioned that when he got back his GeForce,
    the 2D looked blurry for some reason!

    ------------------
    MatroxG400MAX..and some other stuff

    Comment


    • #3
      Hey CHHAS, what brand is your Kyro?

      Comment


      • #4
        It's a Powercolor, but I'm using a new BIOS and the Inno3D drivers, as these are vastly superior in image quality to the original ones.
        "That's right fool! Now I'm a flying talking donkey!"

        P4 2.66, 512 mb PC2700, ATI Radeon 9000, Seagate Barracude IV 80 gb, Acer Al 732 17" TFT

        Comment


        • #5
          CHHAS

          How much of a difference is there at 1280x960. Is it bearable?

          I´ve already ordered a Kyro II, and the 2D should be the same as Kyro I.

          [This message has been edited by Novdid (edited 14 April 2001).]

          Comment


          • #6
            At 1024x768 the difference in noticeble, but the Kyro is not too bad, at 1600x1200 (what I'm working on now, the Kyro is out again) the difference is night and day.
            I used 1152x864 on the Kyro, it wasn't as good as 1024x768 (or 1600x1200 on the G400), but it was ok, haven't worked much at 1280x960, but if you use a Matrox card at that resolution now, you'll notice the difference.

            Of course the Hercules Kyro 2 could have much better 2D quality than my Kyro although I doubt it a bit.

            I'm seriously considering selling my Kyro (if I can get anything for it).

            Another curiosity, I just did some 3Dmark 2001 benches on both cards:

            System: Duron @866(133), 512 mb ram (cas3 4w interleave), Win 98SE, DX8

            Kyro:

            Game 1 low - 26,1
            Game 1 high - 3,9
            Game 2 low - 29,3
            Game 2 high - 12,2
            Game 3 low - 44,8
            Game 3 high - 12,3

            G400 @ 160/180

            Game 1 low - 21,7
            Game 1 high - 7,8
            Game 2 low - 18,9
            Game 2 high - 8,1
            Game 3 low - 27,1
            Game 3 high - 15,0
            "That's right fool! Now I'm a flying talking donkey!"

            P4 2.66, 512 mb PC2700, ATI Radeon 9000, Seagate Barracude IV 80 gb, Acer Al 732 17" TFT

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks for the info.

              Comment

              Working...
              X