Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Matrox G400 32MB DH or G450 16 MB DDR DH??

  1. #1
    mini MURCer
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bonn, Germany
    Posts
    36

    Lightbulb Matrox G400 32MB DH or G450 16 MB DDR DH??

    Hello,
    I have the possibility to use either a Matrox G 400 32 MB Dualhead or a Matrox G450 16MB DDR Dualhead.

    The card is used in a buisness PC, where no real 3D performance is needed (maybe 6 times a year a opengl/d3d game has to run).

    Where are the differences between the two graphics cards in terms of usability, features, Dualhead, heat production, other and stability?
    Which card should I use?
    Matrox rox, S3 sucks!
    Attention:
    I am watching you!

  2. #2
    Super MURCer thop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,550

    Default

    Are you using DVI? If not the G400 is the better choice.
    no matrox, no matroxusers.

  3. #3
    mini MURCer
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bonn, Germany
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Both cards are AGP and Dualhead VGA (no DVI) because i am using 1 - 2 CRT monitors.

    @thop: why is the G400 the better choice?
    Matrox rox, S3 sucks!
    Attention:
    I am watching you!

  4. #4
    Super MURCer thop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,550

    Default

    It is faster, has 32MB and supposedly better TV-Output.
    no matrox, no matroxusers.

  5. #5
    Super MURCer Ribbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,181

    Default

    If you want to run the second head at higher resolutions (like, greater than 1152x864) at a decent refresh rate, you'll have to go with the G450.
    Blah blah blah nick blah blah confusion, blah blah blah blah frog.

  6. #6
    mini MURCer
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Bonn, Germany
    Posts
    36

    Default

    @ribbit:
    Is it because of the lower RAMDAC of the G400?
    How much has the G400 and the G450?
    Matrox rox, S3 sucks!
    Attention:
    I am watching you!

  7. #7
    Super MURCer Tempest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    I'm not Ribbit, but... Yes. Secondary RAMDACs for G400 and G450 are 135 and 230 MHz, respectively. The 64-bit DDR memory used in the G450 makes the card slower than the G400 (which has 128-bit SDR memory).

    More about the differences:
    http://www.matrox.com/mga/archive_st...g450vsg400.cfm

  8. #8
    Super MURCer Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    DENVER, CO
    Posts
    9,541

    Default

    It's because the G400 has a dedicated Maven chip for the second head, while the G450 does a lot of that work in software. You could sort of say that on a G450 the second head is "more like the primary display."
    Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.

  9. #9
    Super MURCer Ribbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,181

    Default

    I thought the Maven was just a TV-out encoder/scaler?
    Blah blah blah nick blah blah confusion, blah blah blah blah frog.

  10. #10
    Super MURCer Ribbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,181

    Default

    Originally posted by Ribbit
    If you want to run the second head at higher resolutions (like, greater than 1152x864) at a decent refresh rate, you'll have to go with the G450.
    Actually, doing the maths, the 135MHz secondary RAMDAC on the G400 should be fast enough for about 1280x960@72Hz. If you want to do any better than that, you'll need the G450.

    The 230MHz 2nd head on the G450 should be good for about 1600x1200@80Hz.
    Blah blah blah nick blah blah confusion, blah blah blah blah frog.

  11. #11
    Moderator dZeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    over there
    Posts
    4,636

    Default

    afaik, the Maven also contains the secondary ramdac.

  12. #12
    Super MURCer
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Rockville, MD, USA
    Posts
    3,883

    Default

    The secondary display on my G400 MAX is no where near as clear as the secondary display on either my G450 or my G550.

  13. #13
    Moderator dZeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    over there
    Posts
    4,636

    Default

    yes, the secondary ramdac on the G450/G550 is integrated into the core, and much better than the one in the Maven

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. G450 32MB DDR and 3DMARK2001
    By Digital Force in forum Benchmarks
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14th March 2001, 20:44
  2. G450 32MB DDR and 3DMARK2001
    By Digital Force in forum MURC Gaming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 14th March 2001, 12:06
  3. Is there a way to OC a G450 32MB DDR
    By Digital Force in forum Matrox Hardware
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 27th February 2001, 16:04
  4. DirectX reports my G450 32mb DDR as 16mb?
    By BokChoy in forum Matrox Hardware
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 16th January 2001, 22:46
  5. BX133-RAID+G450 32MB DDR
    By islander in forum Matrox Hardware
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 17th December 2000, 15:28

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •