[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CL Graphics Blaster - impressions?





On Tue, 11 May 1999, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:

> If I may recommend....
> 
> Go with the Matrox G200 based cards...
> 
> They're pretty cheap right now (no, you don't need more then 8MB RAM), and
> they're running very fast here at 1600x1280 at 32bpp.
> 
> 
I'll have to agree with that, as Matrox makes the fastest 2d chips around
and the G200 has a nice 3D performance (and it looks great !) but I have
to additional comments :
1. I had a G200 but I was forced to replace it with a TNT after exhibiting
serious hardware problems (the system would lock 5 minutes after boot).
Matrox's own testing software decided the card had a faulty RAM, and after
replacing it, the second one also exhibited the same behaviour after a few
runs and with the same results. the guys at the store concluded that it's
must be my system, but even if they are right - the card is still
problematic if it doesn't run on any system (other cards I used ran
flawlessly).
2. the one I use now (ASUS made RIVA TNT) has a very good 2D performance,
and is the currently the fastest 3D card in the market for "spiffy"
windows games (voodoo 3 not included). the benchmark mentions a TNT card,
ranking it last, but I would like to mention that non-linux TNT-only
benchmark have also put the creative version last with a wide margin from
the top (which is the ASUS card) so I think this could be the case here
also. I would run some xbeches if you like and post the results here.

Oded

P.S I'm currently using 1280x1024x32bpp resolution only because my monitor
does not support more .. the card itself can go with 32bpp as high as
1900xsomething , even in 3d with z-buffer.