"Shawn M. Pierce" wrote:
> areas. Their drivers are some of the worst availible, not only does it take
> them 6 months to release a viable MSHQ certified driver, but they also
> cannot release a viable OpenGL ICD. For any games, the Matrox cards bite
> the big one. They are slow and ungainly. U can buy much better card by
The G400 scores better in both image quality and frame rates than any
NVidia card with many Direct3D apps, and the poor old Voodoos get left
behind once 32 bit colour is demanded. G400s handle very high
resolutions better than anything else. The TNTs frame rates drop
markedly over 1280x1024, allowing the G400 to surpass it. Who cares if
the G400 is 20fps behind at 640x480, when we're talking about 90 or so
fps anyway.
Yes, Matrox got their fingers burnt by never releasing a decent OpenGL
ICD for the G200, but the situation is vastly different for the G400. A
working ICD ships with the card which only lags behind the competition
due to its newness. Matrox have learnt their lesson, and are working
very hard to get a high performance OpenGL ICD out.
> I personally have a GeForce 256 (Creative Labs Annihilator). I
> play Quake, Quake3, Unreal Tournament, and many other games. I also use my
The G400 dual head feature rocks, lets see you run Combat Flight Sim on
your monitor, while watching the maps on your TV screen with your
GeForce.
-cb
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
