Okay, please help decide...
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Okay, please help decide...

  1. #1
    GregT Guest

    Okay, please help decide...

    Matrox G400 single head.. or.. Voodoo3 3000....? I need the best 2d sharpness and vivid color rendering I can get using 800x600 desktop and hopefully 32 bit color and 85hz refresh rate. 3D games will only be things like Driver and a few other racing games. Maybe flight sim. 2D quality and crispness is a must. Which would be the better card for a K6III/450 on a 503+ and 128 megs?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California
    Posts
    690
    That's a Hard question. I have both. Well I have the Dual Head Matrox card. I'm using the Matrox card with a Pentium III 450, 128mb ram, SB Live Value, IBM 22GB.

    Normally I would go for the V3 3000 because I think it would work great with your system plus you can get it online for $88 like I did. But it doesn't have 32bit color. I like the Matrox card a lot.

    My V3 3000 is with my Athlon 700, 196mb Ram, Aureal AQ2500, 14.5gb IBM HD, Seagate 20.4gb HD. It pretty much kicks *** plus it's great with the tv out and my DVD player.

    I think you should go for the G400. I have played every top game out there and had good Frame Rates. One thing though; how much are you willing to spend?? $150 can get you a GeForce2 MX card. Great graphics, should work great with your system, and has 32bit color and faster than a V3 3000. Well clocked higher anyway.
    Main Computer Specs:
    Intel E8400 Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz 45nm
    Asus P5E
    4gb OCZ Reaper HPC PC6400
    Seagate SATA2 250Gb
    eVGA 512Mb 8800GT
    SupremeFX II Mobo Audio (for time being)
    Wynndows7 Home Premium 64Bit
    Currently playing; Crysis, Just Cause 2, Alien Swarn, Borderlands, and Starcraft 2.

  3. #3
    GregT Guest
    Not really worried too much about F/R. Only games are when my youngest plays Driver and and a few other racing games. I just need the best 2D quality I can get but dont want to degrade my 3D either. But I suppose that just aboput anything would be better than this Monster Fusion , right?
    Ya think the G400 would give me excellent imagery with 800x600 @ 32 bit and 85hz refresh?-------------
    I just looked and I can get a geforce2 MX with fan but no TV out for $108.95. Would this be the better choice? Consider my 2D crispness needs.

    [This message has been edited by GregT (edited 10-10-2000).]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 1999
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    1,002
    I'd agree with Wynner2 as I have a G400 and have had two V3 3ks and one 2k. Tough choice. You won't find a more compatible card than the V3s. For 2d, Matrox is the best. Ati may challenge but they'll lose. Matrox owns 2d.

    I had a problem with my G400, though. In 3d it would overheat and it would crash under heavy load and now I use it for my Win 2k Server (no games). I don't think that's indicative of the rest of the cards and still think it's a good card.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    500
    I still believe 2D quality is most dependant on your monitor.

    800x600 isn't very high resolution. Difference in sharpness are generally noticable most (if at all) at very high resolutions.
    BP6, P3-700@770 (for now), 320mb, eVGA MX Plus (dual CRT), waiting for VIVO module

  6. #6
    GregT Guest
    The G400 I looked at comes with or without the fan. A no brainer there. But I have two computers running all the time and I'll tell you about my 2D situation. One has an old S3 trio64 virge card(4 megger) and the other has the Monster Fusion 16 megger. The S3 blows the Diamond away for sharpness and contrast and just plain color clarity. They both have identical monitors of the same age. So, either one monitor is failing or the cards are that much different. So the G400 with the fan is what would probably do the best job for me?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Yokohama, Japan
    Posts
    928
    Yeah, that is probably the best but the MX is so much faster in games but the Marox might look better. I haven't seen the comparison because most of the reviews of cards that I have seen don't ever get into the visual quality that much, thats why the Nvidia cards are deemed so superior but at the PC world or PC magazine sites they are all talking about Matrox and ATi. SO....
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.

  8. #8
    GregT Guest
    Okay, the voodoo4 4500 AGP....good choice for what I'm doing?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    SF Bay Area, California
    Posts
    690
    V4 4500; Hmmm...

    If I'm not mistaken it's the same price as a GeForce2 MX and has 32bit color. I think it's another good idea but I think it's clocked at the same speed the V3 3000 is. The GeForce2 MX is clocked higher. So I think it is a good choice. But, before you think about buying it, try to find a webpage that tested the card first.

    Plus see if it's better than the GeForce2 MX. I doubt it because of the features the MX has but I think it's probably a good alternative.
    Main Computer Specs:
    Intel E8400 Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz 45nm
    Asus P5E
    4gb OCZ Reaper HPC PC6400
    Seagate SATA2 250Gb
    eVGA 512Mb 8800GT
    SupremeFX II Mobo Audio (for time being)
    Wynndows7 Home Premium 64Bit
    Currently playing; Crysis, Just Cause 2, Alien Swarn, Borderlands, and Starcraft 2.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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