Matrox G450 or GeForce2 MX - for 2D / 2 monitors?
Home | Reviews and Features | Special Reports | Forums |

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Matrox G450 or GeForce2 MX - for 2D / 2 monitors?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Glasgow, Scotland

    Matrox G450 or GeForce2 MX - for 2D / 2 monitors?

    I'm building a new system based on an Abit KT7A Raid / T-bird setup, and need some advice on which video card to go for.

    I notice a serious swing towards the GeForce2 MX cards in this forum, but am wondering if that's really the one to go for for my purposes.

    I'll be using my system primarily for graphic design work, image manipulation and web design, with occasional CAD work. I intend to get a second monitor in the future too. A good 2D performance is therefore vital to me. I don't play games (other than my 1971 Pong emulator for DOS), so I'm not too concerned about 3D performance. Indeed it's probably the case that any contemporary card will be adequate for my 3D needs.

    What else should I be looking for in the performance of a video card?

    The two cards that are catching my attention just now are:

    Matrox Millenium G450 32MB DDR AGP Dual Head
    Asustek GeForce2 MX V7100/2V1D 32MB AGP Dual Monitor

    Both cards come in at about 120 here. I am aware that the GF2MX provides far superior 3D capabilities to the G450, but that doesn't bother me too much. I notice the G450 has DDR ram, while the V7100 only has SDram. Is this significant, and is the trade off between RAM and 3D capabilities worth it?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Matrox and deffinetly Matrox

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Muncie, IN, USA
    I have to agree with miha76, the Matrox card would better suit your needs.

    PIII 700
    Abit BM6
    17" Viewsonic E773
    Antec Gemstone Case
    384 mb PC 100
    Global Win FOP32
    32 mb Gforce 2 MX
    Sound Blaster Live!
    2x 30GB IBM HDs
    Diamond Supra Max 56K
    Kenwood True 52x CD-ROM
    Plextor 12/10/32 CDRW
    HP DeskJet 932c Printer
    Windows 2000 Professional
    Inwin Q500 FT
    IWILL KK266
    640 mb PC-100
    Duron 1 Ghz
    Gforce 4 MX 420
    Mini Super Orb
    Pioneer 16x DVD
    Philips 24/12/40
    Philips 107S 17" Monitor
    Logitech Z-340s
    Win XP Pro

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    i have the matrox millenium dual head 32mb non-ddr

    i get about 60fps in quake at 1024x768x32 high
    i can play movies full screen at 2560x1024x32 at 30 fps. it's a great 2d card, probably the best. but get 3d out of your head right now because it sucks royally for 3d.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Santa Clara, CA / Baltimore, MD USA
    get the matrox, the geforce mx has pretty bad 2d quality

    Visit my website!
    look for me on AIM as gosanjose or on ICQ as #46997155

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Thanks for the replies. I was leaning towards the Matrox card anyway as I know they have a good reputation for 2D performance.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    London, United Kingdom
    Definately, Definately, Definately the Matrox. The 2D image quality (even 3D image quality) is amazing on those cards. They are a joy.

    P.S. this is from a GeForce2MX user

    AMD Duron [email protected] (7.5x133MHz)
    128Mb 133MHz RAM
    Abit KT7a RAID
    Elsa GeForce2MX 32Mb SDR
    "How much can you know about yourself if you've never been in a fight?"
    Main PC: A64 3200+ | 1024MB Kingston RAM (Dual Channel) | WD 160GB | Seagate SATA 160GB w/NCQ | Asus A8N-SLi Deluxe | Connect3D ATi X800XL Pci-E | Coolermaster ATC-710 case | Antec NeoPower 480w PSU | Toshiba 27wl46 27" TFT

    HwC member's gallery - Upload your picture here

    Team HwC [email protected] results - Find out how to sign up here!

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