A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Video Cards » Matrox Videocards
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What's a good bargain in 3D gaming graphics card?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 21st 05, 12:17 AM
Tod
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Synapse Syndrome" wrote in message
...

"Doc" wrote in message
k.net...

what's a good "bang for
the buck" gaming video card for PC? I don't have to have the latest
greatest, it can be an older card, just something that supports 3D
graphics and that I'm likely to find for a bargain on eBay. Under $100
ideally, under $50 would be even better.

The
particular games I'm fooling with are Novalogic F-16/F-22/MiG combat
plane games. The onboard video works but doesn't support 3-D. I'm
running a Compaq PIII 933mhz w/WinXP home.

Thanks for all shared wisdom.



If you are a gamer, stop cross-posting to the matrox group. We are all
power-user hardcore professionals here. We don't play games and have
other priorities for our graphics cards other than 3D frame rates.

ss.

Then why does Matrox sell their cards with stickers on them that talks about
what
great game gaming cards they make?
Remember the Matrox Mystique, it shipped with two game demos.


  #12  
Old July 21st 05, 02:03 AM
Arthur Hagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Synapse Syndrome wrote:

If you are a gamer, stop cross-posting to the matrox group. We are
all power-user hardcore professionals here. We don't play games and
have other priorities for our graphics cards other than 3D frame
rates.


With the triple-head Parhelia being one of the absolute best cards for
DX8 gaming, esp. flight simulators and FPS games, you are mistaken
(although you're right about frame rates -- as long as they're high
enough, it doesn't really matter all that much whether you get 50fps or
150fps. A movie is 24fps for comparision).

--
*Art

  #13  
Old July 21st 05, 07:02 AM
Andrew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:03:23 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:

With the triple-head Parhelia being one of the absolute best cards for
DX8 gaming, esp. flight simulators and FPS games, you are mistaken
(although you're right about frame rates -- as long as they're high
enough, it doesn't really matter all that much whether you get 50fps or
150fps. A movie is 24fps for comparision).


LOL, please get a clue before spouting such rubbish in a public forum.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
  #14  
Old July 21st 05, 02:06 PM
Arthur Hagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Andrew spamtrap@localhost. wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:03:23 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:

With the triple-head Parhelia being one of the absolute best cards
for DX8 gaming, esp. flight simulators and FPS games, you are
mistaken (although you're right about frame rates -- as long as
they're high enough, it doesn't really matter all that much whether
you get 50fps or 150fps. A movie is 24fps for comparision).


LOL, please get a clue before spouting such rubbish in a public forum.


Exactly *what* is rubbish here?

Having several hundred bought games, six PC's, and a handful of
$400-range cards from nVidia, ATI and Matrox, I think I'm qualified to
voice my opinion. What's /your/ background for your opinion? And what,
exactly *is* your opinion, for that matter, except trolling?

--
*Art

  #15  
Old July 21st 05, 03:37 PM
Andrew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 09:06:32 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:

Having several hundred bought games, six PC's, and a handful of
$400-range cards from nVidia, ATI and Matrox, I think I'm qualified to
voice my opinion. What's /your/ background for your opinion? And what,
exactly *is* your opinion, for that matter, except trolling?


Comparing movie fps (which in themselves are inadequate) to game fps
is rubbish.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
  #16  
Old July 21st 05, 07:43 PM
Fisher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:03:23 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:

A movie is 24fps for comparision).


As comparison to a game it is useless data.

  #17  
Old July 22nd 05, 02:20 AM
dawg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matrox video cards are not considered gaming cards by anyone who plays alot
of current games. They are fine for Tetris ,2D, and games more than three or
four years old.

"Tod" wrote in message
...

"Synapse Syndrome" wrote in message
...

"Doc" wrote in message
k.net...

what's a good "bang for
the buck" gaming video card for PC? I don't have to have the latest
greatest, it can be an older card, just something that supports 3D
graphics and that I'm likely to find for a bargain on eBay. Under $100
ideally, under $50 would be even better.

The
particular games I'm fooling with are Novalogic F-16/F-22/MiG combat
plane games. The onboard video works but doesn't support 3-D. I'm
running a Compaq PIII 933mhz w/WinXP home.

Thanks for all shared wisdom.



If you are a gamer, stop cross-posting to the matrox group. We are all
power-user hardcore professionals here. We don't play games and have
other priorities for our graphics cards other than 3D frame rates.

ss.

Then why does Matrox sell their cards with stickers on them that talks

about
what
great game gaming cards they make?
Remember the Matrox Mystique, it shipped with two game demos.




  #18  
Old July 22nd 05, 03:52 AM
Arthur Hagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dawg don't wrote:
Matrox video cards are not considered gaming cards by anyone who
plays alot of current games.


I play a lot of games, and I consider the Parhelia a very fine gaming
card -- especially the games that can take advantage of three monitors
(of which there are several dozen). Having multiple PCs and cards from
both nVidia, ATI and Matrox, I think I'm qualified to voice my opinion.
:-)

I'd say "Matrox video cards are not considered gaming cards by people
who don't own one and want to justify *their* purchase".

They are fine for Tetris ,2D, and games
more than three or four years old.


Make that "one or two years old", and even then it's not entirely
true -- many newer games specifically list the Parhelia as supported
(although you won't get DX9 features if the games support that).
Flight Simulator 2004, for example, runs quite well on three monitors
with a Parhelia, and so do many other newer games. Of single-monitor
games, well GTA San Andreas works well, and Half-Life 2 too.
Some games I run on my nVidia 6800GT, which is _much_ faster and
supports advanced pixel shaders, while others run better on the Parhelia
with triple monitors and/or 16xFAA. If a game /requires/ pixel shaders
1.4 or higher, they won't run on a Parhelia (nor on a GF4 card, for that
matter).

No, you won't get top frame rates on a Matrox Parhelia compared to newer
cards (it's comparable to a GeForce Ti 4400 in speed -- slower for
low-res/noAA, and faster for high-res/full AA), and it doesn't support
DX9-only features. The Parhelia is still very much a gamer's card, for
games where 3 monitors is a distinct advantage compared to frame rates,
or where you combine gaming with multi-monitor work. Is it worth the
high price? Probably not, unless you also use it for video work or
Photoshop, where it definitely is a good card for the price.

Regards,
--
*Art

  #19  
Old July 22nd 05, 04:05 AM
Arthur Hagen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Fisher wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:03:23 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:

A movie is 24fps for comparision).


As comparison to a game it is useless data.


That depends on the game. Not all games are action games where fast
reflexes makes a difference.

It also depends on the monitor -- if your LCD monitor can't update
faster than 25fps (like a 40ms LCD display) or even 62fps (16ms
display), it makes no difference whatsoever whether FRAPS reports 75 or
200 fps. Except that by generating all the unneccessary graphics that
is discarded, you steal resources that the game could use for other
things, like AI or pathfinding.

Regards,
--
*Art

  #20  
Old July 22nd 05, 05:12 PM
Fisher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 23:05:50 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote:


A movie is 24fps for comparision).


As comparison to a game it is useless data.


That depends on the game. Not all games are action games where fast
reflexes makes a difference.

It also depends on the monitor -- if your LCD monitor can't update
faster than 25fps (like a 40ms LCD display) or even 62fps (16ms
display), it makes no difference whatsoever whether FRAPS reports 75 or
200 fps. Except that by generating all the unneccessary graphics that
is discarded, you steal resources that the game could use for other
things, like AI or pathfinding.

Regards,


Stop waffling. Just because 24fps appears smooth to you in a movie
doesn't mean it will in a game too. In fact it doesn't.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Graphics card for P5GD1 PRO Peter Asus Motherboards 4 April 14th 05 07:48 AM
GARY HEADLEE Motherboard and Video Card Repair neilslade General 8 March 1st 05 03:59 AM
PCI-Express over Cat6 Yousuf Khan General 79 May 28th 04 08:33 AM
PCI-Express over Cat6 Yousuf Khan Intel 79 May 28th 04 08:33 AM
Good cheap graphics card dave stockdale Homebuilt PC's 2 February 10th 04 01:10 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.