VOGONS


First post, by proffrink

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Anyone here have any opinions on the Matrox graphics cards, and their usefulness for a possible DOS/Windows gaming machine? Thanks!

Reply 1 of 8, by Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

My old P100 uses Matrox Mystique, and so far I have no problems with DOS games. However, there is known problem with Commander Keen.

However, do mind that Matrox Mystique is not powerful enough to play Direct3D games (not to mention there's no bilinear filtering), so make sure to add a Voodoo1 or Voodoo2 card for such purpose.

Never thought this thread would be that long, but now, for something different.....
Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman.

Reply 2 of 8, by ZipoBibrok

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I have had nothing but problems with Matrox cards, particularly G100. VGA modes worked fine but VESA modes either crashed the computer, had corrupted palette or had some other problems (for example moving mouse cursor would leave a black trail behind). UNIVBE helped sometimes, but not with Duke3D... Also there is the issue with EGA-scrolling which affects most of Apogee games.
I even tried updating the cards BIOS but then VESA modes ceased to function at all and i decided to get rid off it.

Reply 4 of 8, by 5u3

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The funny thing is, back in the nineties, many computer magazines recommended the Matrox series especially for games. They couldn't have tested more than two or three games with these cards...

The only advantages are the excellent picture quality and the good 2D driver support for old Windows versions.

Reply 5 of 8, by Reckless

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I had a Matrox Millennium (non gaming card) then a G200 and finally a G400 (Max). The G200 could 'just' about do games - came with a couple of titles specifically coded to Matrox's own API. The G400 Max was damned good - for the things I played at the time it was as fast as a TNT2 but was soon eclipsed by the GeForce DDR and the rest as they say is history 😀 The 'Max' was the last game capable card from Matrox.

Other people who used other cards will 'obviously' prefer other cards but hey that was how it was at the time - there was a viable choice from a number of manufacturers; unlike now where it's an nVidia or ATI (AMD) part or nothing (excluding Intel onboard and the odd 3rd party solution).

Reply 6 of 8, by WolverineDK

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

So Reckless, your opinion is, if you want a Smashing great 2D performance then you go for a G400 MAX, and then take a 3D card (3DFX etc.) as your retro game graphics option in a windows 9x environment ? to me, that sounds about the coolest shit, I have heard in a while. And maybe an AWE64 as a soundcard ?

Reply 7 of 8, by Reckless

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

🤣 - and yep, I did have an AWE64 😀 I had a Voodoo 2 in my other machine as the onboard ATI (on a DELL motherboard with no AGP slot) was rubbish. If you put 2 '3D capable' cards in a system then you'll need something to force which of them get used (IIRC I used something called 3D Control Center).

A quick Google located this fair appraisal for the 'Max' - http://www.hardwarezone.com/reviews/video/g40 … ax/g400max.html

Not the fastest card (compared to a TNT2 Ultra) and handicapped by a poor OpenGL ICD - which they did improve over time - but a very good card nonetheless. I had mine for years (I was waiting to see just what Matrox would replace it with) but ended up with a nVidia 4200 whose IQ was a shade under the 'Max 'but performance was streets ahead [of Matrox's new Parhelia].

Reply 8 of 8, by WolverineDK

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

check this out

http://www.assemblergames.com/forums/showthre … ?t=13490&page=6

A thread about making a modern 2D console. And I have just revived it, thanks to your comment about the Matrox G400 MAX card.