2D is usually generalization too big. If you would divide it into DOS, GUI and Video, then I would say in same order average, superb, inferior.

Putas wrote:

2D is usually generalization too big. If you would divide it into DOS, GUI and Video, then I would say in same order average, superb, inferior.

What's the benefit of superb GUI acceleration?

The 2D thing with Matrox cards was mostly about their picture quality. Sharper @high res then most other cards which were kind of "blurry" @1024 and above.
So today I'd use them only as the 2D Part for a Voodoo 1/2 to compensate the quality loss due to the loop cable.

Alucard wrote:

The 2D thing with Matrox cards was mostly about their picture quality. Sharper @high res then most other cards which were kind of "blurry" @1024 and above.
So today I'd use them only as the 2D Part for a Voodoo 1/2 to compensate the quality loss due to the loop cable.

I'll try that when I pick up some 3Dfx cards. Thanks.

The most common complaint about Matrox cards is their disliking of the scrolling in Commander Keen 4/5/6 and Dangerous Dave.

Otherwise they're good. Decent VBE support too AFAIK.

MrTentacleGuy wrote:

What's the benefit of superb GUI acceleration?

Speed/responsiveness just like with any other processing. Yes, nowadays it is taken for granted, but back in the days some heavy office work for example could suffer from weak video card.

I like Matrox, their signal quality was amazing. I've had some great experiences with the Mystique and Milennium II. The G200 and G400 also make for good secondary cards as well nowadays. Back when they were released though, I don't think they were that amazing. Especially with that D3D to OpenGL wrapper...

The signal quality argument always comes up for Matrox cards, but a lot of other more professional cards from this time had also comparable signal quality. So it's not really kind of unique feature.

elianda wrote:

The signal quality argument always comes up for Matrox cards, but a lot of other more professional cards from this time had also comparable signal quality. So it's not really kind of unique feature.

The only other company I can think of that was even close to Matrox in 2D image quality was Number Nine. What others were there?

MrTentacleGuy wrote:

Putas wrote:

2D is usually generalization too big. If you would divide it into DOS, GUI and Video, then I would say in same order average, superb, inferior.

What's the benefit of superb GUI acceleration?

GUI acceleration was important in the early days of Windows. Some Windows functions required a lot of computing power to do smoothly. GUI accelerators were dedicated to making those functions execute more quickly so the system wouldn't lag. In some cases windows would take a long time to open or close or the mouse pointer would leave a trail on the screen because the system couldn't erase/redraw it quickly enough to keep up with the movement. The GUI accelerator eliminated things like this.

From my experience the DSystems cards are very good
http://mail.lipsia.de/~enigma/neu/pics/dsyste … apilio_g1-4.jpg

The ELSA Winner Series:
http://mail.lipsia.de/~enigma/neu/pics/elsa_w … nner2000pro.jpg
just as note, this Winner has a 220 MHz DAC whereas the similar #9 GXE64Pro has just a 175 MHz DAC.

I think around 1997, Matrox's advantages were pretty much gone. But the hearsay-love of Matrox never died. Kind of like the AMD-still-rules belief I hear today from the uninformed. You can find ATI, NVIDIA, 3DLabs, and 3Dfx cards from ~1997 onward that will match Matrox on signal quality.

How many threads have we had about this anyway? Yikes.

swaaye wrote:

I think around 1997, Matrox's advantages were pretty much gone. But the hearsay-love of Matrox never died. Kind of like the AMD-still-rules belief I hear today from the uninformed.

They still had better support for dual monitors and very high resolutions than their competiors. They were finding a niche marked, which they still have kept to this day.

vetz wrote:

They still had better support for dual monitors and very high resolutions than their competiors. They were finding a niche marked, which they still have kept to this day.

Yeah they found their little niche and have somehow survived. Perhaps because the other companies don't find it worthwhile? And I'm not sure what R&D Matrox really does considering they lost a lot of engineering talent post-G400 and ran on Parhelia offshoots for about a decade. AMD has been producing those 6 displayport cards for a few years now.

Ultra high resolution VGA started losing its value by 2000 as digital interfaces became prevalent.

I saved up and bought myself a Matrox Millenium back in the day, for some reason I just had to have 'WRAM' - I know not why.

It was 'meh'.

Matrox Millennium was pushed hard by various gaming magazines during 1995. They did do DOS and GUI very well and had decent DOS compatibility, a rare combination at the time. Magazine editors were also fascinated by the Gouraud shading 3D engine of Millennium and Impression Plus.

Considering the price on these cards, and what was coming in a year or two, they weren't really exceptional. But hindsight is 20/20.

swaaye wrote:

Matrox Millennium was pushed hard by various gaming magazines specifically during 1995.

So true, if you go and read CGW from 95 to 96 they praise this card into heaven. Then 3DFX Voodoo came out and took the praise 😉 Though if you bought a Millennium in 95 and then joined the 3DFX Voodoo 1 and 2 route you could have potentially used it as a decent 2D card untill 1999.

vetz wrote:

So true, if you go and read CGW from 95 to 96 they praise this card into heaven.

Though if you bought a Millennium in 95 and then joined the 3DFX Voodoo 1 and 2 route you could have potentially used it as a decent 2D card untill 1999.

Let me reach up into the closet where the 15 years of CGW that I still have reside.... 🤣 That's true. Millennium would have cost you $400+ so it would be nice if it lasted!

I used a Mystique 220 + Voodoo 1 for awhile. I went Mystique 220 -> G200 -> G400. G200 is a great 2D card but 3D was very buggy until it was very obsolete. G400 went about the same way. Matrox didn't have OpenGL figured out until into 2000. Mystique / Millennium II are rather troublesome cards because of PCI quirks and best avoided I think.