IMO no
I find the s3 Virge is a good performer in both for and windows and there is really no point in changing it

I used to have an S3 Trio64V+ (afaik it's the same 2D core as the Virge) back in the days, and upgraded to a Matrox Mystique 220. There was a noticeable improvement in image sharpness, at least at 1024x768 and higher. The S3 card may have slightly better dos game compatability though, or so a lot of people claim, at least when it comes to games like Commander Keen (if you're into those), but I've never had problems with Matrox cards in DOS. I did like my S3 Trio, but preferred Matrox when I got that. I'm a Matrox "fan" though, so perhaps I'm too biased.

The matrox will produce a much nicer image and will be faster for SVGA games, that's my experience anyway.

Neat replies, definitely makes me think about it.
I see that MGA 2164 is called Millennium 2, and apparently has some better things when it comes to 2D and 3D compared to Mystique.

The only kind of game i would be running is probably Duke Nukem 3D and some older side scrollers.
So far i only want to use it as an replacement for an Matrox Ultima i had, that started bugging out (Computer would not start with it some times), because it originally came with it.

I might pair it with Miro Highscore 3D.

Keep in mind that the Matrox Millennium 2 (and Mystique, they're pretty much the same card AFAIK) will break compatibility with a lot of demoscene stuff and games like Commander Keen 4-6. There was a table that showed this somewhere...

I'd go for it, it generally gives off far better image quality compared to most S3 Virge cards.

The appropriate S3 card would be a S3 Vision. Since the S3 Trio64 is a consumer card whereas the Matrox Millenium is a high-end 2D card. Of course the value of the 2D image quality of the cards got amplified with newer display devices. With a typical S3 Trio64 with 2 MB DRAM you ran maybe 1024x768 at 16 bit color for desktop or a lower resolution which allows a second graphics page and/or overlays (Trio64V+ UV+).
If you run anything low res, like all this Mode 13h stuff a very sharp image representation makes the graphics look like blocks (imho).

F2bnp wrote:

Keep in mind that the Matrox Millennium 2 (and Mystique, they're pretty much the same card AFAIK) will break compatibility with a lot of demoscene stuff and games like Commander Keen 4-6. There was a table that showed this somewhere...

Gona's?
http://gona.mactar.hu/DOS_TESTS/

He doesn't really focus on demoscene stuff, that's a great suggestion though...

I run my S3 Virge at 1024x768 on an LCD monitor and it is plenty sharp. I tried 1280x1024 and it is a little blurry but for a vintage machine I find 1024x768 plenty.

As far as DOS games, tomb raider 1 is playable with a 486 CPU so that is an accomplishment in itself. Doom is fluid and pretty much every other game works fine.

smeezekitty wrote:

I run my S3 Virge at 1024x768 on an LCD monitor and it is plenty sharp. I tried 1280x1024 and it is a little blurry but for a vintage machine I find 1024x768 plenty.

As far as DOS games, tomb raider 1 is playable with a 486 CPU so that is an accomplishment in itself. Doom is fluid and pretty much every other game works fine.

I actually haven't run any of these cards on LCD screens until recently, and now I have no S3 card to compare my Matrox ones to. My Parhelia was noticeably sharper than my TNT2 Pro on my PIII with LCD screen though.
For my DOS system, I use a CRT, and if I get hold of a cheap S3 Trio, I might have to compare and see if I can still see a difference, or if it was just "new gadget bliss" that caused it back in the days 😁

A post I made some time ago with screenshots from Matrox and S3 PCI cards: Signal output quality difference S3 Virge vs Matrox Mystique

vetz wrote:

A post I made some time ago with screenshots from Matrox and S3 PCI cards: Signal output quality difference S3 Virge vs Matrox Mystique

A picture says more than 1000 words 😀

I still have in mind that the Matrox cards had a pretty nifty RAMDAC and were therefore advanced in the picturequality but they never had enough power for gaming.
That's why later on Matrox specialized on medical picture stuff.

Solarstorm wrote:

I still have in mind that the Matrox cards had a pretty nifty RAMDAC and were therefore advanced in the picturequality but they never had enough power for gaming.
That's why later on Matrox specialized on medical picture stuff.

Yes but toss a Voodoo in next to the Matrox and you have a force to be reckoned with!

"Power?"

If you read reviews from the time it becomes clear that the Millennium was considered to have the fastest VGA core at its release, though compatibility can be a different story.

badmojo wrote:

Solarstorm wrote:

I still have in mind that the Matrox cards had a pretty nifty RAMDAC and were therefore advanced in the picturequality but they never had enough power for gaming.
That's why later on Matrox specialized on medical picture stuff.

Yes but toss a Voodoo in next to the Matrox and you have a force to be reckoned with!

Indeed.

The Millennium and Mystique are beautiful fast cards that provide a substantially brighter/vibrant/stable/solid image. Dump the S3.

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

vetz wrote:

A post I made some time ago with screenshots from Matrox and S3 PCI cards: Signal output quality difference S3 Virge vs Matrox Mystique

A picture says more than 1000 words 😀

Amen!

vetz wrote:

A post I made some time ago with screenshots from Matrox and S3 PCI cards: Signal output quality difference S3 Virge vs Matrox Mystique

The S3 is is a little dimmer (and I notice mine is a little dark too) but other than that I honestly cannot tell the difference

The OP states replacing his S3 GX2 - how many here are comparing this card to Matrox cards? The GX2 I have is very sharp and bright, and noticeably brighter than older S3 cards I have. It's similar in brightness to my mystique (220) and more compatible. The OP should test these cards in his system - shouldn't be too difficult.