I'd use the Matrox Millenniums in both. Fantastic DAC quality, good speed in DOS and GDI acceleration.

Their only major flaw with DOS compatibility (keen4-6) has now been fixed with a fan patch

Thanks max, that's the way I had them a while back, but I didn't want to bother with compatibility issues in older games, so I switched the Millennium with a Diamond Stealth 3D 2000 in the PC1. To be honest, I haven't noticed any issues in video quality in any of the Diamonds, I would have to compare them side by side.

The stealth 3d 2000 does indeed have good output for a virge card. I still prefer the millennium, I have both and can tell a difference

You might like this comparison.

There's little performance difference between them in DOS games, I doubt you will notice it in real life. That being said, Ark2000 will most likely be the fastest.

In Windows S3 cards and Matrox should support higher screen resolutions if they have more memory (Ark would be limited to 2MB, others can go 4 or even 8MB depending on the model and memory expansions you have available).

I think the image quality is more pronounced on LCD screens, not CRTs, and probably at resolutions higher than you could use with these CPUs. You might see a small difference in brightness, but all cards on the list should be pretty good.

None of the cards would be "period correct" for the Dx2, but then again you're using it in a late PCI motherboard, so S3 Trio64 would be the most appropriate for that. I have to note, period correctness has pretty much nothing to do with real life — I've seen used DX4/5x86 systems sold with literally all of the listed videocards.

So in the end unless your goal is to absolutely max out the performance, you can really pick the card by its looks or your feelings towards the brand. I rarely use S3 cards because they are so ubiquitous and I feel like adding a Tseng/Matrox/Ark adds "character" to my system or makes it more unique, but there is really zero rational argument behind that.

I find the visual quality difference between PCI video cards is vastly greater than performance differences, so unless a specific game I have in mind is troublesome with it I go with the card that has the sharpest image on the monitor I am using. For my Cx5x86 that was a PCI Riva TNT. On my Pentium build, it was a Millenium (II).

For non AMD/Nvidia cards I look at what else can it do? some of the early 3d API's while not absolutely necessary can be fun to play with.
3D Accelerated Games List (Proprietary APIs - No 3DFX/Direct3D)

The Virge in your Socket 7 PC is a good match, I've got mine in a 586/133 and its a bit slow for the S3D games.
The Matrox Millennium does give you access to 1 game, Nascar Racing

I went for a Matrox Mystique on my early Pentium to get access to MSI games. Some of the other cards have a more interesting game list but cost more tehn I'm willing to pay.

jheronimus wrote on 2021-11-03, 10:19:

I think the image quality is more pronounced on LCD screens, not CRTs, and probably at resolutions higher than you could use with these CPUs. You might see a small difference in brightness, but all cards on the list should be pretty good.

I have an extremely sharp 21" aperture grille CRT and I use 1600x1200 in windows even on a 486

Even a hole/slot mask tube can work well, I can still count individual pixels on my 20" Nokia in 1600x1200, though I don't use that res on my 486 🤣

S3 cards will give you better compatibility with DOS games, while the Matrox will provide slightly better image quality at the expense of visual glitches in some games.

Note that the image quality of S3 cards that were made by reputable manufacturers (such as Diamond, STB or Hercules) is vastly superior to the generic (unbranded) ones.

Thanks for the comments guys! I mostly agree with them.

retardware, thanks for the chart, I've seen it before, it's a very good reference.

jheronimus, I don't care much about being "period correct", I just want to make sure the video card's potential performance is not limited by the 486 cpu.
My Matrox Millennium 2 has 8Mb and I have a 4Mb memory expansion board, but I'm sure that's pointless for a DOS build, even if I'm using a 20" LCD monitor.
I also have a 2Mb expansion board for the Millennium 1 which will make it 4Mb, but again, it will be way too much video ram for DOS / Win 3.11.

chinny22, wow! what an amazing job that guy (vetz) did with all that info!! It's unlikely I'll get to the point of switching a video card just for a game or two but you never know hehe!

max, 1600 x 1200 ? 🤣, which windows? 3.11 or 95? I remember a tested some crazy resolutions on win 3.11 on my 20" monitor when I got the Matrox cards, but everything was so small that I settled for a lower res, I think 800x600 or something like that.

Joseph_Joestar, yes, as I mentioned before, I really didn't notice any difference between the Matrox and the Diamond S3 cards, that confused me because everyone mentions how sharp the Matrox cards are, I'm still asking myself what is that thing that I'm not seeing. I have very good eye sight up close, I can see the pixels on the screen, so I'm going to assume that I didn't pay enough attention to the details!.
One thing for sure is that Matrox wasn't playing "games" when it came to video quality, according to what I have read, it was like the big leagues, professional video cards. Actually, they're still around but they do some other stuff now.
I'm going to re-test everything in the list again to make sure, if I still don't see a difference I'll stick that ark2000 (I haven't tested it yet) on the 486 for the older games and a Millennium 1 (or 2?) on the P133. ...and I might change my mind any second, to be honest, I really have enjoyed playing around with all these cards.

I use 1600x1200 in any software that will support it, all versions of windows with suitable display drivers. I also have excellent near point vision and with a large screen the "smallness" is not a problem for me