ATI vs. MATROX

[stark]

Hey,
i wanted to start out vjing, i want to get a new vj computer and i know the most important thing is the video card


well. i was looking but cant quite decide if i should use ati radeon or matrox millenium


i was between the all in wonder radeon 8500 cuz it seemed a pretty good option since it could do capture

then i came accross the matrox eTV but i wasnt convinced by it


i really like the matrox dualhead features..... because (acording to the webiste) you can conect two monitors at the same time, or a monitor and a tv , etc ,etc.... allowing you to extend your desktop into another screen.


i noticed that the ATI dual head features dont seem that good. it offers no zoom... and correct me if i'm wrong.... it seems to be able to conect either a VGA or DVI and a TV, but not able to conect 2 VGA... is this true????

the memory in the ATI is higher than the Matrox.... most matrox cards get to 32 mb and ATI cards start at 64 all the way up to 128 mbs.... will this affect the overall performance..... or do they put higher memory to level it for the lack of GPU power????

the app i will most likely use will be resolume, but it wont be the only one (i might need that zoom capabity)

is it better to buy a separate scan convertor?? is a good one too expensive?"???? is there really a piece of software coming out to give zoom capabities to any dual head card,(through software)????

does memory make a big difference???

which offers better win xp support

thanks... please help...!!!!!

[detsme]

whoaoh ! alot of questions here.
I'll answer a few for you.
First of I'm selling my ATI and getting either a Matrox or a GeForce 2 w/TV.
I didn't like the fact that 1)ATI out to TV is cropped 2) ATI out to TV is simply a clone of the primary monitor and 3) if you attach a 2nd VGA to the ATI the TV out goes away...

Most people will tell you to get a seperate scan converter, but the good ones are over $200 not that much if you are earning a living off of this but to play around it's a little steep. Perhaps this SoftScan sw will be the answer to everything ! (do a search in the forums)

That might answer a few of your questions ;)

-Des

[philjones]

i have used both a matrox millenium G550 and an nvidia Geforce 4 MX460, they both have their advantages.

The matrox is definately the more versatile and easy to use, have two gpus (graphics processing units) which makes the zoom function so cool - you can output a section of your screen (great for resolume) to your second monitor and output it to s-video and composite simultaneously and still see what you're doing on your computer screen. Also, had some problems recently using it - seemed to have a black line around the whole image when mixing with a dvd player, though it may have been a setup problem.

The Nvidia is much faster, however, you'll need to take a seperate monitor to see what you're doing (using the dual monitor/tv function in resolume) which could cost an extra ?15 (b+w) to ?125 (decent colour) which means you'll be moving more kit about which is always bad. Also, with my card there is a roughly 10% pixel black line down the left of the output which makes it a bitch to mix which other sources without shifting the whole output to the left (off the screen) and losing some of all the output

i haven't used the ati card but i assume it has similar issues as the nVidia (no-one but matrox seem to provide a decent zoom fuction - the nVidia has one but it is designed for business presentations that take no heed of frame rate considerations - they seem to run at a very low frame rate - roughly 15fps if you're lucky, dunno if things have got better lately).

If you are happy with a 320x240 output in resolume (which looks great if your source is good) then use the matrox. however, most visuals these days will be heading toward the 640x480 - 1024x768 mark for which it would be much better to use the nVidia/ati option (not sure which is better now).

could work to output your live resolume stuff with the matrox and mix in some 720x540 stuff from a DVD player (as cheap as ?45 these days) buts that's assuming you have access to a mixer.

dunno if that helps

[philjones]

as far as 2 vga outputs go - you can get a variety of signal splitter/ amplifiers from maplin (if you're in the uk) which will, quite cheaply give you a ual output without compromising signal quality

[asterix]

Get a matrox. Much better quality. Even the latest ati radeons have shitty output which Im pretty dissappointed with.

[sondz]

I've had a Matrox G450 for a while now, and it is definitely great.

I have found though that the TV out will only produce a full screen copy of any QuickTime movie you play, not a copy of your desktop, and it doesn't work for AVIs either. Have I set this up wrong?

I have just bought a cheap ATI, mainly for the TV out, but also to get some 3D power behind my computer.

Its important to consider 3D acceleration and if you will need it for live shows, as the matrox doesn't do ANY 3D acceleration at all.

From what everyone has said here, ATI is rubbish, which means I wasted my money, I?ll let you know.

I'll post here when it arrives.

Loz

[SuperficiaL]

hi there,

hopefully this will help...

Ram on your videocard is not as important as the processorpower and bus width on the mainboard...
so if u buy a videocard espacially for vjing dont go higher than 128 MB (cost explodes with higher Ram models).
and if i may advise u to buy a videocard it would defenetly be a matrox.
because u can set the refreshrate of each screen individually. comes in handy when u are using the composite output with some video spliters.
and resolume seems to be built for matroxcards.
but bottomline is: matrox is ahead when it comes to dualscreen and dualscreen functions.

good luck, SuperficiaL

[Rovastar]

Whooooooooooooooooooooo notread all this but what............


On the plus Matrox do support via forums no matter how limited it is it does support it's users unlike Ati/Nvidia(my choice), etc


They no not support pbuffers for OpenGl on any cards that sounds technical but for OPenGl programming lan it is shocking.

( i am sure pbuffers are OPenL 1.4 we are on OPenGL 1.5 now...)

Dual head wtf Matrox don't care they have like 1% of the market place and that is for the commerical (LOL) graphic market (LOL again)

Leave MAtrox alone for a programers POV. Do not go there the dual head options soundcool but really if you are using s/w that demands VGA (not svideo shit quailty) output then tell me about it cause I want to know!!!!!!!!!

[alangeering]

The first PC I used (my dad's 386) had a matrox card in it. At that time only a few games had begun using VGA, many still were written for other graphics card modes...

Has anyone used the Matrox Parhelia or P750 yet?

Anyone used a Matrox QID?

Thanks,
Alan

[sleepytom]

yep i've used a Parhelia
usual matrox story - good multimonitor but shit 3d (openGL runs very slowly l - didn't try an direct3d but guess its the same deal)

total waste of money imoh - get a cheap nvidea card and a decent scanconverter for the price of the Parhelia

TVout is a shitty solution anyway - allways looks poor and often produces very strange results due to dodgy video levels.

as for the old g400 / 500 series cards they were very good for there time and still offer good performance if you are using software that was written at the time they came out (eg: resolume) but i'd advise against buying one these days as they are very old and can't cope with modern vjing apps that use 3d to display the video (eg: pilgrim, VJamm 2 etc)