Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Matrox G550 vs Radeon 8500

Tags:
  • Matrox
  • Performance
  • Radeon
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
June 4, 2005 11:59:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks

More about : matrox g550 radeon 8500

June 6, 2005 2:59:40 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
wrote:

>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>
I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 12:59:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
"jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
> >Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
> >performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
> >output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
> >
> I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
> I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
> probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:42:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

Tony Pacc wrote:
> My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
> "jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
> news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
>
>>On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>>>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>>>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>>>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>>>
>>
>>I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
>>I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
>>probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
>

In a word ... yes.
Matrox is the notorious "leader" in 2d rendering/display ... while ATI
concerns itself primarily, with 3d performance.

--
Convert & Proud Adopter of ...
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 & my new favorite Browser ... FireFox 1.0
get on board at http://www.mozilla.org//
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:32:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

iamnotme wrote:

> Tony Pacc wrote:
>> My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
>> "jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
>> news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>>>>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>>>>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>>>>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>>>>
>>>
>>>I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
>>>I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
>>>probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
>>
>
> In a word ... yes.
> Matrox is the notorious "leader" in 2d rendering/display ... while ATI
> concerns itself primarily, with 3d performance.

If he sees a _significant_ improvement in text by going from a Radeon 8500
to a G550 then his radeon was broken. There may be some slight difference
that an expert on text rendering might be able to detect with a magnifier
or instruments, but there is none perceptible to the average user.

The notion that there is some huge difference in text quality between Matrox
and other boards is pure hyperbole.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 12:42:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

I've used a Matrox G400 and an ATI 9100 (really a renamed 8500).
The ATI 8500 will give about 90% as good 2D as the Matrox G400/G550.
So it's not worth spending the money.
As a matter of fact, the 8500 architecture is newer then the G400/G450/G550.
So driver support and 3D will be better (not trying to knock Matrox).

If you really wanted the best 2D you would need to get a Matrix Parhelia


"iamnotme" <iamnot@home.now> wrote in message
news:k2%oe.1588936$6l.951285@pd7tw2no...
> Tony Pacc wrote:
>> My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
>> "jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
>> news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>>>>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>>>>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>>>>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>>>>
>>>
>>>I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
>>>I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
>>>probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
>>
>
> In a word ... yes.
> Matrox is the notorious "leader" in 2d rendering/display ... while ATI
> concerns itself primarily, with 3d performance.
>
> --
> Convert & Proud Adopter of ...
> Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 & my new favorite Browser ... FireFox 1.0
> get on board at http://www.mozilla.org//
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 12:43:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

No much improvement

"Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:11a8lihc4q3gbd3@corp.supernews.com...
> My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
> "jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
> news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>> >Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>> >performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>> >output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>> >
>> I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
>> I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
>> probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
>
>
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 12:45:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

Matrox has usually had better 2D then other cards.
ATI was second, Nvidia was third.
But the "others" have gotten better.

"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:D 82h1c01eku@news4.newsguy.com...
> iamnotme wrote:
>
>> Tony Pacc wrote:
>>> My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
>>> "jayson" <robjayson@hotsnail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:imv6a1hpvfjhpj80e4j9d6v2uks16e86ot@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>>>>>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>>>>>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with
>>>>>digital
>>>>>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I would try the ATI since you already have it, and it has dvi support.
>>>>I like Matrox for 2D, so I've only owned Matrox cards. You could
>>>>probably get the 8500 on ebay for less than $40.
>>>
>>
>> In a word ... yes.
>> Matrox is the notorious "leader" in 2d rendering/display ... while ATI
>> concerns itself primarily, with 3d performance.
>
> If he sees a _significant_ improvement in text by going from a Radeon 8500
> to a G550 then his radeon was broken. There may be some slight difference
> that an expert on text rendering might be able to detect with a magnifier
> or instruments, but there is none perceptible to the average user.
>
> The notion that there is some huge difference in text quality between
> Matrox
> and other boards is pure hyperbole.
>
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
June 7, 2005 1:46:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

"Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com> wrote:

>My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?

No, I use Matrox G400MAX, G550, P650 and Radeon 7500, 8500, 9600 and on the
same monitor these is IMHO no discernable difference in text or colour
quality.

Best regards

Andy
Anonymous
June 7, 2005 9:41:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:46:33 +0200, "Andy@nospam.co.uk"
<me@privacy.net> wrote:

>"Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com> wrote:
>
>>My question is would I see a significant improvement in text?
>
>No, I use Matrox G400MAX, G550, P650 and Radeon 7500, 8500, 9600 and on the
>same monitor these is IMHO no discernable difference in text or colour
>quality.
>
>Best regards
>
>Andy

If you are seeking after a maximum text quality, go LCD and DVI. At
native resolution, a dot above "i" is one pixel. No less, no more, no
in-between and completely flicker-free.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia
June 7, 2005 9:41:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:41:05 +0200, Edi Zubovic <edi.zubovic[rem
this]@ri.htnet.hr> wrote:


>If you are seeking after a maximum text quality, go LCD and DVI. At
>native resolution, a dot above "i" is one pixel. No less, no more, no
>in-between and completely flicker-free.

that is not my experience. i did this with a syntax olevia 30" LCD and
and ATI dvi output. Text looked awful

I much prefer a CRT

--G
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 2:17:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 15:24:45 -0400, george1234
<george1234pds@excite.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:41:05 +0200, Edi Zubovic <edi.zubovic[rem
>this]@ri.htnet.hr> wrote:
>
>
>>If you are seeking after a maximum text quality, go LCD and DVI. At
>>native resolution, a dot above "i" is one pixel. No less, no more, no
>>in-between and completely flicker-free.
>
>that is not my experience. i did this with a syntax olevia 30" LCD and
>and ATI dvi output. Text looked awful
>
>I much prefer a CRT
>
>--G
>
But was it at the native resolution (it must have been huge) and could
the ATI handle it?

I have no problems whatsoever regarding text and 2D with a Matrox
Parhelia 128 DVI connected to a Samsung Syncmaster 213T @1600 x 1200,
normal (i. not "large") desktop fonts. This is the "native" resoution
for the 213t.
It is important that the resolution matches that "native" one,
specified by the manufacturer. Otherwise, yes, text does look awful.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 2:24:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 22:17:42 +0200, Edi Zubovic <edi.zubovic[rem
this]@ri.htnet.hr> wrote:

--------------8<----------------------
>>
>>that is not my experience. i did this with a syntax olevia 30" LCD and
>>and ATI dvi output. Text looked awful

Oops -- but this is a LCD TV, not a monitor... can't say much here,
sorry.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

>>I much prefer a CRT
>>
>>--G
>>
>But was it at the native resolution (it must have been huge) and could
>the ATI handle it?
>
>I have no problems whatsoever regarding text and 2D with a Matrox
>Parhelia 128 DVI connected to a Samsung Syncmaster 213T @1600 x 1200,
>normal (i. not "large") desktop fonts. This is the "native" resoution
>for the 213t.
>It is important that the resolution matches that "native" one,
>specified by the manufacturer. Otherwise, yes, text does look awful.
>
>Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 9:45:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

J. Clarke <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> What you are reporting is called "anecdotal evidence" and further,
> since you knew which was which, a certain amount of placebo effect.
> You want Matrox to look better so you find something that leads you
> to believe that what you are seeing is "better". If it makes you
> happy go for it, but when you start selling other people Matrox
> boards because of this vast difference in text quality and the find
> out what all they can't do with those boards and find out that they
> can't tell the difference in output between those boards and their
> friends ATI and nvidia boards then they will stop listening to your
> advice.

Sorry for breaking in here, but what I find is that there's a lot of
things I could do with my *Matrox* card that I simply can't do with the
nVidia (or ATI). Hardware text anti-aliasing? Forget it. Independent
or hardware-accellerated overlays? Sorry, nope. Get used to TV that is
1-2 seconds delayed even with a top nVidia card. Two monitors in
independent mode plus a TV? Forget it -- you have to clone then. 10
bits per colour, at least? No, 255 greys or greens is all you get.

Face it -- the nVidia/ATI cards are made for gamers, and they do an
*excellent* job for that. If frame rate and the latest DX features is
what you want, they *rock*. But for things like video or Photoshop
work, give me a Matrox Parhelia any day.

--
*Art
June 13, 2005 1:46:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.matrox (More info?)

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:59:38 -0500, "Tony Pacc" <tpacc@execpc.com>
wrote:

>Hi, I am currently using a ATI Radeon 8500 on an older Dell P3 1000mgh
>Pentium,I'm not into games ,so I am wondering if I would get better 2 D
>performance with the G550,I using a Samsung 930B flat panel with digital
>output,I am basically looking at better text performance.Thanks
>

I've never had good luck with any ATI video cards when attempting to
use them with either of 2 LCD monitors (3 cards tested). All of the
ATI cards showed instability to varying degrees, and this has never
been a problem with the G450 or G550. In my present setup I need a
digital hookup to eliminate ghosting, so am using an offbrand non-ATI
that works great.
!