Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Dream Machine ( Build your own PC ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biggie Smalls who wrote (13346)	5/28/2002 9:10:31 PM
From: Robert Graham	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14778

I think you need to make a decision here. Do you want to play games with it? Or do you want 2D performance, including image clarity? Matrox = 2D while GeForce4 = 3D. Something tells me you want the greatest and "best-est" card that looks the most impressive on paper, even though you will not be taking advantage of all of those 3D stats. Matter of fact, I bet you have no idea how those performance stats will impact your use of the card. If that is the case, then choose the GeForce4. This probably would be a good choice for you. You cannot go wrong with this choice. NVidia makes good products, particularly for gamers. But lets just think about this for a moment. If a medical imaging company uses this card in their medical equipment that cost a few hundred thousand dollars, an Endoscope that is a leader in their field, do you think they are looking at the 3D gaming specs for the card? Are the doctors purchasing this equipment to play Quake? You have the same decision to make. The race to purchase the hottest raddest card that has stellar benchmarks is in part an illusion. Particularly for your uses. Do not be blinded. Put on the sunglasses and make a rational choice. Besides, Matrox has or will come out with a set of drivers to dramatically improve the gaming performance of the card. They usually do. So you can play games too. Also, if you take a closer look at the stats you have referenced, you will see they have comparable 2D stats. So what is your point? Quote from that same article: "The Matrox Millennium G550 was never meant to be a 3D gaming card, so it's not surprising that it bombed the Quake III test. Its 2D performance was much better, however. " Enough said. :-) Bob Graham PS: I cannot give out the name of the medical imaging company. This knowleddge may unnecissarily have an adverse effect some peoples opinion of their product.