Matrox PCIe Provides 8 DisplayPort Outputs

[ira176]

[citation][nom]gto127[/nom]This is slightly off the subject but I used to build computers for a print shop years ago & I always put matrox graphics cards in them since they accelerated 2d or workstation type graphics better than the competition at the time & had cleaner visuals. Nowadays nobody tests 2d graphics anymore. I think the print shop wants me to build some more computers again but I don't have a clue which card would work best now. They use adobe programs & some corel. Do any you guys have a link for some 2d video card testing or have any ideas.[/citation]

I remember when Matrox was one of the big names in 2d video acceleration, I also remember Cirrus Logic and Trident were big 2d names amongst others. I don't know of any 2d testing of video cards lately, but programs from adobe may support GPU acceleration from Nvidia or ATI. It might be worth looking into, since that can greatly increase productivity and time savings.

 

[curnel_D]

[citation][nom]ira176[/nom]I remember when Matrox was one of the big names in 2d video acceleration, I also remember Cirrus Logic and Trident were big 2d names amongst others. I don't know of any 2d testing of video cards lately, but programs from adobe may support GPU acceleration from Nvidia or ATI. It might be worth looking into, since that can greatly increase productivity and time savings.[/citation]
Ah, that is true. I hadn't thought of CS4's OpenCL acceleration. But it also depends on how large the print-shop is. I know of a smaller one that doesn't process so many images at a time that they'd prefer to have faster effect rendering over higher image quality. Photo Rendering is fast enough now days on standard quad-cores that it'd be a waste unless they processed hundreds or even thousands per day.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

I suppose a simple x58 system with 3 of those cards could run video surveillience for a big hotel - or run advertisement screens for a big supermarked etc. Plenty of options. Obviously the length limitation for the cables would make the latter a bit complicated, but I'm sure there'll be a nice use for those cards.

 

[rhino13]

This system is for the business professional.
It does not support DX11, and it does not have the ability to display DX or OGL content on more than one monitor.
Meaning you can hook up 8 displays but you'll be playing your games on one.
This is in contrast to the ATI card that will upgrade your resolution to fully utilize all six screen's resolution by splicing up a 3D image into each display port.

 

[cookoy]

multiple cores and now multiple display ports. when will we get multiple salary pay? 8 security monitors would look great. but maybe one big monitor subdivided into 8 small video areas would be serve the same purpose. you can just zoom in to the video that requires more scrutiny.

 

[lelias2k]

I still have a G450 in one of my computers. It's a 10 year old card and it does 2D flawlessly (better than my current ATI). Not to mention the dual monitor feature.
I remember setting up networks in investment firms, and many computers would have multiple monitor setups to follow up multiple markets simultaneously. Professionals like these guys are the target for this product, not gamers. And for them, money invested in money made.

 

[Computer_Lots]

I will 2nd the others comments about Matrox video quality. They seem to pay more attention to sharpness and color accuracy than ATI and NV. However, they pay zero attention to performance. My company used to use Matrox G550 or G200 cards in all of our PCs and they worked well for a time. However, they were so expensive that we kept them longer than we should and they just couldn't keep up with any res over 1024x768. We switched to Nvidia Quadro and ATI Fire MV cards which cost less and are probably 4 times faster than Matrox's 2-port offerings.

 

[bk420]

LOL..take that AMD....

 

[lordcrazex]

wait.. yesterday 6... um..today 8.. er.. tomorrow..10, 12 output? XP

 

[sebastienm]

Matrox never intended to get into the gaming business. The are focusing on professional applications for which their cards fit very well unlike common gaming brands.
It's like complaining that Planar monitors are too expensive for gaming while their targets are pro apps like medical imaging.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

[citation][nom]sebastienm[/nom]Matrox never intended to get into the gaming business. The are focusing on professional applications for which their cards fit very well unlike common gaming brands.It's like complaining that Planar monitors are too expensive for gaming while their targets are pro apps like medical imaging.[/citation]

Well I distinctly remember that Matrox was one of the best choices back when I ordered my Mystique 220. They decided not to dabble much in 3d gaming graphics, but before 3dfx matrox was a really good vendor for gaming cards. To prove my point : video accelleration was faster on my matrox card than it was on the voodoo card sporting twice as much memory and a higher energy usage.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

I still have that Mystique card at home by the way - it's always handy to have a pci adapter around for troubleshooting - and the matrox cards never seem to break!