View Full Version : Nice card - but Matrox have trouble with GL, don't they?
05-15-2002, 05:48 AM
Looks like hardware displacement mapping and LOD are in:
05-15-2002, 10:54 AM
Yup, it seams quite cool http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubb/smile.gif
The only disappointing thing about that chip is it's fragment shading. I'd hope for more than PS1.3 support.
I hope they will expose the displacement mapping in OpenGL. It's a shame they never exposed EMBM in OpenGL even though it was the big thing about the G400 when it was released.
- 10-bit source texture support and precision
- High-precision ARGB (2:10:10:10) frame buffer
This also sounds very nice. It would reduce the precision Problems with normal Maps and such ab bit. And also gives a bit more Quality on Framebuffer blending.
But what about DX9/GL2.0 support. I hope it can compete against the 3D Labs, ATI and Nvidia Cards comming out this time and claiming to have support for everything.
By the way, is support for Displacement Mapping planned in GL 2.0 ?
05-15-2002, 08:30 PM
If I'm not mistaken, there's no RTCW and Quake3 port to direct3d...
Well maybe they use a mini client or something.
There's no D3D port of RTCW and co., but they run without problems with the MS OGL to D3D layer shipped with windows XP.
Matrox' last card, which has vertex shaders IMHO but no fragment shaders wasn't really successful. I know nobody who owns this card. Matrox will have a tough time and if they don't release high-quality drivers simultaneously(nobody needs them 1 year later since nobody is using the card by that time) with the hardware they'll be forgotten.
[This message has been edited by Lev (edited 05-15-2002).]
05-15-2002, 10:33 PM
The G400, with the turbogl drivers, were very useable for games like quake 3.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.