Talk:Matrox G200

Mystique

Re: "Mystake". Yes, thanks for that. I didn't realise that there was more than one version of the Mystake. Perhaps if and when you put up a page about the earlier version, you could give some explanation of why it was called the "Mystake". Thanks.

I'm going to put together an article on the older pre-G200 Mystiques one of these days. I need to do some research beforehand though. I have the cards in a drawer here, so it's just a matter of time!

Basically the reason the old cards were called the "Mystake" by some was that their 3D acceleration lacked many important features and that caused them to have very ugly image quality. They left out transparency support and bilinear texture filtering, for example. Performance was actually not bad though, a lot better than ViRGE (but a lot slower than Voodoo Graphics). For 2D they are not far behind MGA Millennium, and that is nothing to complain about. They weren't bad cards, but they definitely were not ground breaking in any way. Except in that they were Matrox's first Direct3D-capable cards. They were really cost-reduced Millenniums (no WRAM) with much more robust 3D, relative to Millennium. --Swaaye 05:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

SGRAM

Do we have a picture of the 8 MB SGRAM upgrade module for the G200? Those were quite rare apparently. 2fort5r (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Matrox G200. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.tomshardware.com/1998/08/18/new_3d_chips_/page4.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060421062545/http://grafi.ii.pw.edu.pl/gbm/matrox/ to http://grafi.ii.pw.edu.pl/gbm/matrox/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.tomshardware.com/1998/08/18/new_3d_chips_/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110712224404/http://bizsupport1.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/lpv09046/lpv09046.pdf to http://bizsupport1.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/lpv09046/lpv09046.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Article reads like marketing copy

Half this article reads like it was written by a marketing department. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.124.154.251 (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Manager speak

This article is filled with bombastic manager-speak, ie. "significant player", "high-end", "excellent", "excelled" and "innovate", and this is only the very first paragraph of the article. I'm almost disappointed they didn't mention how this company leveraged their synergies with manageable and scalable enterprise Java-based solutions(tm). Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 07:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)