If you're here, can you please post a pic of your donfiguration with Pete's DX6 plugin your matrox card, i remember last year you posted it but I reformated my HDD and lost all the info 
Maxtor makes hard drives. And I really wouldn't compare the G400 to a TNT1.Originally posted by Ali
The Matrox G400 configuration are quite close to the one for that of TNT 1, all that matrox g400 would do good would be the filtering modes, therefore those will be kept diabled, just like TNT2, also Blending options won't be working good either, why I am saying that cause my friend has a Maxtor.
Ali
From http://www.3dspotlight.com/reviews/hardware/millennium_g400/g400-2.shtml
Here are the different configurations of Matrox G400 based cards: Retail Products
Display Features
SGRAM Memory
RAMDAC
Millennium G400
(G4+MDHA16GR)
DualHead
16MB
300 MHz
Millennium G400
(G4+MDHA32GR)
DualHead
32MB
300 MHz
Millennium G400 MAX
(G4+MMDHA32GR)
DualHead
32MB
360 MHz
As you can see there aren’t any products with the Mystique brand name, instead Matrox has decided to ship two different versions of the Millennium. The difference with the MAX version is that this one uses better cooling, faster memory and the core is clocked higher so that higher performance can be achieved, pretty much the same as TNT2 and TNT2 ULTRA cards.
Performance
I did a lot of benchmarking with the Millennium G400 card, and using the latest drivers and the OpenGL beta ICD which should improve performance a bit in games like Quake 2. I saw the card was performing somewhere between a TNT2 and a TNT2 Ultra card, but that wasn’t in all applications.
I mean, in some games the performance was much better than a TNT2 and maybe on par with a TNT2 Ultra but in some others it was way behind.
I really think the problem is drivers related, you might remember when Brian Hook from id Software made some benchmarking with the Quake 3 Test and the G400/G400 MAX cards were performing incredibly well in 1600x1200 resolutions (beating TNT2s Ultra) but just ok in 800x600 and other low resolutions.
From the 1600 benchmark results we can say the G400 chip has got a lot of raw power but since the drivers aren’t as optimized as they should in low resolutions they fall behind. For more detailed performance numbers see the benchmarks in the next pages.
Anyway, although G400s performance isn’t the best out there it has got some unique features for both gamers and professionals that are definitely worth a look.
Originally posted by Shiori
I expected a stupid answer like that from you anyway.
Maybe you were stupid enough for not reading one of your own quotes...and yes I have seen articles of Matrox before so there is no need to teach me....!I mean, in some games the performance was much better than a TNT2 and maybe on par with a TNT2 Ultra but in some others it was way behind
[edit]Originally posted by Ali
Maybe you were stupid enough for not reading one of your own quotes...and yes I have seen articles of Matrox before so there is no need to teach me....!