Great comparison. The most important thing for me is not the performance...it's the fact that G550 ist LP-AGP and fit's in my small desktop machines. besides that with the exception of native win3x-drivers /which can be accomplished with using the native winOS2 drivers for that there is no real downgrade for the g550. therefore the g550 is my favorite card!
Interesting benchmark for retro friends. I have an old Compaq that only accepts ATI and Matrox cards. Nvidia and all the others don't work, the image remains black. It has a G400 better than the Rage Pro that was originally installed.
vvbee : the GPU-s are on paper equal in rendering power....except for the difference in G400 having SDR via 128-bit and G550 having DDR1 via 64-bit....which comes into play when rendering more complex or larger textures....then the G400 produces more FPS. I used to own both of them back in 2001 and despite the G400 being 2 years older I liked it more because it was stronger while having equal high quality 32-bit texture format supported just like the G550 has. Matrox back then was truly better than 3D-FX, ATI and NVIDIA in terms of picture rendering quality.
Remember which games they were? Grand Prix Legends here uses high-res mods from the 2000s, but the cards perform about equal. My general experience with the G400 has been that games from 2001+ are a bit too new and the FPS dips too much. Good render quality though.
@@vvbee Damn....I would have to think hard....I'll check some old magazines of mine and it will jog my memory as to which games, that supported above 16-bit and 24-bit textures were the ones.
@@fradd182 OC-ing doesn't help here....because there is one big achilles heel here and that is 64-bit memory bandwidth that cripples the same speeds of the G550 as soon as higher textures are in game.
