If you go back far enough in the computer industry, there have been many successful video card companies. Back before the whole 3D craze kicked off, some of the fastest 2D video cards came courtesy of Matrox, and while they made some attempts at producing compelling 3D graphics cards, they were never able to grab the performance crown from NVIDIA or ATI. Their last real attempt at the 3D graphics market came in 2002 with the Parhelia-512, and as was the case with previous efforts it basically ended up falling short. Interestingly, the Parhelia-512 supported "surround gaming" long before AMD's Eyefinity, and that may have opened the gates for what would become Matrox's core focus over the next decade: multi-display video cards.

Since 2002, there haven't been many reviews of Matrox cards because the focus shifted to industries that need not just two or three but potentially a dozen or more displays all running from a single system. Their last graphics card update was in 2009, and since then the top product has been the M9188, a single card capable of driving eight DisplayPort or DVI connections, with the possibility of using two cards to drive 16 displays. Who needs that many displays? Well, the financial and security markets are two easy examples, as they both have use cases where six or more displays is "reasonable", and digital signage is another category where Matrox can provide useful technology. These are all professional markets, and the M9188 is priced accordingly ($1500+), but if you were looking to build a system with good graphics performance, Matrox basically hasn't been relevant as their cards seem to focus almost exclusively on 2D performance these days.

That might be changing with future products given today's announcement, as Matrox will be switching to AMD-designed GPUs for their next generation of multi-display products. These will continue to support Matrox's PowerDesk desktop management software, but what's not clear is whether Matrox will be doing much in the way of customized hardware. The announcement states that "key features of the selected AMD GPU include 28nm technology with 1.5 billion transistors; DirectX 11.2, OpenGL 4.4 and OpenCL 1.2 compatibility; shader model 5.0; PCI Express 3.0 and 128-bit memory interface."

From that we can surmise that Matrox will be using a variant of the Cape Verde GCN core, which is one of the lower performance GCN parts from AMD. In fact, Matrox may actually be using AMD's FirePro W600 cards, only with custom Matrox-developed software applications. This would also mean Matrox is looking at a maximum of six display outputs per graphics card (compared to eight on the M9188), but AMD already has the ability to run up to six GPUs in a system with the appropriate motherboard meaning up to 36 displays off a single system is theoretically possible.

The hardware is of course only part of the equation, and Matrox's PowerDesk software is something that benefits many businesses and professionals. Matrox notes that "critical productivity-enhancing features available with Matrox PowerDesk software will continue to be supported on the next line of Matrox graphics cards designed with AMD GPUs." These features include the ability to configure and manage multi-display setups, which can get tricky once you move past two or three displays. PowerDesk has tools to configure stretching, cloning, pivot, bezel management, and other items that are important for a professional multi-display configuration.

There are plenty of upsides to this announcement. For one, it allows Matrox to reallocate resources that are currently going into hardware development and instead focus on their core competency, which at this point is multi-display solutions. PowerDesk is well regarded in their target market, and this will allow Matrox to continue to improve the platform without trying to design their own hardware. AMD benefits as they're able to partner with Matrox and potentially sell their GPUs at higher "professional" prices, and they may also increase their share of digital signage and other multi-display markets.

And of course the customers that purchase the cards benefit as they get to move to a modern platform with support for all the latest DirectX, OpenGL, and OpenCL libraries. Long-term, this also opens the doors for Matrox to offer substantially higher performance 3D solutions from AMD for customers that need such features. Overall, this announcement isn't likely to affect most computer users, but it's good to see Matrox still hanging around after several decades in the computer graphics industry, something many of their competition from the 90s didn't manage to achieve.

Source: Matrox PR

POST A COMMENT

36 Comments

View All Comments

  • wireframed - Saturday, September 6, 2014 - link

    They're just pushing 2D data, so it's not like there are gigabytes and gigabytes of data. You can easily calculate what you need to push 2560x1600x24 bits Per pixel for however many fps you need. You need around 16.3MB per frame, so 30fps or even 60fps wouldn't require much bandwidth, even for 8 or 16 displays. It's a little over 15GB/s, easily doable with a modern card. A cheap card like the r260 has around 90GB/s of memory bandwidth. You just need to enough lanes to the display connectors. Reply
  • iwod - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    Another thing, Why Couldn't Matrox just license IP from Imagination or ARM? Reply
  • deltatux - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    Probably because those parts might not deliver the graphics performance used in professional displays? They probably had their reasons for not using PowerVR or Mali. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    You'd need to create robust Windows drivers for PowerVR or Mali or any other GPU, and as we've seen from AMD, Intel, and NVIDIA over the years, that's not always easy to get right. Reply
  • frenchy_2001 - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    why not license Kepler from NV then? ;) Reply
  • deltatux - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    Little known fact, Dell sells their PowerEdge T320 with Matrox graphics. I use Matrox on a daily basis lol. Reply
  • username609 - Tuesday, September 16, 2014 - link

    HP's servers have alternated between "embedded Matrox" and "embedded AMD" for years. Reply
  • Stuka87 - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    I had a G400+, and it was a fine card for the time, but it was costly. I later replaced it with a GF3Ti200 which blew it out of the water.

    But the Matrox card had some nice features and 2d image quality.
    Reply
  • Syran - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    I'll always remember Matrox cards fondly. They were the perfect pairing for the voodoo 2's... *sigh* my friend and I used to have G200 + sli Voodoo 2's that were amazing setups. Reply
  • digitalsolo - Thursday, September 4, 2014 - link

    This makes me reminisce about my old Matrix MGA Mystic 4MB back in the day. Wonderful little card that was, played Mechwarrior 2 and Descent with the upgraded texture packs! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now