Matrox Parhelia.. NDA BROKEN!!!

[vash]

If this review is 100% correct, I may be a Matrox convert quickly. I have yearned for the days of gaming with 3 monitors and with the possibility of gaming on 3 screens, I could totally be sold, instantly.

Being a bit cash strapped, I am in no place to start buying new computer toys, but when the money is a bit better, I see no reason why not getting the fastest Matrox card and setting up a few more monitors on my new desk. I have DREAMED of playing any one of my FPS games across 3 screen and with this card, it sounds possible. The only real question left is the performance hit when playing on 2-3 screens. If there is little to no performance hit, it will be the "killer" feature for me and I will HAVE to buy it. If the performance hit is too much for 3 screens at a high resolution (1024x768 with all the eye candy on), I'll wait for a faster revision of the card that won't have such a performance hit.

After the benches come out with triple head, under games like Quake3, I could be sold quickly. Being that I've been unemployed and looking, means I won't be buying immediately, but you can LINE ME UP!

vash

 

[Neurofreeze]

The rumors going around also state that the first G1000 models will be available in quantity late June, at $229 MSRP.

Umm, 20-30% better performance than a GF4Ti 4600 in June? I don't care if it'll actually improve or not, if the price (and performance) is true, I'm sold.

As for the triple-head, it's one of the features that most attracts me. I find it kind of hard to believe that a lot more of you don't have a spare monitor or two lying around. Even just adding two more craptacular 17" monitors to your main monitor for more periphial vision in FPS's sounds good to me. Not all three monitors have to be some $700, 21" trinitron tube monstrosity.

I doubt this card will be the the card to end all cards (this year, anyway), but from the rumors, the features are good, the price is right, and the timing is right (I really want a new card within the next few months).

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Neurofreeze
Umm, 20-30% better performance than a GF4Ti 4600 in June? I don't care if it'll actually improve or not, if the price (and performance) is true, I'm sold.

The performance should be significantly higher than that! I mean, one of the articles mentioned that 20-30% figure. They also mentioned that they got that performance using pre-release board with beta-drivers! Comparing pre-release card with unfinished drivers to a mature GF4 with even more mature drivers, and the newcomer still beats GF4!

 

[Pabster]

Parhelia, here I come

On second thought, no thanks. I don't need 16X FSAA or triple output support. And 256MB is overkill. I mean, right now, Ti4600 is overkill. Why in the world drop the big bucks on something like this with NV30 and R300 just around the horizon? Personally, I'm looking forward to R300 more than Parhelia-512 or NV30.

Also, is anyone taking bets on nVidia releasing Detonator 5's in the near future?

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Pabster
On second thought, no thanks. I don't need 16X FSAA or triple output support. And 256MB is overkill. I mean, right now, Ti4600 is overkill. Why in the world drop the big bucks on something like this with NV30 and R300 just around the horizon?

Why drop big bucks for NV30, when NV35 is just 6 months away?

You don't need FSAA? that's strange, I find features that improve image quality to be most welcome addition. If you could use FSAA without significant drop in FPS would you do it? I myself wait for the day when I can run my games at 1600x1200x32 with FSAA. And Parhelia might be overkill right now, it won't be that 1 year down the road. I'm not one of those people who run to the store every 6 months and buy the latest and greatest NVIDIA has to offer. If I buy the Parhelia, I will use it for few years at least.

Also, there are rumors that Parhelia gets updated next spring. Propably full DX9 compliance, together with .13 micron process, higher MHz and internal tweaks.

You don't need 256MB video-.card? then get the 128MB Parhelia, problem solved.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Originally posted by: Pabster
On second thought, no thanks. I don't need 16X FSAA or triple output support. And 256MB is overkill. I mean, right now, Ti4600 is overkill. Why in the world drop the big bucks on something like this with NV30 and R300 just around the horizon?

Why drop big bucks for NV30, when NV35 is just 6 months away?

You don't need FSAA? that's strange, I find features that improve image quality to be most welcome addition. If you could use FSAA without significant drop in FPS would you do it? I myself wait for the day when I can run my games at 1600x1200x32 with FSAA. And Parhelia might be overkill right now, it won't be that 1 year down the road. I'm not one of those people who run to the store every 6 months and buy the latest and greatest NVIDIA has to offer. If I buy the Parhelia, I will use it for few years at least.

Also, there are rumors that Parhelia gets updated next spring. Propably full DX9 compliance, together with .13 micron process, higher MHz and internal tweaks.

You don't need 256MB video-.card? then get the 128MB Parhelia, problem solved.

So you'd get the Parhelia w/o even seeing what NVIDIA and ATi have to offer with NV30 and R300? Yeah, that sounds pretty smart to me And who's to say that if you buy an NV30 or R300 that you still won't be using it for years to come? Parhelia won't be fully DX9 compliant coming out of the gate, it will take a refresh and a smaller die size to do that. NV30 and R300 will most likely be DX9 parts from the get go. Those two will most likely will last a lot longer "value wise" than the Parhelia.

And another thing. People seem to be so happy that Matrox is coming out with a card that will be 20 - 30% faster than the Ti4600. Not taking into account Detonator 5 drivers (I mean come on, EVERYONE knows that NVIDIA has something like this in the works...they ALWAYS do), the Ti4600 has been out for FOUR months. It's gonna take more than 20 - 30% from Matrox to sway me...especially with NV30 on the way with a radically different architecture.

Lastly, those of you above talking about $229 for G1000, you may be a little hurt when Tuesday comes around. I have seen from many sources around the web that the Ti4600 killer will be a workstation level card and will not be easy on the wallet (~$500+) while the entry level card will be lower in price. When NV30 DOES get here, you can expect a price of $399.

LOL, and how quickly you all forget 3DLabs' P10

 

[Mem]

If you could use FSAA without significant drop in FPS would you do it?

I actually never use FSAA even with slow type RPG games which I`ve tried it with,FSAA means nothing to mean since I prefer to use higher res without it,I actually did not like the image with FSAA,it`s really personal choice since I know some that do and some that never bother using it.I`m going to wait until December before I upgrade my Video card,by then we will have more options .

 

[DocM]

I get a kick out of you guys who see the "20-30%" quote and think that's the end advantage. That was with early alpha drivers.

Also: many things in the Digit-Live/Russian text are presumptions and misleading. You'll see later on

DocM

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: NFS4
So you'd get the Parhelia w/o even seeing what NVIDIA and ATi have to offer with NV30 and R300? Yeah, that sounds pretty smart to me

Nope, that wouldn't be smart . I'm upgrading at the end of this year or early next year (might even wait till next spring). My next video-card will most likely come from one of these manufacturers:

NVIDIA
Ati (in theory, see below)
Matrox
Bitboys

I will base my choice solely on their features and performance. Currently, Ati is not really a contender because of their less than good Linux-support. Matrox and NVIDIA have that covered.

And who's to say that if you buy an NV30 or R300 that you still won't be using it for years to come?

There seems to be quite few people who upgrade their vid-cards several times a year. But I was exaggarating in my example.

Parhelia won't be fully DX9 compliant coming out of the gate, it will take a refresh and a smaller die size to do that. NV30 and R300 will most likely be DX9 parts from the get go. Those two will most likely will last a lot longer "value wise" than the Parhelia.

I see no reason why Parhelia couldn't be upgraded to full DX9 compliance in the spring. I mean, it mostly already supports it, one thing it lacks are the compliant pixel-shaders. Upgrading those to DX9 isn't as difficult as it sounds, since Parhelias vertex-shaders are already DX9-compliant. And even with DX8 pixel-shaders, I think Parhelia has long enough life ahead of it. DX9 get's released at the end of summer it seems. When will we see games that will take advantage of DX9? Propably close to end of 2003. And even those games will run on Parhelia, they just might now have all the bells & whistles.

And another thing. People seem to be so happy that Matrox is coming out with a card that will be 20 - 30% faster than the Ti4600. Not taking into account Detonator 5 drivers (I mean come on, EVERYONE knows that NVIDIA has something like this in the works...they ALWAYS do), the Ti4600 has been out for FOUR months. It's gonna take more than 20 - 30% from Matrox to sway me...especially with NV30 on the way with a radically different architecture.

Oh yes, the old NVIDIA-trick... Competitor releases a product, and NVIDIA just happens to release new drivers that increase performance. Could it be that NVIDIA is holding GF4's performance back ? As for the 20-30% increase. Like I said, it was pre-release card using beta-drivers. Hardly a valid indication of Parhelias performance.

Lastly, those of you above talking about $229 for G1000, you may be a little hurt when Tuesday comes around. I have seen from many sources around the web that the Ti4600 killer will be a workstation level card and will not be easy on the wallet (~$500+) while the entry level card will be lower in price. When NV30 DOES get here, you can expect a price of $299.

To my knowledge, low-end Parhelia will cost about as much as GF4 does (non MX GF4's), with hi-end models going upwards toward 1000 dollars. Even the low-end models should compete well with GF4, so I see no problem there, whereas the expensive models compete with Quadro and the like (which also cost about 1000 dollars)

 

[ElFenix]

I actually did not like the image with FSAA

matrox has the ability to do line AA rather than FSAA, it appears. now thats something nice.

 

[Mem]

matrox has the ability to do line AA rather than FSAA, it appears. now thats something nice.

I`m still going to wait FSAA or AA is not at the top of my list when I choose a video card .

 

[NFS4]

I see no reason why Parhelia couldn't be upgraded to full DX9 compliance in the spring. I mean, it mostly already supports it, one thing it lacks are the compliant pixel-shaders. Upgrading those to DX9 isn't as difficult as it sounds, since Parhelias vertex-shaders are already DX9-compliant. And even with DX8 pixel-shaders, I think Parhelia has long enough life ahead of it. DX9 get's released at the end of summer it seems. When will we see games that will take advantage of DX9? Propably close to end of 2003. And even those games will run on Parhelia, they just might now have all the bells & whistles.

I didn't say that it wouldn't/couldn't be upgraded to DX9...I was just stating that it won't be a full DX9 part at launch

Of yes, the old NVIDIA-trick... Competitor releases a product, and NVIDIA just happens to find release new drivers that increase performance at the same time. Could it be that NVIDIA is holding GF4's performance back ? As for the 20-30% increase. Like I said, it was pre-release card using beta-drivers. Hardly a valid indication of Parhelias performance.

LOL, NVIDIA always seems to pull some drivers out of their a$$ when the heat comes Well, I can't really argue with it. Free speed is always good Even so, new Det drivers are usually good for 10 - 20% speed increase for the current top end offering.

To my knowledge, low-end Parhelia will cost about as much as GF4 does (non MX GF4's), with hi-end models going upwards toward 1000 dollars. Even the low-end models should compete well with GF4, so I see no problem there, whereas the expensive models compete with Quadro and the like (which also cost about 1000 dollars)

Well, personally I'd rather have an NV30 than a low-end Parhelia

 

[ElFenix]

Well, personally I'd rather have an NV30 than a low-end Parhelia

/me wonders if anand is whispering in nfs4's ear about how nv30 and r300 are doing

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Well, personally I'd rather have an NV30 than a low-end Parhelia

/me wonders if anand is whispering in nfs4's ear about how nv30 and r300 are doing

Actually, I've heard NOTHING on either of those two cards from NE1. It just makes logical sense to me...

I'd rather have NVIDIA's top end offering for $299 than Matrox's bottom-feeder

 

[mastertech01]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Well, personally I'd rather have an NV30 than a low-end Parhelia

/me wonders if anand is whispering in nfs4's ear about how nv30 and r300 are doing

Actually, I've heard NOTHING on either of those two cards from NE1. It just makes logical sense to me...

I'd rather have NVIDIA's top end offering for $299 than Matrox's bottom-feeder

Isnt that kind of like saying you would rather have a fully loaded 2002 Blazer over a deluxe model 2003 Navigator?

What diff does it really make if its fully DX9 compliant if DX9 isnt even avaliable to us yet?

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Well, personally I'd rather have an NV30 than a low-end Parhelia

Why? Do you know the specs ov NV30? And even if NV30 costs alot more than low-end Parhelia does? Even if it doesn't offer any real benefits?

I for one find it rather amusing that NVIDIA's flagship product has to compete with Matrox'es low-end product

 

[NFS4]

Isnt that kind of like saying you would rather have a fully loaded 2002 Blazer over a deluxe model 2003 Navigator?

What diff does it really make if its fully DX9 compliant if DX9 isnt even avaliable to us yet?

Not really a good comparison b/c a fully loaded Trailblazer is still about $12,000 cheaper than a BASE Navigator

The DX9 statement was simply stated b/c Nemesis77 mentioned about using a Parhelia for years to come and I stated that R300 and NV30 would technically have a longer shelf life if they supported the full DX9 feature set (at least in gaming).

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

Why? Do you know the specs ov NV30? And even if NV30 costs alot more than low-end Parhelia does? Even if it doesn't offer any real benefits?

I for one find it rather amusing that NVIDIA's flagship product has to compete with Matrox'es low-end product

I've seen some rumoured specs, but I'm really just going on NVIDIA's reputation and their CEO's statements on NV30. The NV30 will be the first BIG change in architecture in a while for NVIDIA.

As for pricing of NV30 and Parhelia, it's all speculation. I simply stated $299 b/c that's what the GF4 Ti4600 debuted at.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: NFS4

The DX9 statement was simply stated b/c Nemesis77 mentioned about using a Parhelia for years to come and I stated that R300 and NV30 would technically have a longer shelf life if they supported the full DX9 feature set (at least in gaming).

And it will propably be (like it has been so many times before) that by the time games take advantage of the features those chips have to offer, they have become so slow in other areas that they need to be replaced regardless. Same thing happened with original GF. By the time games really took advantage of T&L, GF was so slow that it had to be replaced.

I've seen some rumoured specs, but I'm really just going on NVIDIA's reputation and their CEO's statements on NV30. The NV30 will be the first BIG change in architecture in a while for NVIDIA.

I have heard some specs too. DX9 part, DDR-II, separate geometry co-processor etc. Of course it will be faster than GF4, but it isn't set in stone that it will annihilate Parhelia. And of course, why get NV30, when upgraded Parhelia is just around the corner ?

 

[Leon]

And of course, why get NV30, when upgraded Parhelia is just around the corner

Upgraded Parhelia? The one with double head casting (that gives you virtual BJ in chat rooms)? I am sure we all looking forward to it in the next 3 years

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Card shot and specs

For the record, that is a fake.

So you'd get the Parhelia w/o even seeing what NVIDIA and ATi have to offer with NV30 and R300? Yeah, that sounds pretty smart to me And who's to say that if you buy an NV30 or R300 that you still won't be using it for years to come? Parhelia won't be fully DX9 compliant coming out of the gate, it will take a refresh and a smaller die size to do that. NV30 and R300 will most likely be DX9 parts from the get go. Those two will most likely will last a lot longer "value wise" than the Parhelia.

I will definitely buy the Parhelia before seeing anything from Nv or ATI. I really don't care what they have to offer. Matrox has never let me down. I am STILL using my G400 and gaming away without any problems, plus I enjoy beautiful, crisp 2D. Nothing you have seen here has even touched on the 2D upgrades on this card. They've all just focused on the 3D features.

As for DX9 compliance

Who really cares? It will be an eternity (in the computer world) before any software will actually use it anyway. Like I said above, I'm still using my G400 and it's, what, DX6? DX7? compliant. Maybe??? All this DX compliance really doesn't mean crap. By the time any software starts using DX9, DX10 will be out... It's a never-ending chase...

amish

 

[rickn]

so where are all the price complainers? You same people complain that $399 nv cards are to expensive. Your mouths is gonna fall to the floor when you see how much parhelia costs.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: rickn
so where are all the price complainers? You same people complain that $399 nv cards are to expensive. Your mouths is gonna fall to the floor when you see how much parhelia costs.

The price complainers don't complain when Matrox is involved...only when it's NVIDIA Matrox is "holier than thou" to them so they don't care

 

[rickn]

For the record, that is a fake.

of course any idiot could have figured it was fake. a 300+mhz 80mil transistor chip with passive cooling only? Sure, when pigs fly out my arse

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: rickn
so where are all the price complainers? You same people complain that $399 nv cards are to expensive. Your mouths is gonna fall to the floor when you see how much parhelia costs.

Difference is that you get alot for that money. With NVIDIA you just get rehash of a rehashed tech.

 

[rickn]

Difference is that you get alot for that money. With NVIDIA you just get rehash of a rehashed tech

You actually believe that? G400 couldnt even run Quake 3 at a decent speed at 1024 32bbp. I'd imagine it runs everything like a slideshow now. You sure get a lot for your money alright, after you have to run out and buy three monitors. Matrox should go into the monitor business with Parhelia