Matrox Parhelia review @ Toms

[Mingon]

With a core and memory increase of 25-35%

Thats a strange comment to make, the difference between 0.15 and 0.13 is around 15% so we can expect the next generation to reach how fast 250mhz perhaps 275 max, and even if it manages a 25% core speed would it still need the extra bandwidth, i dont think so. I said about a month ago I suspected the card would be limited by the core speed and so it seems. Makes you wonder though how on earth the r300 / nv30 are going to run so fast, especially as the r300 is due to be on 0.15 still.

 

[VBboy]

Did anyone really doubt that Nvidia was going to make Matrox its b|tch?

 

[mcveigh]

Originally posted by: VBboy
Did anyone really doubt that Nvidia was going to make Matrox its b|tch?

troll

 

[Mingon]

Did anyone really doubt that Nvidia was going to make Matrox its b|tch

realist troll

 

[mangled]

Originally posted by: SteelCityFan
From looking at the second review, it seems to me that the Matrox Card is pulling ahead when you get above 1024x768 (and some at 1024x768) with 16X antriscopic and 4XAA.

With new drivers, this will likely improve.

Looks to me that if you like to run games in high res and max detail, this card does in fact beat a GeForce 4600.

sure, if you like playing your games at 40fps! Just keep aa at 2x or quincux (sp?) at any resolution and it will stomp the Matrox and still look phenomenal.

Competition is great, when there is competition.

 

[randomlinh]

ugh, i'm fairly disappointed. I mean, the 2d quality may be top notch, but at the price, i would hardly say it's worth it over something like a g400 if you're concerned about 2d. they need to drop the price to stay competitive. triple head is a really nice feature, but running three crts is space consuming and heat generating

the real key here is can they release drivers in a timely manner to improve on performance before it's too late? i would think they would put a lot of effort into this if they really wanted to take a bite out of nvidia. regardless, i'm still waiting to a closer doom3 release time before upgrading video...

 

[boi]

nm

 

[murphy55d]

Originally posted by: lnguyen
ugh, i'm fairly disappointed. I mean, the 2d quality may be top notch, but at the price, i would hardly say it's worth it over something like a g400 if you're concerned about 2d. they need to drop the price to stay competitive. triple head is a really nice feature, but running three crts is space consuming and heat generating

the real key here is can they release drivers in a timely manner to improve on performance before it's too late? i would think they would put a lot of effort into this if they really wanted to take a bite out of nvidia. regardless, i'm still waiting to a closer doom3 release time before upgrading video...

NV30

 

[sc0tty8]

Enlishified for english users

 

[dawks]

Originally posted by: NFS4
GamePC's Review

It looks as though the Parhelia's bleeding from the a$$ continues

From what we can tell, the Matrox Parhelia is a victim of it's own massive hype. Everyone has been expecting this card to absolutely crush the competition and bring in a new era of Matrox-dominated graphics. Everyone who forecasted the downfall of nVidia and ATI at the hands of Matrox is most likely eating their words right now. As the benchmarks clearly show, nVidia is not giving up the 3D performance crown anytime soon.

BUAHAHA

Its nice to have a unified driver system. Hard to beat drivers that have been in constant development for over three years.

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: DaZ

Originally posted by: NFS4
GamePC's Review

It looks as though the Parhelia's bleeding from the a$$ continues

From what we can tell, the Matrox Parhelia is a victim of it's own massive hype. Everyone has been expecting this card to absolutely crush the competition and bring in a new era of Matrox-dominated graphics. Everyone who forecasted the downfall of nVidia and ATI at the hands of Matrox is most likely eating their words right now. As the benchmarks clearly show, nVidia is not giving up the 3D performance crown anytime soon.

BUAHAHA

Its nice to have a unified driver system. Hard to beat drivers that have been in constant development for over three years.

Matrox had unified drivers way before Nvidia ever did.

amish

 

[dawks]

So they are using the same drivers they used on the G200, to G550?..

Shouldnt the benchmarks be close to maxing out the card? Seeing as most of the new features that would require new driver code arent in quake3 based games, or some DirectX games..

Either the card just isnt as fast as ATI/nVidia chips at the silicon level (design, not clock speed), or their drivers just arent top notch. (Or, they have new drivers for this chip)

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: DaZ
So they are using the same drivers they used on the G200, to G550?..

Shouldnt the benchmarks be close to maxing out the card? Seeing as most of the new features that would require new driver code arent in quake3 based games, or some DirectX games..

Either the card just isnt as fast as ATI/nVidia chips at the silicon level (design, not clock speed), or their drivers just arent top notch. (Or, they have new drivers for this chip)

The Parhelia drivers are completely new and I'm sure they haven't been bundled into the Unified yet.

amish

 

[Chumster]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish

The Parhelia drivers are completely new and I'm sure they haven't been bundled into the Unified yet.

amish

Isn't that, by definition, not unified then? nVidia didn't release a separate driver with the release of GF4..

Chum

 

[dawks]

Yea.. WTH?

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: Chumster

Originally posted by: Electric Amish

The Parhelia drivers are completely new and I'm sure they haven't been bundled into the Unified yet.

amish

Isn't that, by definition, not unified then? nVidia didn't release a separate driver with the release of GF4..

Chum

Yeah, because the GF4 wasn't completely and totally new hardware. All they had to do was tack-on a few things to the old drivers.

amish

 

[dawks]

Hence my point. ATI and Matrox always come out with very different silicon that requires new software.. nVidias progressive system.. (cant think of the proper term) is much more efficient.. of course there will be a ceiling sometime, but if they can keep adding, and improving this current core, rock on.

Coding new drivers for every chip you make every year or two is just too much wasted work. (IMHO)

Post 2001

 

[MTVsucks]

matrox does not make a new chip every year. This will be the first new core for along time. Its a new core, let the drivers mature. I was disapointed with the initial benchmarks, but im having faith. they can be much better.

 

[Gl4di4tor]

the card is way to expensive and under powered.

 

[Gl4di4tor]

However the card do have alot of good features.