More info on the Parhelia, and now some numbers

[Pabster]

Parhelia isn't gonna trample anything. Your best expectation will be reasonable performance with some nifty features for a selected segment of the market -- mainly, those who happen to have 3 nice LCD's laying around for a triple-head configuration. And those who are willing to drop $400+ for it It remains to be seen how the drivers look, but, frankly, it isn't gonna matter. Parhelia won't be the "GeForce 4 Killer" it was heralded to be. And, frankly, I'm not surprised.

I'm shocked at Matrox's timing, though. With ATi's R300 looming (and looking stunning), and nVidia unleashing NV30 ... They had better get this card to market with a solid driver set and reduce the price in a hurry. Or be left holding the bag.

And we all know nVidia is set to unleash a new set of official Detonators which will push the GeForce 4 to incredible heights, similiar to what DetonatorXP did for GeForce 3.

 

[merlocka]

I'm not saying that you shouldn't buy it, just don't get excited over nothing, don't get caught up in all the hype. I'm just trying to show you that nothing that has been said is worth the remark "I'm going to get it no matter how much it costs!!!!!".

Well, that's silly unless they know alot more about the card than has been published.

It may turn out to be the greatest card of all time but in order to decide that you will have to see it in action and evaluate what it is going to offer you.

Or it could be a giant turd. The reality is that it will probably be somewhere between.

My point is that both the sides are clueless, both the people who say stuff like "Matrox will kill xxx" and the people who say "Parhelia will suck" or "Even if 8tap AF results in a performance hit for R300 and NV30 the difference in performance will be such that the end result will be Parhelia being slower again."

No one can verify anything so everyone just needs to take in a giant chill pill and be grateful that we now have MORE competition than just ATI vs nVidia.

 

[Pocatello]

The Parhelia might be better than the GeForce 4, because of partial support for DX 9, how about the Parhelia against the R300 from ATi, which suppose to support DX9 fully and supposedly much faster than the GeForce 4 4600? Both cards supposed to come out this late summer, and cost about $400 both.

 

[BFG10K]

I don't think I'm the only one worried about those scores, especially for $400. Come on Matrox, get those drivers optimised so your card starts scoring much better results.

 

[Fun Guy]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish

Originally posted by: Gog
I wonder were Amish is... I remember him saying that the Parhelia will make the Geforce 4 Ti a 'paperweight.'

Sure having nice features is good, but when it comes to video cards whats primary of importance is fps... if you don't have enough of them, you simply can't play your games. The Parhelia's mediocore scores (relative) on Quake III hint at the cards relative performance at future games... sure it may have partial directx 9 support, but those features will just be enough for it to pull even with a Geforce 4 on future titles....

Furthermore, Matrox doesn't have the experience that Nvidia does in releasing top notch drivers on a continuous basis...

You called??

First of all I have to call bullsh*t on the "Matrox doesn't have experience releasing top notch drivers." Have you owned a Matrox card? I have only owned Matrox cards and EXCEPT for the G200 OpenGL fiasco (which didn' t bother me because I didn't have any use for OGL) I have NEVER had a driver problem.

As was mentioned before, these are beta drivers. VERY beta from what I've heard.

It's a Quake X bench. Matrox has NEVER been top dog on a Quake bench. Ever. I'd be more interested in a UT 2003 bench or Doom III bench. I have no doubt that Matrox will come close to matching Geforce4 Quake benches.

amish

I have a G550 Dual DVI and the drivers just simply suck. Extremely buggy and unpredictable in any multi-monitor mode, and acknowledged by Matrox as such. They also say they have no idea when they will get around to fixing them.

Couple this with the lack of hardware overlay on the second monitor and you've got a Class A waste of money as far as I'm concerned.

Matrox has nice concepts, but their execution is extremely poor.

 

[xynder]

This card is so stupid. Who the HECK is going to use "surround gaming?" Not me.

 

[robg1701]

If i could afford the card in addition to the rest of my new rig (i cant, im getting a 128MB VIVO Ti4200...and well, it wont be out when im buying either) then id use the surround gaming yes.....see that tri-head pic of UT2003, looking at it actually spanned across my 3 monitors, its stunning to hink of playing it, severe drool factor

 

[grant2]

I have a G550 Dual DVI and the drivers just simply suck. Extremely buggy and unpredictable in any multi-monitor mode, and acknowledged by Matrox as such. They also say they have no idea when they will get around to fixing them.

Couple this with the lack of hardware overlay on the second monitor and you've got a Class A waste of money as far as I'm concerned.

I just ordered a g550 for work.... should I reconsider and get a different brand?

I don't think 2d quality will be much of an issue as I use LCD screens... but having headache-free support *WILL* be important.

 

[merlocka]

Fun Guy is the official Anandtech Matrox Fanboy. He loves that second overlay.

 

[MrGrim]

Originally posted by: merlocka
My point is that both the sides are clueless, both the people who say stuff like "Matrox will kill xxx" and the people who say "Parhelia will suck" or "Even if 8tap AF results in a performance hit for R300 and NV30 the difference in performance will be such that the end result will be Parhelia being slower again."

That is not what I said, I've never stated that I know what is going to happen for sure. What I said is this:

If a GF3 can outpeform a Parhelia in games such as Quake3 then the chances are that R300 and NV30 (as well as GF4) will be able to do so too by a much bigger margin. Even if 8tap AF results in a performance hit for R300 and NV30 the difference in performance will be such that the end result will be Parhelia being slower again.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: grant2
I have a G550 Dual DVI and the drivers just simply suck. Extremely buggy and unpredictable in any multi-monitor mode, and acknowledged by Matrox as such. They also say they have no idea when they will get around to fixing them.

Couple this with the lack of hardware overlay on the second monitor and you've got a Class A waste of money as far as I'm concerned.

I just ordered a g550 for work.... should I reconsider and get a different brand?

I don't think 2d quality will be much of an issue as I use LCD screens... but having headache-free support *WILL* be important.

just get the g550, it seems that funguy just posts alot of this sort about matrox lately, hell its the only thing I'v noticed from him ever

 

[Fun Guy]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: grant2
I have a G550 Dual DVI and the drivers just simply suck. Extremely buggy and unpredictable in any multi-monitor mode, and acknowledged by Matrox as such. They also say they have no idea when they will get around to fixing them.

Couple this with the lack of hardware overlay on the second monitor and you've got a Class A waste of money as far as I'm concerned.

I just ordered a g550 for work.... should I reconsider and get a different brand?

I don't think 2d quality will be much of an issue as I use LCD screens... but having headache-free support *WILL* be important.

just get the g550, it seems that funguy just posts alot of this sort about matrox lately, hell its the only thing I'v noticed from him ever

And with 11,000 posts in the same amount of time as I have 600, I guess you know everything that happens on this board, huh? And I also guess that you have also been using the G550 for quite a while so you are qualified to speak and have a lot to offer on the topic, yes?

grant2, I am using two Samsung 181T LCDs with my G550 right now. Under Win2K Professional, there are multiple problems with applications opening wherever they want, 'extra' little windows opening at bizarre times, applications not 'remembering' their previous opening sizes and opening from full-size one time to just an 'X' in the middle of the wrong screen the next, etc.

There are also issues when having one screen for the main display and having the other screen be an 'extra', as opposed to 'stretching' the viewable area across both screens (with the Win2K Taskbar stretching across both screens as well): in the first instance, the second screen for some reason goes out of alignment and the 181T's LCD controls are disabled so I cannot correct this misalignment. So, I am forced to use the 'stretch' desktop by default.

If this 'little' stuff doesn't bother you, don't worry about it. I am dealing with it because I want to have two digital LCDs, but I am certainly not happy with the situation. It's as if Matrox whipped these drivers up over a weekend, posted them, and said they're through. They acknowledge all of the issues I am having, and when I asked them when they plan on fixing them, the impression I got is 'never.'

It's not like I don't like Matrox - I have used a G400 Max and a G450 as well. It's just that I really don't care for their pompous attitude. Now that I have an obviously defective and immature product right here in front of my eyes and they are refusing to address it, I have become much less enamoured of them.

I will continue pointing these issues out in contrast to zealots who seem to worship them in order to bring some balance to the picture. I am neither a zealot nor overly critical, I am just a big fan of making informed decisions.

 

[Czar]

Fun Guy
First of all I dont have a g550, just not much difference from my g400 so I didnt bother.

About the alignment thing, try going to display properties and align the monitors in the thingy where you see two monitors named 1 and 2, worked when I ran dualhead on two 20" monitors.
I had problems much like you did, with the windows popping up in the wrong places, got kinda anoying after a while but all those programs that did it were either shareware or freeware programs, none of the comercial software did it.

For me the drivers work great, no problems whatsoever except with few programs, so I have nothing to complain about. Those issues are just minor, the card has everything I want, except fast enough 3d but thats going to be solved soon

finaly, when you bash matrox for their drivers you must compare them to other brands and matrox drivers compared to others come out realy well.

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: xynder
This card is so stupid. Who the HECK is going to use "surround gaming?" Not me.

Oh, this card has way more to offer than just Surround Gaming. That's just what Matrox is hyping.

I have a G550 Dual DVI and the drivers just simply suck.

Well, I've never used Dual head, so I can't attest to those drivers. Normal Single Head and 3D I've never had a problem.

Funboy did you ever go to the MatroxUsers Forum to try and get some help? There are some very knowledgable and experienced people there.

amish

 

[Fun Guy]

I speak on what I am experienced on and acquainted with. This is my reference point when giving input.

Electric Amish = Zealot
Czar = Zealot

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Fun Guy
I speak on what I am experienced on and acquainted with. This is my reference point when giving input.

Electric Amish = Zealot
Czar = Zealot

ahh right

I would rather call me a matrox fanboy

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: Fun Guy
I speak on what I am experienced on and acquainted with. This is my reference point when giving input.

Electric Amish = Zealot
Czar = Zealot

What, just because I have never owned a video card that was NOT made by Matrox??

I've used Nvidia products at work and am not impressed with their 2D quality. So, since the majority of my time is spent in 2D apps (programming, browsing, etc...) I choose Matrox. If you think that makes me a zealot, than fine. I'm a zealot.

amish

 

[kami]

Sorry to you guys that look hopeful but it looks as if your $400 Matrox card won't be able to keep up with $170 GF4 Ti4200's in games.

160fps is PLENTY in Q3, but other cards get 250+ so it doesn't bode well for newer games. I want to know how it runs in other games such like ones anand uses in benchmarks (commanche 4, serious sam 2, unreal performance test).

BTW, nvidia 2d quality varies card to card. I've seen bad and good ones. My Asus GF2 (soon to be upgraded) has great 2d quality

 

[Daemon_UK]

Erm, grant2 and Fun Guy.

Do you know how to install a Video Card ??

I have 10, yes count them!! 10 PC's at work each with a G550.

4 of them have DUAL head in action.

ALL machines haven't had a problem since September LAST YEAR!!

The problems that you post about, simply don't exist.

On my work machine, which I run Windows 2K SP2, and which I do development on with and use

MS SQL Deveoper
Macromedia Flash MX
MS Visual Studio
Lotus Notes
MS Office
many many more apps...

haven't had any issues with.

Stop spreading FUD and get a life... :|

 

[merlocka]

Sorry to you guys that look hopeful but it looks as if your $400 Matrox card won't be able to keep up with $170 GF4 Ti4200's in games

This comment is stupid becuase 1) no Matrox Parhelia cards are available 2) there will be more that one Matrox card available and they both won't be $400 and 3) no one here has ever tested one of these cards.

Unless I'm wrong on those three points above, statements like this make people bashing the card look like butt-nuggets. They also make people who make guesses about how awesome the card will be - stop inflating the hype balloon.

Also, comparison to any NV30 or R300 parts is also stupid becuase those parts don't exist yet.

The reason ATI and nVidia are still on top is because they executed and released stuff on time which was close to their claims. So anyone can talk about what might be this, and who's pixel shaders are gonnd be the best, blah blah blahs anisoblah blah mssablah blah... but it all comes down to that first card bundled with a Dell or that first box placed on Bestbuy's shelf. Then you can get it and have a (somewhat) educated discussion about the things. Until then, none of us know jack.

 

[grant2]

Erm, grant2 and Fun Guy.
Do you know how to install a Video Card ??

Of course I do, maybe if you paid attention you'd have noticed I use a Voodoo 3500 without problem.

I have 10, yes count them!! 10 PC's at work each with a G550.

And what do your 10 wonderful, magnificent, blessed g550 equipped PCs have to do with my annoying & underfeatured g200 drivers?

Stop spreading FUD and get a life... :|

Legitimate complaints about a product I paid for is certainly not "FUD" unless you're such a rabig Matrox Fanatic that you can't bear to hear the truth.

Furthermore, my idea of a "life" is _not_ setting up 10, yes 10 PCs at work, or chasing down Matrox support staff to unravel the mysteries of the 'perfect video card install.' You may not be the same way, but I get a "life" by setting up my computer as quickly & simply as I can & moving onto other stuff, like actually doing my job.

Guys like you give Matrox Fanatics a bad reputation.... why can't you all be reasonable and courteous like Electric Amish?? now THERE is a gentleman...

 

[MrGrim]

This thread has been pooped on.

 

[Rhombuss]

Anyone know the stock symbol for Matrox on the TSX composite or NASDAQ index? I'm hoping Matrox's stock will go up from the release of the Parhelia .

 

[xtreme2k]

Those who are saying FPS doesnt matter... get real. Heck you are at anandtech.com and you are telling me you dont care about how much fps we have. Hell we read benchmarks from sites all over the places and we care about each miniscule difference in terms of speed... and now you tell me FPS doesnt matter...

The fact is that if a card can AVERAGE 200fps, it is LIKELY to have a higher minimum frame rate than a card that draws 160fps. That isnt always the case, but that is the likely case. And it is just unacceptable to pay for a card that cost $400 that gets outperformed by a $150 card, in the areas that we do care about. Simple as that.

Personally unless Matrox has a brain and releases difference versions of the card, cheaper derivatives, not many people will buy the Parhelia. 2D Graphics professionals wont buy them as their G550 or whatever they have now already sastisfy them, and I dont see why they should pay for such 3D performance while all they do is photoshop-ping. Average gamer wont because of the $400 price tag. (note not all THAT much people bought the Ti4600 because of the price. most of the shops sells mostly 4200 and even 4400 are less likely to be sold). Well, here comes the extreme gamers. Some of them will but seriously not many. Whether that small number of buyers is enough for Matrox, I dont know.

 

[xylem]

For those who are complaining about the assumed price on release, keep in mind that Matrox is using very high quality components to output 2D video. This is an area where both NVidia and ATI skimp, in comparison. Going from a Matrox G400 to GF2 Pro (Gainward), I can say that the drop in 2D quality was ghastly. I know NVidia has improved 2D since then, but if you read the 2 big previews (Anand and Tom's) of Parhelia, the quality difference is explained. Theoretically, Parhelia 2D quality should be even better than the G400, and 2D quality is a big concern for people who spend significant time other than gaming in front of a screen.

As far as 3D performance and quality is concerned, for most of us it remains to be seen. For those who have seen it, the basis has been unpolished/unrefined drivers. Nevertheless, I suppose this argument will rage on until we find something else to argue about... =)