Help! Is Parhelia best for Photoshop, 3dMax?

[daveybrat]

I've got a friend at work who wants the best card (under $350) for Photoshop, Lightwave, 3dMax, and other Workstation style
apps. He will only be playing minor games, so that's not important.
From the stuff he's read, he's thinking about buying the Matrox Parhelia for $325.
Is this a good choice or is he better off with a Geforce4 TI4200-4600 card? Or even a Radeon 9500-9700 card?
Could anyone find a link of comparisons that doesn't involve gaming benchmarks?
Thanks!

 

[rbV5]

I'd say the GF4 might be the best for the budget or for dual DVI, but the apps you mention are pretty forgiving on the OpenGL, so the Radeons would be fine too. I use my 9700 in Photoshop and Max. There are issues with the DX9 driver in Max (the DX 8.1 driver, OpenGL seem fine), and I've not used it enough in a workstation environment yet to make a call to be honest, I've noticed no other problems.

 

[Huma]

For pro 3D apps, I'd go nvidia. Find a GF4 ti with good 2D and roll with it. Their openGL drivers are top rate for consumer cards.

 

[EdipisReks]

the Parhelia really doesn't have enough grunt to run 3d studio max. i would suggest a geforce4 or a radeon 9700.

 

[Creig]

The same guy "Unwinder" who brought us the RivaTuner Soft9700 upgrade for the 9500 has just released his NEXT upgrade patch for the 9500, the SoftFireGL patch. I believe it's included with the latest version of RivaTuner. In addition to turning a 9500 non-pro into a 9700 and letting you overclock it, it NOW unlocks all the rendering features of a FireGL X1 (for 128 mb cards) or a FireGL Z1 (for 64 mb cards). That's a $700 card (X1) for $150! Current estimate has it that only 30% of the 9500 non-pro cards show artifacts with the Soft9700 patch.

 

[Peter D]

get a nVidia Quadro 4 or Quadro FX when it comes out

it may break the bank but it'd do the job!

 

[littlegohan]

dont get a nivdia card

the 2d quality od those cards are just horrible

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: littlegohan
dont get a nivdia card

the 2d quality od those cards are just horrible

The consumer level cards of nvidia used to have terrible 2D (think: GF2 days). nvidia's 2D has been getting better, but in my experience it still doesn't compete with the 2D quality of ATI. Matrox is about the best with 2D IQ; they're even better than ATI. If it weren't for the 3D, I'd say a Parhelia might be his best choice, especially its 10bits/channel DACs which allow for better color precision in Photoshop. However, an ATI Radeon or FireGL (the latter is probably out of his price range though) would probably be a better choice.

Edit: before all the nvidia fanboys start attacking me for my statements, I will say that these 2D IQ problems aren't going to be noticable until you start to run resolutions above 1024x768, or higher refresh rates (say 85 Hz or more).

 

[Lonyo]

How about a 9700PRO and softmod to FireGL X1? That way it's more likely to work without artifacts.

 

[Huma]

Originally posted by: littlegohan
dont get a nivdia card

the 2d quality od those cards are just horrible

There are several manufacturers that actually have very good 2D. My abit ti4400 was surprisingly good.

I use a g550 at work, so I'm not talking out of my ass.

 

[dejacky]

at what resolution?

 

[Mingon]

The 9700 runs slower in autocad than a ti4200, so I would guess 3dsmax might show similar results. I use Photoshop and acad quite often and I have never had a problem with nvdia cards, whereas the 9500 with softpro job was very slow in autocad - the firegl hack might make a difference never tried it.