Matrox Parhelia.. NDA BROKEN!!!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Piano Man

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
3,370
0
76
HOLY SH!!!!!!!!!!!!T, it says two models will be available AT LAUNCH on May 14th!!!!!!!!!!!! COME TO DADDY!!!!!!!!
 

Pariah

Elite Member
Apr 16, 2000
7,357
20
81
The PDF is a fake. Look at the card, you can't fit 3 DVI connectors on the back of a card. All of Matrox's multi DVI cards use one connector with a cable adapter for 2 monitors. Even their 2 monitor G200 has only one connector using the cable adapter.

Here is Matrox's quad G200:

Matrox G200 Multi-Monitor Quad

Note the back plate, there is no way you can squeeze a third connector onto that.

Luk is right about the fan as well. You can't mount a fan on that, and there is no way the Parhelia is going to run without a fan.
 

esc

Senior member
Dec 4, 2001
314
0
0
WOW! i think i'm going to hold out first on my video card upgrade! this is the sh!!!!T!:D let's hope it really really performs well.
 

LukFilm

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
6,128
1
0
I agree that it's a fake (the card). No fan? Yeah, right! Plus DDR chips in a regular format, not Tiny-BGA? Yeah, right! No large capacitors? Yeah, right! Three connectors on the back of the card? Yeah, right!
rolleye.gif
 

flexy

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2001
8,464
155
106
"early drivers show the parhelia outperform the gf4 ti4600 only 20%-30%"

There it goes...the "3d graphics of a new generation".... :( :( :(


And...WHO IN THE WORLD owns 3 monitors ??? I mean..who is the market.. ???? Who needs that *** ????


The triple head is the most useless feature as far as i can tell....FOR ME the only interesting feature of the card will be how it performs in Direct3d apps..using 4x (8x,16x) Antialiasing...if the performance gain is neglectible...then so is the whole card !!!!!!!!!!

(Maybe NOT for "all" those many users out there with three [or more] 19" monitors :) [/cynism off]

Edit:

NO Pixelshader 1.4...Ok...noone gives anyway...but....i was (to say it at least) "surprised" ... what DX standard is Vertex shader 2.0 ??






 

otlg25

Senior member
Aug 20, 2001
394
0
0
flexy:

The card features 4 1.3 compliant pixel shaders that can operate as 2 v2.0 pixel shaders. Additional 20-30% faster with drivers a month before release, and built in debug mode means a card 50-60% faster with retail drivers..

And if you don't think displacement mapping is cool, well... no one can save you ;)

 

CBone

Senior member
Dec 4, 2000
402
0
0
Originally posted by: Pariah
No, it actually is 3fps.

Here's a clear non-cropped photo.

http://ixbt.com/video2/parhelia512/faa16x/3dmark_faa16x.jpg

I question the usefulness of a "feature" that scores 3fps. Of course 16x FSAA would take some incredible fillrate.

That's what I'm saying. 3 fps is less than worthless.

Originally posted by: andreasl
If you want a lowdown on the FAA-16x mode then look at this graph:

FAA-16x

It seems that it sorts out only those pixels that are aliased and stores them in a buffer and then performs the anti-aliasing on them. This should allow almost full speed since only a few % of the pixels are 'fixed'. Or am I way off base here?

I hope you are. If 3 fps is almost full speed, that kinda sucks. But I guess in comparison, if other cards can't do it at all, 3 fps is rockin' the casbah.
 

Gog

Senior member
Feb 1, 2002
351
0
0
What intrigues me is seeing MS Flight Sim on triple head.

On current high end systems with Geforce 4's, you rarely see the fps going over 30 (on 1 monitor at 10x7)... how many FPS must the Parhelia be pumping out at that res to support triple head?
 

Pariah

Elite Member
Apr 16, 2000
7,357
20
81
Actually, now that I look at it again, the no FSAA is showing 3fps as well. I would just ignore the fps counter, it doesn't appear to be indicating anything relevant.
 

metalmania

Platinum Member
May 7, 2002
2,039
0
0
It's good to learn Chinese language, especially for Matrox fans

I can translate this ariticle, but since May 14th is coming... let's just wait. :)
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
3,000
126
They say it is 20% faster than 4600 with current drivers.
That's rather poor considering it has almost double the physical memory bandwidth. Also I wonder if nVidia has Detonator5 drivers up their sleeve and it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a large performance gain from them.
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: BFG10K
They say it is 20% faster than 4600 with current drivers.

That's rather poor considering it has almost double the physical memory bandwidth. Also I wonder if nVidia has Detonator5 drivers up their sleeve and it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a large performance gain from them.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if NVIDIA release Det5 soon.
 

Dreadogg

Golden Member
Mar 1, 2001
1,780
0
76
Also I wonder if nVidia has Detonator5 drivers up their sleeve and it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a large performance gain from them.
who gives a crap if Nvidia releases Detonator5 drivers, they still have not got there detonator4 drivers stable! I want a stable card like Matrox! Hopefully the price will be resonable!
 

Nemesis77

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
7,329
0
0
I wouldn't worry about the 3 FPS issue. I mean, isn't that 3DMarks Image Quality test? It takes a screenshot in exact same spot, and you can then compare the quality. Does it even record FPS during that test? And it gives 3 FPS regardless of the FSAA-mode in use, so it seems that the reason for the 3 FPS lies elsewhere.
 

Mem

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
21,476
13
81
who gives a crap if Nvidia releases Detonator5 drivers, they still have not got there detonator4 drivers stable!

My Nvidia drivers are 100% stable no crashes period and I game a lot ;),anyway good luck to Matrox they`re going to need it,it`s a dog eat dog world in the graphics industry.

:)