• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Matrox Parhelia questions (any game with this card)?

cm123

cm123

Senior member
Anyone here use the Matrox Parhelia to game with? If so how does it do with speed and quality (single montior use)? What type of games have you played?

Just curious questions...

Do you have any compatiblilty issues hardware or software?
 
It's about the same speed as a 8500 but it's 2-3 times the price and has inferior AF and AA. Also a lot of newer games aren't even listing it as a compatible chipset.

You should stick to ATi or nVidia instead.
 
it has FAA, i hear it is nice, plus surround gaming, and dont forget the great 2d. i would love this card if it were not so expensive versus the performance
 
nVIDIA cards have just as good if not better 2d quality and performance. Surround gaming is kind of a waste, sounds cool but really expensive and a waste of power, something that the Parhelia doesn't have.
 
i wouldn't say the aa is inferior to the 8500,
Click to expand...
It has known problems in a number of games (Matrox themselves admit it) and it exhibits artifacts when you use it in those situations. Also it doesn't address as many issues as the competing ATi and nVidia AA methods do.

nVIDIA cards have just as good if not better 2d quality and performance.
Click to expand...
Some people swear that the Parhelia still has the 2D quality crown. But yeah for most people ATi and nVidia are basically equal to their eyes and hence the price-hike to the Parhelia simply isn't worth it.
 
I am curious as to why it STILL cost that much. Surely the memory prices have gone down if nothing else. Its not like they support it with new drivers or anything.
 
It's not exactly for your typical gamer. Actually it's not for gamers at all. Mainly for people who need good 2D quality, 3 monitors.
 
Originally posted by: clicknext
It's not exactly for your typical gamer. Actually it's not for gamers at all. Mainly for people who need good 2D quality, 3 monitors.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I have several clients who work at home. They sometimes use the computer to play games, so a parhelia is the perfect card IF it was around $200 or so. I don't want to debate the card, I know what it is. What I don't understand is that it retailed almost 2 years ago and it still cost the same now as it did then. Surely the memory they used cost alot less if nothing else happened to lower the price. THe lack of drivers and high price has scared many people away from this card, not just me.
 
Well, the core is 512-bit compared to the normal 256-bit. I also think it was the first to come out with 256-bit memory bus.
 
I don't know this for a fact, but I'm guessing retail sales to gamers aren't much of Matrox's market. I'd love to try a Parhelia just for soemthing different, but I'm not going to spend $350 for the privilege unless they come out with one that is competitive.
 
Matrox should've not bothered including a 3D core at all a simply made a 2D card with triple-head and all associated 2D features. Then they could've sold it for like $25 and made an absolute killing in the business and consumer market. Even OEMs might've liked a PCI version to include along-side their systems' AGP cards.

As it stands now the 3D core is too slow and adds a tremendous cost to the product.
 
Originally posted by: BFG10K
Matrox should've not bothered including a 3D core at all a simply made a 2D card with triple-head and all associated 2D features. Then they could've sold it for like $25 and made an absolute killing in the business and consumer market. Even OEMs might've liked a PCI version to include along-side their systems' AGP cards.

As it stands now the 3D core is too slow and adds a tremendous cost to the product.
Click to expand...

games are not the only applications for 3d. matrox cards will support cad/cam programs much better than it does on gaming.

JB
 
Compared to high-end ATi and nVidia parts the Parhelia generates very lackluster performance in professional 3D rendering based on the benchmarks I've seen so far.
 
The thing most people forgot to do was use the Parhelia as it was designed...running things on 3 monitors
rolleye.gif


I'm sure if they had taken the peformance of the cards at the time (8500, Ti range) and divided their peformance levels by 3, then I'm sure the Parhelia would have been just as good, if not better. Remember that the Parhelia is designed to power 3 displays at once, rather than the 1 display that the Ti and 8500 range does. 🙂


Confused
 
Originally posted by: Confused
The thing most people forgot to do was use the Parhelia as it was designed...running things on 3 monitors
rolleye.gif


I'm sure if they had taken the peformance of the cards at the time (8500, Ti range) and divided their peformance levels by 3, then I'm sure the Parhelia would have been just as good, if not better. Remember that the Parhelia is designed to power 3 displays at once, rather than the 1 display that the Ti and 8500 range does. 🙂


Confused
Click to expand...

But triple head doesn't work in games, for the most part. People on these boards that bought one usually get it to work on one, maybe two games.

They have released a new triple head card, the P750, but its triple head system doesn't work right even on 2d applications.
 
Originally posted by: VIAN
nVIDIA cards have just as good if not better 2d quality and performance. Surround gaming is kind of a waste, sounds cool but really expensive and a waste of power, something that the Parhelia doesn't have.
Click to expand...

clearly you've never used a matrox video card. The 2d quality of matrox cards is far superior to nvidia's 2d quality.

If matrox ever got their 3d act together, I would pick one up in a heartbeat, unfortunately, they seem to be constantly way behind the curve.
 
The thing most people forgot to do was use the Parhelia as it was designed...running things on 3 monitors

I'm sure if they had taken the peformance of the cards at the time (8500, Ti range) and divided their peformance levels by 3, then I'm sure the Parhelia would have been just as good, if not better. Remember that the Parhelia is designed to power 3 displays at once, rather than the 1 display that the Ti and 8500 range does.


Confused
Click to expand...

The Parhelia's already low performance drops by half when used with 3 monitors. Who wants that wide a screen anyway and the cost to get it.

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: VIAN
nVIDIA cards have just as good if not better 2d quality and performance. Surround gaming is kind of a waste, sounds cool but really expensive and a waste of power, something that the Parhelia doesn't have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



clearly you've never used a matrox video card. The 2d quality of matrox cards is far superior to nvidia's 2d quality.

If matrox ever got their 3d act together, I would pick one up in a heartbeat, unfortunately, they seem to be constantly way behind the curve.
Click to expand...

I know what your saying but I've seen 2D IQ tests saying that the nVIDIA was just as good if not better. Let me see if I can find it. My fault, that was against the G400. The Parhelia on the otherhand creamed on everyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top