New 3DLabs "killerchip"?

[rubank]

So Ant,

you´re saying Matrox isn´t capable of doing the Parhelia dance by itself after all?

I thought you and the other knowledgables refuted any suggestion to that effect.

Poor old Joel,
he´s trying so hard but he can´t see the difference between a formal announcement and rumours.



rubank

[Dr Mordrid]

One thing you guys had better take into account: the market 3DLabs tends to serve: professional workstations. Their high end cards run $4000-5000 USD.

Not exactly what most gamers can afford

Dr. Mordrid

[Dogbert]

Dr Mordrid,

Right on spot, exactly what I thought.

[dZeus]

but since Creative bought 3DLabs, you don't think they are going to aim at the gaming market as well???

[isochar]

The articles indicate that Creative will be releasing a card *based* on the technology for the consumer market.

[Wombat]

but since Creative bought 3DLabs, you don't think they are going to aim at the gaming market as well???

Not right away. They <I>just</I> bought 3DLabs, and I have a pretty strong feeling that 3DLabs didn't have any plans for a common consumer card. It will take quite a while to redirect the lab.

[Indiana]

Well, it was stated several times that 3DLabs will return with a gamer-card towards the end of the year.

No need for 3DLabs to "return" to anything in the pro market anyway as they were top there for some time...

And what would be so bad if the new Matrox card would be made with some kind of cooperation (if VapourBoys or 3DLabs, or...). As long as the card has all Matrox 2D features combined with state-of-the-art 3D I'm happy. Even more so if they could additionally beat ATI feature-wise (esp. in the DVD/video playback area).

[xortam]

Originally posted by GT98



Theres been rumors that the OpenGL drivers might or might not have been done by M.

Hard to disagree with such a firm position.

[Ali]

For some strange reason, I wouldnt mind if the OGL drivers for the P were written by 3DLabs, but if the hardware is the same, Ill feel a little ripped off.

The P10 looks like a nice design, but it also seems a little half hearted. They seem to have only gone halfway towards their goal of a fully programmable VPU.

Im sure it will kick arse for a while on the market, but it just doesnt sound complete.

Ive only read the previews at Toms and Anandtechs, so until some site I trust has a good look, Im not 100% sure. (Hopeing beyond3D get a demo card).

I can see the financial reasons behind Matrox and 3DLabs co-operating on the chip design, but I hope Matrox goes the whole hog, and has a fully programable pipe.

Ali

[rubank]

Originally posted by Ali
...The P10 looks like a nice design, but it also seems a little half hearted. They seem to have only gone halfway towards their goal of a fully programmable VPU....

Well Ali, there seem to be a reason:

"Having great hardware is one thing, but you need a software and API infrastructure to enable it to run. The P10 will, of course, support DirectX 9, including Vertex Shader 2.0. It's unlikely, posits Trevett, that any graphics hardware shipping this year can support Pixel Shader 2.0, however. "It will take 0.13 micron at a minimum, and possibly even 0.10 micron process technology before we see Pixel Shader 2.0 hardware"".

This quote is from <a href="http://extremetech.com" target=_blank>Extreme Tech</a>, where I suggest you read the whole article.

rubank

[Ali]

Ah ha, so there was a reason.

Reading that link now, thanks rubank

Ali