I don't intend this to be trolling...but

[DedicatedFan3D]

Recently converted to a nice Radeon 9700 that I picked up for a steal from mwave.com and I have put my GF FX 5600 into my second machine, which ended up retiring the Parhelia.

What shocked me was the fantastic display when running the 3.4 cat's. What prompted me to investigate was that I had a CRT monitor that was very high quality (A Dell P990 trinitron 19")

Between the two cards, I have concluded that the Radeon has much nicer 2D and the DVD's on the Radeon completely blow the Parhelia out of the water. So much it's pathetic.

My icons are crisper, the built in text filtering algorithm looks way better than glyph, and not to mention my UT 2k3 experience is much better since I can run 1280x1024 with 4XFSAA and fx anisotropic filtering and maintain a nice 60+ fps and really kick some butt in gaming.

Now I applause Matrox for being able to keep Unreal2 at 30 fps when running 1280x1024 at 16XFAA, but the Radeon running 1600x1200 at 4xFSAA and holding 50 fps is getting ridiculous.

Now, I understand that Matrox got their card out late, and it was a card of a different time. But I snagged this Radeon 9700 for 200 bucks even, and the Parhelia's cheapest price is 315 bucks.

If you game, and own a Parhelia, Matrox should have also stamped "SUCKER" on your forehead.

Video editing professionals and alike keep your card, gamers, you should have nothing todo with Matrox.

[BuddMan]

The only reason I see to get a Parhelia is if you need the multimonitor support (ie, TripleHead). Other than that, the card is way overpriced for its features IMO.

[Marshmallowman]

Don't take this personaly DFd 3d but:

It has a pretty exclusive set of features and fuctionality, if you don't use the why did you get the card in the first place. Its a professional card and you at best are half A r s e d

If you bought one for pure FPS gaming you obviously don't know what you are doing. But if you are into surround gameing in flight sims and racing games its good.

I just can't trust the opinion of some idiot who buy a 5600 and makes some rediculous statement about it qualty and speed, and then a month later buys a completely new card, which is know suddenly the "ducks nuts".
The 9700 is a great card but if it takes you 3 atempts to get the right card for your needs then I simply don't want here your next batch of BS.

Yeah right comparing a prelease model card to a brand new production model is a valid comaprison of IQ(you were ranting for quite a while about your UBER alpha parhelia)....Go to raged3d that is a better forum for you rantings....

[DukeP]

Easy does it.

At least it IS posted in the right forum - and the point IS valid, although pretty selfevident.


~~DukeP~~

[Paddy]

ding! ding! 'Roung Two'....

(bring on naked woman with sign...)

[The PIT]

Well I can't comment on the P as I don't have one.
Apart from gaming the Gxxx series still has better quality in 2D than the Radeon 8500 and the 9700 and 9800. Most notable when you up the res.
The latest cards from matrox are over priced though.

[Kruzin]

When have Matrox cards NOT been pricey?
My original Millennium (1) and memory upgrade was over $500us.
My MillenniumII was in the same $ range.
G200 and G400 where lower, but still more costly than others.
Parhelia ain't cheap, but it offers features not available in any other card out there.
You get what you pay for. And Matrox cards hold their value better, and tend to live longer useful lives than others.
They've never been for FPS counters, but always managed to keep playable speeds in games while giving the best looking desktop and feature package around.
There is no doubt these cards are not for everyone (especially the 'mine is bigger than yours' FPS counters). But people who appreciate quality and longevity know where to look for the best high end cards...

[BuddMan]

I think Parhelia is a great workstation card, but so is an AIW 9700, and its price is about the same as a Parhelia (plus you get the fps you want if you are a gamer). But I surely don't think anyone is a "sucker" if they buy a Parhelia. Heck, I almost bought one myself and would have had it not been for the 9700. I still think the Parhelia could be priced lower, but I do not think it is a bad card, esp if you need the triple display.

[The PIT]

Got to admit if I was still using the G550 as my main card I would have gone for the P. Knowing my luck I'd have got one that got severe banding as I seem to attract lemons.
Since I was using the 8500 I couldn't see the point of changing. I don't have room for three displays on the desk so the triple head would have been useless in my case.
I still using the G550 in my other machine which I may swap out one day for the 8500 so I got a back up game machine in case one dies in the meantime.
The gxxx prices were more competive than the P price. The only things I miss the dual display and the 2D sharpness when I'm working on a CRT.

[Gurm]

I don't mean to be a troll, but I'm big and green and have leathery skin and... umm. DAMN, I'm a troll!

- Gurm

[Technoid]

Its Time Again.......

[Seaspray]

P

Give him a break guys. There are plenty of reasons for owning a P, but gaming isn't one of them.

An exception is made for those with space and funds for three qood quality and size monitors to whom multi display gaming is all important.

I've owned several Matrox cards and I've always loved them (otherwise I wouldn't be here) for their solid drivers, image quality and (in the past) 2d and 3d speed.

Unfortunately, ramdacs have reached the point where differences in 2d are now negligible, and other cards can far exceed P's 3d ability at a much lower price. Lately even the stability of the drivers has been questioned.

I make no apologies for my graphics card, when Matrox release a card with equivalent performance and features, I will buy it. I don't mind paying a bit more but I'm not paying twice the price.

~J

[Byock]

Yeah, I agree, Lets show a little patience. It is easy for everyone to say the P is not for gamers, you should have known this, blah blah. But honestly, when the P was first announced, did it look like a gamers card? YES. IT DID. there was alot of hype here, and everyone was convinced this was the GAMING card to have. Hell, I wanted one. If you pre-ordered your card, or bought it early, then yes, I can see being dissapointed. It was not until later that the problems, and speed issues seemed to arise.
But, IMHO, there are cheaper cards, that do the same thing, with the exception of Tripple head.

[Gurm]

No, the problem isn't that he's saying that - we all KNOW that the P isn't for gamers.

The problem is that three times in the past month and a half he's made a post that says "my new XXX card is KICKASS and the P sucks!"

It's getting old, and he has no clue.

- Gurm

[dZeus]

Re: I don't intend this to be trolling...but

Originally posted by DedicatedFan3D
<cut load of bull>

I could comment on every silly remark you make, but the fact that you consider the Dell P990 as a high quality display says just about enough. It has good colour output, but the old trinitron tech used in it is way too fuzzy to compare sharpness with different videocards decently. I know because I had one. My Iiyama VMPro 454 is even miles ahead in sharpness, and that's WITH horrible ghosting going on!