Tweet
First a bit of background on my experience and other caveats so you can take my opinion for what it is worth: 
I've been a *hardcore* PC gamer since back in the Apple ][ days. My two primary areas of "expertise" are FPS's (Original Doom, Quake, UT, etc.) and flight sims (mainly mil sims like Falcon 4, IL-2, F/A-18 etc.). I bought the first 3dfx Voodoo card when they came out, and quickly added a second for SLI. I graduated from there, eventually, to a TNT2 card, and from there to the GeForce2 GTS. Recently I bought a GeForce4 Ti4600 which I currently run on my P3-1gig 512meg rig with an Apple 22" Cinema display.
When I read about the Parhelia's offering for SurroundGaming, I was, quite simply, blown away. I was in the middle of doing some research for a new high-end display as I am building a custom office/PC gaming room. Up until I heard about the Parhelia, I was close to getting a 42" plasma strictly for gaming (would be mounted above my PC on the wall while using an LCD for "work".
Once I realized the potential of SurroundGaming, I quickly changed from plasma to a three-LCD configuration and had settled on a single unit, three panel display from 9XMedia (www.9xmedia.com) to go with my new Parhelia card as soon as it is released.
It is with this background that I ventured today to E3Expo in L.A. to see the card in action.
Now, I'm *well* aware that what I saw was a beta version, and that the drivers are *far* from complete. So.... *PLEASE* don't take this for anything more than it is: an eyewitness account of the current version of the card.
I first saw the card at the Auran booth. They were running their program Trainz on the Parhelia displayed on the Panoram PV230 DSK (www.panoram.com). Trainz, for those who do not know, is a slick program that lets one build a 3D world populated with, well, trains. It is to model railroading what SimCity is to urban development (well.. kinda...). Anyway.... they were running it in 3072x768 and the panoramic effect was nothing short of stunning! Seeing the train span the screen from edge-to-edge was a real treat. The out-the-window-view made you feel like you were really sitting in the cab of a locomotive. I really think I saw the future of gaming....
Which leads me to the downside: framerate. When panning around, there was a *noticable* framerate hit. I neglected, unfortunately, to find out what processor they were running it on, but as they only had two machines in the booth, I will assume that they were using a newer generation system.
Still pleased with the effect, I eventually made it across the street to see what I had *really* come to see: the Parhelia running UT2003 in SurroundGaming mode. Before I did, I went to the Infogrammes booth to play UT2003 on a plasma widescreen and a GeForce4 Ti4600. All I can say is *UN-FLIPPIN-BELIEVABLE*!!! The graphics are simply jaw-dropping. Colors are vivid, framerate is fluid, and it was being rendered in 1280x1024. It was the highlight of the show for me (well... Doom III is awesome too...
). When you see UT2003 in action you will be floored.
Anyway... so I made my way across the street to the "Dome"; literally a dome wherein a Soldier of Fortune II Tournament was being run on high-end machines running GeForce4's (funny... considering the Matrox guys were a partner in this). However, my attention was drawn to the SurroundGaming on 3 projectors of UT2003. I was, unfortunately, disappointed.
Now first, I realize that comparing how a program looks on a 42" plasma display to that on somewhat washed-outed projectors with not the best lighting in the world is a bit unfair. However, the display was good enough to draw a reasonable opinion on two aspects: framerate and overall "look".
First framerate. The Matrox rep (not the most informed fellow in the world), told me they were running at 3072x768. I'm a *very* accomplished UT player, so I know a playable framerate when I see one. This was not really playable for a serious player. Most concerning was when I asked the rep about rendering at 3840x1024 (i.e. 1280x1024*3), he himmed and hawwed and said that it really was not good. I asked him if the choke point was the processor and he said no; the card handles most of it and thus not really that CPU sensitive. The systems they were running on there were fast Athlons (Alienware computers was a co-sponsor).
Picture quality, although clearly subjective, did not compare to the GeForce4. Again, I believe I'm taking into account the projector issue.... but it just did not look nearly as rich.
Now I know that the Matrox view is that the Parhelia is not about rendering 200 fps's in Quake (a line parroted by the rep I spoke with). However, let's be real: As a flight simmer and FPS nut, framerate is king. While I agree that a card that pushes 200 fps vs. 120 ain't got any huge advantage, there *is* a baseline for framerate that *must* be met. IMHO, this card, in its current incarnation, is not there.
Most concerning to me is that while clearly beta is, well beta, I saw noticable coughing on the Trainz engine; a renderer that does not come *close* to the engine used in UT2003. So my concern is that if the Parhelia is having some problems rendering 3072x768 on an older, "plain vanilla" 3D engine, how will it be able to handle the UT2003's and the DoomIII's of the world when they are released?
Maybe the drivers will fix all this and it will be as smooth and beautiful as what I saw on the GF4 (and yes... I *know* that the GF4 was not being asked to render 3027x768... but then again... I didn't buy the GF4 to do SurroundGaming). But until then, I'm gonna take a wait and see approach.
This is one gamer who, having seen the potential of 3 head gaming, is *praying* that these issues get resolved.
Wazoo
I've been a *hardcore* PC gamer since back in the Apple ][ days. My two primary areas of "expertise" are FPS's (Original Doom, Quake, UT, etc.) and flight sims (mainly mil sims like Falcon 4, IL-2, F/A-18 etc.). I bought the first 3dfx Voodoo card when they came out, and quickly added a second for SLI. I graduated from there, eventually, to a TNT2 card, and from there to the GeForce2 GTS. Recently I bought a GeForce4 Ti4600 which I currently run on my P3-1gig 512meg rig with an Apple 22" Cinema display.
When I read about the Parhelia's offering for SurroundGaming, I was, quite simply, blown away. I was in the middle of doing some research for a new high-end display as I am building a custom office/PC gaming room. Up until I heard about the Parhelia, I was close to getting a 42" plasma strictly for gaming (would be mounted above my PC on the wall while using an LCD for "work".
Once I realized the potential of SurroundGaming, I quickly changed from plasma to a three-LCD configuration and had settled on a single unit, three panel display from 9XMedia (www.9xmedia.com) to go with my new Parhelia card as soon as it is released.
It is with this background that I ventured today to E3Expo in L.A. to see the card in action.
Now, I'm *well* aware that what I saw was a beta version, and that the drivers are *far* from complete. So.... *PLEASE* don't take this for anything more than it is: an eyewitness account of the current version of the card.
I first saw the card at the Auran booth. They were running their program Trainz on the Parhelia displayed on the Panoram PV230 DSK (www.panoram.com). Trainz, for those who do not know, is a slick program that lets one build a 3D world populated with, well, trains. It is to model railroading what SimCity is to urban development (well.. kinda...). Anyway.... they were running it in 3072x768 and the panoramic effect was nothing short of stunning! Seeing the train span the screen from edge-to-edge was a real treat. The out-the-window-view made you feel like you were really sitting in the cab of a locomotive. I really think I saw the future of gaming....
Which leads me to the downside: framerate. When panning around, there was a *noticable* framerate hit. I neglected, unfortunately, to find out what processor they were running it on, but as they only had two machines in the booth, I will assume that they were using a newer generation system.
Still pleased with the effect, I eventually made it across the street to see what I had *really* come to see: the Parhelia running UT2003 in SurroundGaming mode. Before I did, I went to the Infogrammes booth to play UT2003 on a plasma widescreen and a GeForce4 Ti4600. All I can say is *UN-FLIPPIN-BELIEVABLE*!!! The graphics are simply jaw-dropping. Colors are vivid, framerate is fluid, and it was being rendered in 1280x1024. It was the highlight of the show for me (well... Doom III is awesome too...
). When you see UT2003 in action you will be floored.Anyway... so I made my way across the street to the "Dome"; literally a dome wherein a Soldier of Fortune II Tournament was being run on high-end machines running GeForce4's (funny... considering the Matrox guys were a partner in this). However, my attention was drawn to the SurroundGaming on 3 projectors of UT2003. I was, unfortunately, disappointed.
Now first, I realize that comparing how a program looks on a 42" plasma display to that on somewhat washed-outed projectors with not the best lighting in the world is a bit unfair. However, the display was good enough to draw a reasonable opinion on two aspects: framerate and overall "look".
First framerate. The Matrox rep (not the most informed fellow in the world), told me they were running at 3072x768. I'm a *very* accomplished UT player, so I know a playable framerate when I see one. This was not really playable for a serious player. Most concerning was when I asked the rep about rendering at 3840x1024 (i.e. 1280x1024*3), he himmed and hawwed and said that it really was not good. I asked him if the choke point was the processor and he said no; the card handles most of it and thus not really that CPU sensitive. The systems they were running on there were fast Athlons (Alienware computers was a co-sponsor).
Picture quality, although clearly subjective, did not compare to the GeForce4. Again, I believe I'm taking into account the projector issue.... but it just did not look nearly as rich.
Now I know that the Matrox view is that the Parhelia is not about rendering 200 fps's in Quake (a line parroted by the rep I spoke with). However, let's be real: As a flight simmer and FPS nut, framerate is king. While I agree that a card that pushes 200 fps vs. 120 ain't got any huge advantage, there *is* a baseline for framerate that *must* be met. IMHO, this card, in its current incarnation, is not there.
Most concerning to me is that while clearly beta is, well beta, I saw noticable coughing on the Trainz engine; a renderer that does not come *close* to the engine used in UT2003. So my concern is that if the Parhelia is having some problems rendering 3072x768 on an older, "plain vanilla" 3D engine, how will it be able to handle the UT2003's and the DoomIII's of the world when they are released?
Maybe the drivers will fix all this and it will be as smooth and beautiful as what I saw on the GF4 (and yes... I *know* that the GF4 was not being asked to render 3027x768... but then again... I didn't buy the GF4 to do SurroundGaming). But until then, I'm gonna take a wait and see approach.
This is one gamer who, having seen the potential of 3 head gaming, is *praying* that these issues get resolved.
Wazoo
is 240FPS next?
Comment