Parhelia-512 GPU NOT AGP 8x capable?

[DGhost]

Okie... the inital Matrox Parhelia-512 chip specs listed the core as AGP 3.0/8x compliant... and we all know that the cards that will be shipped will not be 3.0/8x compliant, only compatable in the same sense that an AGP 1.0/2x card is compatable with an AGP 2.0/4x slot.

but... Matrox seems to have been doing a lot of backpeddling with that initial claim... from the recent Dan Wood interview...

ET: Will Parhelia support AGP 8X?

DW: There was some confusion regarding whether or not the Parhelia-512 is a full AGP 8X device. Basically, the answer is no, Parhelia-512 is an AGP 4X device, but - like any other AGP2.0 compatible device - it will fit into an AGP 8X slot and operate correctly at up to AGP4x signaling.

so... is that just talking about the cards then or is he acctually talking about the core? since he says Parhelia-512 and not just Parhelia, i would be inclined to believe its the core...

in addition, Matrox's website for the Parhelia-512 GPU doesn't say that it is an AGP 3.0 compliant core. it now on the bottom just has this...

* Parhelia-512 is compliant with AGP 8X motherboards, but currently performs AGP 4X data transfer rates.

quite strange considering that it was being touted as an AGP 8x device when the chip specs came out...

so... anyone know if the core is really AGP 3.0 compliant, or if that is gonna take a new revision or perhaps even a new GPU to implement?

Edit: their chip specs still list it as AGP 3.0 compliant. hmmm.....

[DukeP]

AGP 2.0 = AGPx4, will work as AGPx4 in an AGPx8 socket.
Read the interview with matrox thats linked to on the frontpage.

~~DukeP~~

[Pace]

Duke: He's posted a quote from said interview

Matrox have did announce the Parhelia-512 technology to be AGP 8x compatible, but those comments certainly are worded confusingly.

P.

[DGhost]

exactly... i quoted that article and i said the same thing in the first paragraph...

not that this really makes a difference at all, this just seems to be an area that there is a lot of confusion about...

[DukeP]

Oh. Yeah. Ehm. Right. Sorry DGhost.

It might be because Im not a native speaker, I just thought the Interview was very clear..

~~DukeP~~

[Pace]

Hehe, didn't notice how quickly we'd all posted

As you said, AGP 8x is a moot point anyway.

[Greebe]

We all might be able to test this if Matrox or us BBz had a AGP8x compliant MB... but none are available atm. So the real problem lies with how to check if P will work or not.

That's why there is such confusion over this matter, nothing more.

[az]

Nah Greebe - but M already said the CARDS wouldn't do 8x.. the question (albeit a theoretical one) was if the CHIP was able to - Matrox said yes when they introduced it, but the interview seems to suggest otherwise

AZ

[Greebe]

Oh gosh I keep forgetting, us beta testers are totally clueless on the subject

[az]

plaese don't take my words as you know I didn't mean them - I just meant that I think this is what DGhost wanted to know. (sometimes I hit the borders of my knowledge of the english language, particularly when it comes to subtle hints in tone)

No offense meant, enjoy your holydays

AZ

[Reckless]

Originally posted by Greebe
We all might be able to test this if Matrox or us BBz had a AGP8x compliant MB... but none are available atm. So the real problem lies with how to check if P will work or not.

That's why there is such confusion over this matter, nothing more.

Bizarre really, as SiS have a AGP8x device which is being sold as such without the public availability of AGP8x motherbaords. Personally, I don't care about AGP speed - 128MB of local RAM is enough for the duration the chip will have viable performance. I do however think Matrox gets egg on its face again as they did this with the G400. Everyone sort of expected AGP4x and when it cam down to it, they released it as an AGP2x unit. Marketing departments really need to be careful

[Joel]

My question is what difference does it make? It didn't make that much difference going from 1x to 2x nor 2x to 4x why should it make any difference going from 4x to 8x. The things some people tend to dwell on.

Joel

[Reckless]

Originally posted by Joel
My question is what difference does it make? It didn't make that much difference going from 1x to 2x nor 2x to 4x why should it make any difference going from 4x to 8x. The things some people tend to dwell on.

Joel

I said I didn't care, but if a marekting message gets released with details that are not correct then the company looks like it doesn't know wtf it's doing. Just because you're a beta tester it doesn't mean you have to consider everything Matrox does is the right thing. Yeah, you've had your Parhelia a while - bully for you. Dwell on that!

[Joel]

but if a marekting message gets released with details that are not correct then the company looks like it doesn't know wtf it's doing.

Then I guess nVidia doesn't know wtf they are doing. They are always release information about their cards that never comes about.

Just because you're a beta tester it doesn't mean you have to consider everything Matrox does is the right thing.

I never said that everything Matrox does is right. It's not my fault people don't know the difference between, compatible, compliant and capable.

Joel

[Joel]

I bet you also didn't know that Matrox, AFAIK, is still the only manufacture to do DiME AGP transfers(which are better) instead of DMA AGP transfers.

Joel