Parhelia *NOT* for gamers

[ZenmasteR]

it seems that most reviews and interest is coming from the crowd that Matrox doesnt want to market to.
instead Matrox is aiming for some non existent "business" market

in any case i think alot of folks esp the lunatic gamers with too much money and time to spend, are getting their panties in a twist and should just calm the feck down. Either buy the card for its merits (I'm sure it has some) or look elsewhere for benchmark "thrills".

[Sinistral]

- What reviews? Theres been 1 Review thats been pulled down. Far to early for any conclusions... The Parhelia has the power, it just needs better drivers. Which every company can improve on. -

[ADM]

By the time Matrox make the new drivers, Nvidia will have their next card out...

[xortam]

... and it will still look like an NVIDIA.

[MrGaribaldi]

Originally posted by ADM
By the time Matrox make the new drivers, Nvidia will have their next card out...

Your point is?

Some of us prefer eyecandy over performance,
and it's allways nice with a couple of new features...

So why should we be concerned over nvidia releasing a new card?

[piaxVirus]

Matrox is marketing the Parhelia card towards ME, and people like me. We may not be as big a "market" as the FPS gamers. But we are big enough to have kept Matrox profitable for as long as they have been in business.

Was the original Millennium targeted towards gamers. No. It was a more expensive professional card that was also a favorite of those who like professional quality.

There isn't a feature I can think of on the Parhelia that I won't use or strive to make use of. The thought of running dual 1920x1440 displays makes me drool. Yet I also like to play games. I am the kind of person that will buy more monitors and build a bigger desk just to experience the gaming wonders of Triplehead. FSAA is uselessly terrible and the lack of AA in games has always been a peeve of mine. IMO, 16xFAA is the only reason I would need to buy the Parhelia over the competting gamer cards.

I don't consider the present benchmarks of Quake and 3Dmark2001SE. Since I don't play any of those games. I also understand that all the new cards will be cpu limited. Not until I get my hammer will I see the full potential of the parhelia.

If the Parhelia had come out before the GF4. Would you be saying, "What a let down. It's only as fast as a Parhelia".

[Wombat]

I think the mistake is people thinking there is a "gamer" market. People who haven't even finished high school yet think the world revolves around them, when the average large corporation could buy more of the product than there are people in the "gamer" market.

[BuddMan]

I still think this card will do well in the gaming market.

[Jon P. Inghram]

Yep, that's how 3DFx stayed in business for as long as they did, selling a couple Voodoo 2 cards to a few teenagers.

Originally posted by Wombat
I think the mistake is people thinking there is a "gamer" market. People who haven't even finished high school yet think the world revolves around them, when the average large corporation could buy more of the product than there are people in the "gamer" market.

[bobby2]

Oh dear.
I wil buy the card for some very specific reasons.

1. Gigacolour. I do a colossal amount of image editing work. Scanning at 48bit (slides/negs) and the extra bits will be a ****ing massive bonus.

2. Im an adult, who likes games, but needs to work. The performance will be fine, and will get better as drivers improve. Ive said it before. The GF drivers are very mature - and all GF cards are architecturally similar - Matrox have to work from the beginning.

3. 3 monitors. Desktop, and surround gaming to boot.

4. I forgot ... image quality. Other cards are crap when you do a direct card/card comparison. Im sorry - but I cant give that up.

Matrox will survive due to people like me. And think of that colossal PHotoshop community who will drool over gigacolour. On one of my mailing lists (filmscanners) everyone is desperate to hear about this card in action.

... FPS .. who gives a toss

[ADM]

Originally posted by MrGaribaldi


Your point is?

Some of us prefer eyecandy over performance,
and it's allways nice with a couple of new features...

So why should we be concerned over nvidia releasing a new card?

I perfer perfomance over eyecandy, most gamers do;
the same with the public, they look for FPS count too.
I don't understand why they show loads of game screens, then all of you say it's not a gaming card. If it wasn't intended on gaming then why Surround Gaming?

[SteveC]

Originally posted by bobby2
...The GF drivers are very mature - and all GF cards are architecturally similar - Matrox have to work from the beginning....

How can you say nVidia's v29.xx drivers are more mature than Matrox' v1.0.1?

[EvilDonnyboy]

Believe it or not, there actually is a "business" market. I don't know how large that market is, but it most definately exists.

Why did SGI choose the G450 for some of their workstation's? To sell to enthusiats? More likely for professionals who need Dual monitor capability.

Ppl need to realize that the demographic of these forums such as these are almost purely enthusiasts. Some of those enthusiasts may be professionals of some kind, but are enthusiasts none the less.

[Kruzin]

Steve, I doubt the review was even done on the 1.0.1 drivers. Pretty sure it was on the 1.0.0.xx.

And Donnyboy is right, there is a business market. And it's HUGE. Much, much, MUCH larger than the hard core gamers market.
What do you think has kept Matrox in buiz (quite succesfully I might add) for over a quarter of a century? Certainly not the FPS counters.

[ADM]

I know Matrox are a huge company for business products, who didn't?
I'd just like to see more challange in the gaming market, it's always the same old names.
I want to see Matrox stay in the top, but I reckon they won't do aswell as they aspected with the Parhelia and maybe drop out.