Firingsquad did one 2!

[Michel Carleer]

Don't misunderstand me, I don't want put the Parhelia's head down under.
For more than 15 years I have only used Matrox video cards.
And I am pretty sure I will continue for many years to come.
I simply disagree on the "most unbiased nature of the review" comment.

[Guru]

Originally posted by Michel Carleer
Guru,
That's exactly my point!

Yes and I think you got it all wrong!!! You should be thinking of the Matrox as the Runing at 1 GHz Alpha @ 5MHz and the GF4 as the 8MHz 286 runing at XXXGHz!

[Liquid Snake]

Good review, but I wish the reviewer had tested with applications other than games. I agree that it seems a little biased towards Matrox but the reviewer is right about looking at the big picture and not just some benchmark numbers.

[isochar]

That's a valid concern. However, gaming performance is indicative of 3d CAD performance. How will this card fair against competitors like 3dlabs when it's about as fast as a GF3 ti200?

[Michel Carleer]

Liquid Snake,
I totally agree.

Guru,
If I were interested by benchmark numbers, what would matter to me would be the biggest number, and not how they are achieved. And certainly not by the stated fact that brand x is better than y because *if* it was running at the same clock speed as y, it *would* be better. But I am not interested by higher benchmark numbers, so I think I will continue buyng M.
And apart from a slight bias towards M, the review in every other respect is a very good one indeed.

[Parhelia Pro256]

here

According to this benchy, P beats GF4 with full eye candy, @ 1280 x 1024 with playable fps of ~65

[Dogbert]

Firingsquad took this review very seriously...

It's one of the best all around reviews out there.
They gave time for 2D as well as for 3D, checked through most features and as gamers should, didn't forget the "fun factor" while not forgetting the "out of the box" experience.

It's a wonderfully written very fair review.

[Dogbert]

From beyond 3D

There reviews are coming online in Matrox's latest. Now Firingsquad has a review, but this must be the worst review that FS ever produced. It looks at 2 benchmarks (3dmark and quake 3 arena) and then they gave it a rating.

Ouch...!

[Ryu Connor]

That's a valid concern. However, gaming performance is indicative of 3d CAD performance. How will this card fair against competitors like 3dlabs when it's about as fast as a GF3 ti200?

That statement is either a gross simplification or just grossly wrong. Good gaming performance does not make good professional performance.

http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=45000354

A proffesional GL driver for the Parhelia will likely prove quite interesting. As it has several key points going for it:

1. It's ability to do 16x edge AA for basically free.
2. Cheaper than 3DLabs P10 and the NVIDIA Quadro.
3. Crisp 1600x1200 output on two monitors
4. Hardware acceleration on both monitors
5. No need to hack the hardware to turn it into a Quadro (which doesn't work anymore any ways).

I'm simply amazed by the sheer number of gamers in this forum. Where the hell are the professionals?

[isochar]

Gross simplification. nvidia's been using their GF series rebadged as Quadro and it's been very competitive (price/performance). The P10 isn't looking all that powerful against the Quadro 4...

[Ryu Connor]

The P10 isn't looking all that powerful against the Quadro 4...

The $600 VP760 is doing quite well against the 750GXL Quadro which is $700.

http://www.amazoninternational.com/html/benchmarks/multiple/wildcatVP/wildcatVP.asp

It does lose in gaming, but pfft. That's not the point.

[Cheesekeeper]

The $600 VP760 is doing quite well against the 750GXL Quadro which is $700.

Exactly as isochar said, the Quadro is a rebadged GF4. By editing the bios on a Geforce card, you can turn it into the equivalent Quadro. The "SoftQuadro" utility can do this as well. This does at least go to show the corrolation between gaming speed and professional workstation performance.......

[Ryu Connor]

the Quadro is a rebadged GF4. By editing the bios on a Geforce card, you can turn it into the equivalent Quadro. The "SoftQuadro" utility can do this as well.

Not anymore you can't. NVIDIA changed the GF4 in such a way as to prevent that from working.

http://www.digit-life.com/articles/profcards/profcards-04-2002-update1.html

The situation with the GeForce4 and Quadro4 cards is diametrically opposite. You won't get a complete copy of the professional card using a game one. Well, in some tests the clone works faster than the original, but do designers work often only with lighting and texturing? In all other modes the NVIDIA Quadro4 900XGL is unconquerable. It means that the manufacturer uses different chips for GeForce4 and Quadro4 cards. Some units are identical, but these two families are different. Probably this is the way NVIDIA protects itself from loss of profits, or probably it just develops a new line. If you want to get new machines for modeling, you'd better use original Quadro4 cards instead of the GeForce4 with the SoftQuadro driver.

NVIDIA got tired of people eating their proft share.

I'm still hunting for the link that shows the Hardware hack has now been broken as well. I'll post an update with that as soon as I find it.

This does at least go to show the corrolation between gaming speed and professional workstation performance.......

How's that? I can show you professional cards that suck at gaming but beat the GF4. In fact I just did. Look at the P10 V760. Gaming and professional apps don't go hand in hand. Yes you can make a gaming card competitive in professional apps, but that doesn't mean that professional cards are any good at gaming. In fact they typically stink at gaming.

This argument would be somewhat stimulating if you guys were making valid points, but I get the impression you don't even know what you're talking about.

[Ryu Connor]

http://www.cgchannel.com/story.php?story_id=1051

There's the link that shows the hardware hack is now useless as well.

The Quadro hack is no longer an option for professionals trying to pinch a penny.