Need new PC: Parhelia or Ati 9700

[MagerValp]

Originally posted by Dogbert
What fps should I expect with an Athlon 1800, 1GB (333Mhz) ram and a G400 ?

I haven't measured any fps, but on my Athlon XP 1700+ I think it's perfectly playable, but not smooth, in 640x480.

[NetSnake]

Originally posted by DarkStar
Monitor - ViewSonic .... .... ....

Eizo baby!!! a Mitsubishi Diamontron would be nice also

[BigDH01]

If you're not going to be using 3 monitors I can't see any reason why you'd pick a P over the 9700. Considering they have the same MSRPs and the 9700 is in a league of its own (that is until the NV30 arrives). I know the people here will rave about the P's 2d quality and they have every right to from what I've read. However, we do not know if it is in fact superior to the 9700's as no one here actually has gotten their hand on one, nor will they for a couple more weeks. I really don't do a lot of work in 2d, so I really don't notice that my VisionTek GF3's 2d is inferior to the g200 I have in my closet. I guess some people have an eye for 2d and some people don't. What I do know is that if you do 3d then the 9700 is definately the way to go. Even if the P could match the 9700 in 3d IQ at the same resolution the 9700 has the power to play a game in resolutions that the P just can't handle. And, if you've seen the screenshots, you know that anisotropic filtering on the P is borked. Not only does it look like crap, it can't do levels of filtering that even the much hated geforce4 can do. Aceshardware did a nice article on the P and http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50000268 will show you just how crappy aniso is on the P. And, although P's AA looks great and plays fast there is the small fact that it does miss edges. I don't understand how people who are nitpicky enough to tell the difference between ATi's 2d and Matrox's 2d often don't mention the fact that P's FAA seems to be selective on what edges it actually applies itself to. Then, there's also the small fact that matrox's AA method will not work with stencil shadows. Where these shadows are used the P will have to fall back to 4x FSAA which strains an already fillrate limited card. On the other hand, the 9700 beats the ti4600 at the same resolution with anisotropic and AA turned on while the ti4600 runs with neither turned on. I believe those particular benches were on www.hardocp.com. And as for 3d professional applications I believe that ace's review that I linked earlier should enlighten you to the P's performance in that area. Matrox claims to have professional openGL drivers in the works, so let's hope they get those out quicker than they created openGL drivers for the g200 series. Of course, they 9700 should be available in volume by then and it is safe to assume that it will soundly hold the professional openGL crown. I don't mess with DVD or tv-out much but from what I understand ATi's DVD playback is top-notch and the 9700 does support MPEG-4 hardware acceleration. Someone more enlightened in these areas would have to comment on the difference between the P and the 9700. I'm gonna get flamed for this, but with the 9700 only weeks away from the shelves and due to the fact that it will be priced very close to the P (have same MSRPs, so maybe $50 higher at time of release?) I just don't understand how anyone could purchase the P over the 9700. The only plausible reason is the need or use for 3 monitors. I just don't know many home users that use or need that. And if 2d quality means that much to you then why not get a cheaper g400? I guess I'm just not seeing the value in the P priced the way it is. Is everyone else here so blinded by company loyalty that they can't see that the 9700 is by far the better deal for the vast majority of users? I'm not anti-matrox (I really do have a g200 in the closet) I'm just looking for the best deal. I suppose if you have to have the P then at least wait until the nv30 launches so nVidia and ATi will enter a price war and hopefully drive the prices of all the vid cards on the market down. I know that's when I'm going to upgrade my gf3. And no, I'm not automatically gonna get an nv30 over a 9700, I'm gonna get the better buy, whether it be ATi or nVidia, as I have no company loyalty when it comes to computers . However, you would not catch me in a vehicle that didn't have a bow-tie on it . There's my long-winded and probably idiotic post of my thoughts. Just my 2 cents.

Dustin

[Ali]

I think thats a well though out post, and follows my thoughts quite well.

The Parhelia does miss the mark on many things. Its too slow, its too expensive, and it has 3D image quality faults (FAA sometimes, texture filtering).

My thoughts are that in a years time when neither the P or the 9700 are the top dogs anymore, I would rather be using the P. But for the year up till then I would rather be using the 9700.

Also lack of Win9x drivers sucks.

Ali

[[Ch]amsalot]

"Also lack of Win9x drivers sucks. "

I respectfully disagree. Anyone who is still running Win9x doesn't deserve either Parhelia or Radeon 9700.

-[Ch]ams

[Jacco Hoeve]

I use Windows XP, so I couldnt care less ..

[afterburn]

I dont want to step on anyone's toes, but for those raving about the 9700: let's please remember untill it is released, it is vaporware and there are no final boards yet and noindependant benchmarks. Correction, there are no benchmarks period, only a few non-telling graphs that look like some. Remember last time people raved about a pre-production board and specs?

Let's keep the discussion about how good and how fast it is for when the thing actually excists and there are possibilities to verify its performance instead of rephrasing the ati marketing mumbo-jumpbo.

[Cobos]

Thank you afterburn.... And as I mentioned earlier ATI has a great track record when it comes to new high-end designs (it costs 400$ with drivers turning of some of the major selling points ??)

Cobos

[Ali]

Originally posted by [Ch]amsalot
"Also lack of Win9x drivers sucks. "

I respectfully disagree. Anyone who is still running Win9x doesn't deserve either Parhelia or Radeon 9700.

-[Ch]ams

What a load of crap.

Is the Parhelia a gaming card? Sort of

If you want to play games, then get XP.

Is it a work card? Sort of.

Do you think every company out there who are looking for new cards are going to re-write all their (expensive) software, or fork out the money to MS for XP, plus more money to their software suppliers for their costing/payroll/General ledgers etc to make sure they are XP compatiple, just to run a new graphics card?

If you think every bit of software written for win9X runs on XP, then you are wrong. As a simple example, if you have a DBMS written in VB for win9x, and use SaveSettings GetSettings to save settings to the registry, if you run that on 9x, boolean values are saved as text 'false' or 'true'. In win2K and XP they are saved as integer '0' or '1'. Therefore your software doesnt work.

If you (like me) work at a financial institute and have to spend $25000 getting every revision of your software audited (which also takes about 3 months), then you are NOT going to buy a Parhelia (or more to the point, get the boss to fork out for one for you).

People who think 9x is dead dont live int he real world.

Ali (sorry for the rant, having a bad day)

[GT98]

Originally posted by Ali
If you (like me) work at a financial institute and have to spend $25000 getting every revision of your software audited (which also takes about 3 months), then you are NOT going to buy a Parhelia (or more to the point, get the boss to fork out for one for you).

People who think 9x is dead dont live int he real world.

Ali (sorry for the rant, having a bad day)

Well if your still using Windows 98 in a Finacial Institute thats just plain ****ing wrong then more ways then I can think. I personally would deploy or recommend Windows 98 to any business right now. Windows 98 is passable for Home use, but Since Windows 2K or WinXP is easy to work with why use a Program thats hobbled by DOS and has all sorts of memory usage problems etc. Its much like when Windows 95 came out...all the DOS people where bitching about it...come out and imbrace the Future....you might like it

[defaultuser]

Originally posted by DGhost
Another problem with Abit boards is they have this bad tendancy to not work with new chips...

all the KG7's that i ever saw had problems with Palomino chips.

the KX7 i have seen would not post with a 2200+ on it, and we verified the chip worked fine by using one of our boards.

Thats funny, because my KG7 had ABSOLUTELY NO problems with my XP 1600.

This wouldnt have anything to do with you being an idiot and trying to upgrade from a slower T-bird to a faster Palomino without upgrading the borderline 250-300w powersupply, would it?

You do know that the jump from a 1GHz T-bird to a fast Palomino is over 30 watts, don't you? Upgrades arent as easy as a simple switcherooo these days.

And incidentally, good pick on the monitor, no matter what these folks say. People only bash Iiyama because they've never owned one themselves, and they cannot comprehend that there are other monitor companies out there.

Iiyama uses Mitsubishi Diamondtron tubes like everyone else, but unlike everyone else they use extremely high-bandwidth dot clocks for optimum quality at higher resolutions and refresh rates.

[Kruzin]

Originally posted by defaultuser
This wouldnt have anything to do with you being an idiot...would it?

I suggest you watch your step. I do not approve of name calling in my forums, and you'll find most of the regulars here are not going to take that from a 2-post mini.
Tread lightly...you are one post from getting a quick boot.

[defaultuser]

Jesus, first I'm nodded off for even daring to make a statement about the Parhelia...

And now I'm not allowed to point out a really foolish statement?

Because thats what it was.

A really foolish statement.

I stand by my response. Foolish statements are fair game.

[Greebe]

Did you know that running an Athlon500@850 (1.90Vcore) is greater than that of a XP2100+... ie you are wrong at least in part by thinking for a sec that we all are stupid n00bs

You do know that the jump from a 1GHz T-bird to a fast Palomino is over 30 watts, don't you? Upgrades arent as easy as a simple switcherooo these days.

BTW you can be assured that those of us that have been here like nearly forever insure that those who aren't as knowledgable do correct anyone who states anything that is incorrect.

[defaultuser]

Originally posted by Greebe
Did you know that running an Athlon500@850 (1.90Vcore) is greater than that of a XP2100+... ie you are wrong at least in part by thinking for a sec that we all are stupid n00bs

Right, but on the other hand we are comparing an overclocked, overvolted part from a 1st-generation ( for Athlon anyway ) .25 micron process to a STOCK speed part on a 3rd-generation .18 micron part.

Not to mention the fact that in those three generations, AMD's .18 micron Athlon design has gone through several revisions and over 1GHz in clock speed gains since it's introduction.

If you were to upgrade an older T-bird to a brand new Palomino, you'd discover something amazing - these new faster chips do in fact use a lot more power, despite the notable power savings of the Palomino core.

BTW you can be assured that those of us that have been here like nearly forever insure that those who aren't as knowledgable do correct anyone who states anything that is incorrect.

That right? That post I brought to point has been up a week. Wonderful turnaround time with your Department of Corrections, my compliments.