Next Version Of Parhelia

[ElDonAntonio]

I don't agree Wombat. My brother used to work for Matrox and I was there too for an internship, and all the best and key people have been hired away, mostly by nVidia, because they were hired higher salaries.
If money was no issue, I'm sure Matrox would quickly come out with some great things.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Originally posted by Wombat
Money isn't Matrox's problem. They've had all the money they needed to do things right. Handing them more capital would just let the same idiots mismanage mroe funds.

Too true AFAIK M makes big money in the MMS and video sectors. IMO it's just their marketing ppl screwing up the graphics division. First it's the FatCasting Engine now the stupid 64MB P. Perhaps ppl would be better off with an ATI 9000 that is less than half of the price, while they have their 16x AF... M should also fix AF in order to compete, since AF = 3d quality while P is aimed as a high visual quality card. Kinda seems like M is in neither the quality (well... not their 2d/video quality) or performance "niche", which is sad... please give me back the good old days when M aimed for max 2d/3d (i remembered my G200 was THE BEST in terms of 3d quality)/video quality.

Edit: lol ElDonAntonio. This forum is "back to life" after VigilAnt is back.

[ElDonAntonio]

You laughin' at me, chrono?!?!

It's back to life indeed, but unfortunately it's back to life because of bad news...

I don't think Matrox makes a lot of money as you guys suppose. I talked to a matrox engineer 2 months ago and he told me they were producing more Parhelias than they were selling...which is a very bad indicator.
Furthermore, Parhelia was more than 3 years in development. Suppose the team was only composed of 20 people. Each of those making 65,000 CAN$ / year (VERY conservative figures). That makes: 65000*20*3 = 3,9 million $. And that's just in paying the R&D people. You have the finance and marketing guys, IT, then you have cost of equipment, electricity, the prototypes, etc.

They probably spent around 15 million$ in developping Parhelia. That's a lot of money for a company that was considered "dormant" for 3 years.

[Wombat]

EDA, I really disagree with you. Look at the plans for the 64MB Parhelia as an example. Just the latest blunder.

[ElDonAntonio]

I won't deny that matrox's management/marketing has serious problems, but a stronger R&D team is *crucial* for matrox's survival. Anyway, both of these problems could be partly solved with more money.

[Admiral]

...but a stronger R&D team is *crucial* for matrox's survival...

And who is in such a position to decide if it's needed if not management ?

[ElDonAntonio]

I doubt management would refuse some new talented engineers if they could pay them.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

replace the marketing department with ant, the mods, haig, and the super MURCers here . SOON™!!! lol just kidding

edit: of course we can't forget vigilant

[Wombat]

You have no idea how much of an improvement that would be.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

hehe of course and i bet the MURCers here will do it for free

[MetalCartman]

Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
hehe of course and i bet the MURCers here will do it for free

There's no doubt, indeed!

[thop]

where do i sign up? just pay the flight and i'm sold

[Kurt]

Again, it makes perfect business sense to launch a lower-end part if you're targetting the MMS business.

3 monitors is better than 2. The P128 is too expensive for a workstation that needs to display only 2D apps. You don't need 128mb of FAA for that...moreover, there's probably someone who thinks triple head is worth 50% more than dual head

If MMS and workstations are where the money is for Matrox, the P64 is going to improve sales. Gamers look elsewhere....besides, at 250$US the GF4 Ti4600 is a steal...

It was a marketing mistake to pitch it against nvidia or ATi for games, but it sure is a quality card. 10 bit imaging is a boon for certain medical applications for example -at 250 or 399$ they're a steal as well...The problem remains that the 3D performance is not up to par with the competition. The only thing saving it from total disdain is triple head gaming. That's the killer app. But the card is still too slow and too expensive so it can't have the success it could with a few FPS more...

OTOH you don't have to be the biggest to make money. As long as Matrox dominate their market (target market?) and are profitable there are no reasons to change the current strategy -whether it pleases the fans or not...

If the P64 serves to expand Matrox's market, fine. As a gamer I'll be disappointed but I'll be sure I can still benefit from the best image quality on my work computer.

If they were to terminate the graphics division, I'm not sure who we could turn to for good image quality as ATi is discontinuing it's boards is various countries -given they're still second best, what can we say about the various manufacturers using their chips? Look at the Nvidia boards, one can't say they're at the top...that's the problem with selling only the chips.

Gamers are most likely not at the top of their list since they are ready to switch brand at the first lackluster product. Businesses are another beast altogether. They have (technology) investments they need to protect, contracts to honour, etc. In a word: they're return customers, they make you live. Same for Matrox, same for everyone. Hence the P64...

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Originally posted by Kurt
Again, it makes perfect business sense to launch a lower-end part if you're targetting the MMS business.

3 monitors is better than 2. The P128 is too expensive for a workstation that needs to display only 2D apps. You don't need 128mb of FAA for that...moreover, there's probably someone who thinks triple head is worth 50% more than dual head

If MMS and workstations are where the money is for Matrox, the P64 is going to improve sales. Gamers look elsewhere....besides, at 250$US the GF4 Ti4600 is a steal...

It was a marketing mistake to pitch it against nvidia or ATi for games, but it sure is a quality card. 10 bit imaging is a boon for certain medical applications for example -at 250 or 399$ they're a steal as well...The problem remains that the 3D performance is not up to par with the competition. The only thing saving it from total disdain is triple head gaming. That's the killer app. But the card is still too slow and too expensive so it can't have the success it could with a few FPS more...

OTOH you don't have to be the biggest to make money. As long as Matrox dominate their market (target market?) and are profitable there are no reasons to change the current strategy -whether it pleases the fans or not...

If the P64 serves to expand Matrox's market, fine. As a gamer I'll be disappointed but I'll be sure I can still benefit from the best image quality on my work computer.

If they were to terminate the graphics division, I'm not sure who we could turn to for good image quality as ATi is discontinuing it's boards is various countries -given they're still second best, what can we say about the various manufacturers using their chips? Look at the Nvidia boards, one can't say they're at the top...that's the problem with selling only the chips.

Gamers are most likely not at the top of their list since they are ready to switch brand at the first lackluster product. Businesses are another beast altogether. They have (technology) investments they need to protect, contracts to honour, etc. In a word: they're return customers, they make you live. Same for Matrox, same for everyone. Hence the P64...

Here we go...

Kurt is a Matrox marketing personnel and his msg does not necessarily represent Matrox Graphics, Inc.

edit: Designing chips are extremely expensive. if they market the P just to 2d workstations then IMO they should just integrate ATI/nvidia chips onto their cards. at $225 it is not much to cover the development cost when matrox relies on only 2d customers. 2D is getting to a point where it can hardly be improved. Surely there are 2D users. But when competitors like ATI come up with products that rivals (or when the human eye can hardly tell the difference) with Matrox's 2d, then those ppl may shift to ATI or companies alike that ships parts with better performance but at the same/lower price. It's kinda like developers using gaming cards to do DCC works.

[Belwarrior]

I feel as if i am being pushed by Matrox to ATi/nVidia, dont the ppl at Matrox ask the market what is required or wanted before pushing products?

I feel really let down by Matrox.