Got Apex Parhelia review

[funky-d-munky]

He is saying in simple English:
You are complaining that were are asking questions that have been already asked.
He is saying your response is lacking. You keep brushing it off. So we keep asking.

You test the card in single head but not a 1600x1200. Why? Because it can't run it in SG?
What does that have to do with it!

It is POOR reviewing.
The benches are incorrect. It plays games at 1600x1200.

It takes two seconds to switch from single head to surround gaming and back. It is a feature and an ability of the card to switch back and forth between these modes. Your benches make it look as though the card cannot perform that resolution due to a pure lack of thoroughness on your behalf.
funky

[Pace]

Originally posted by Eon
I mean it’s easy to claim that “oh well your review is useless because you haven’t used more recent drivers”, but the most recent ones don’t seem to do much to fix all the performance and quality problems present since the initial driver release so IMO in this context, it’s a strawman argument.

If recent drivers would have given you a 20, 30 or 40% speed boost, like I have seen in other products, or finally at least enable > 2 way anisotropic filtering - or is this problem hardware based like for FAA-16x deficiencies and the banding problem?

Who claimed the review was "useless"?

I'm not saying newer drivers would change reviews, but the fact that they were ignored could be looked at.

And, from what I see, this has been judged from a gaming viewpoint, but not used in that way. (imho )

[Greebe]

Oops, I missed that. That is the difference between you and I.

You think. I test and report facts. If I were to review by thinking alone, I would have to say the Parhelia performs better than it does in the end because it sure looks like it should on paper. At least the paper we are permitted to see. That is known a marketing paper.

Time to trade upto a newer model crystal ball, yours must be on the fritz

Well, they've lost their fire!

No, we have families and lives. Besides you, who else is camping out on this thread? Nobody

Time to go play some games on the Radeon 9700. I do like to keep abreast of ATIs driver improvements with some casual gaming. The newest Cat drivers installed almost seemlessly, BTW.

I had a feeling you were a fanATIc

[KillerG]

Originally posted by funky-d-munky
He is saying in simple English:
You are complaining that were are asking questions that have been already asked.
He is saying your response is lacking. You keep brushing it off. So we keep asking.

You test the card in single head but not a 1600x1200. Why? Because it can't run it in SG?
What does that have to do with it!

It is POOR reviewing.
The benches are incorrect. It plays games at 1600x1200.

It takes two seconds to switch from single head to surround gaming and back. It is a feature and an ability of the card to switch back and forth between these modes. Your benches make it look as though the card cannot perform that resolution due to a pure lack of thoroughness on your behalf.
funky

As I said already, if someone does not read the entire review (or at least check into the reason for the 0s) then it is they who have erred not I. The reasoning is right there if one looks. Because you do not agree with my reasoning, it is wrong? My reviewing is poor? I don't think so, Tim. Someone needs to give their head a shake.

At least you are getting into it a bit maybe though. I thought I smelled passion there for a sec.

[KillerG]

Originally posted by Greebe
Time to trade upto a newer model crystal ball, yours must be on the fritz



No, we have families and lives. Besides you, who else is camping out on this thread? Nobody



I had a feeling you were a fanATIc

Ah, see how easily peeps can make incorrect assumtions and miss the entire point. I have owned every highend ATI chipset since the Rage Fury Maxx. I would not tell my worst enemy to buy an ATI card. Why, well, they are a lot like the Parhelia... unfinished products at release time.

I was actually noting through sarcasm that their drivers are not so good either. Today was the first time I have ever had them install "seemlessly".

Gee, I bet you call me an "nVidiot" now, right?

[KillerG]

Originally posted by KeiFront
I only read your review today only because the first response in this thread mentioned that you used older drivers. While already different driver revisions where released.
The lastest Parhelia review I've read was the beyond 3d review (you even mentioned that review in your review) it was dated 2 decemeber and it used the latest drivers at that moment. Your review was published the 13th of january and your using drivers that are four months old .
I appreciate the time you put into the review but you could at least tested the card with the latest drivers. Newer drivers not only include speed improvements but also bugfixes.

As i have said time and again. I did check the new drivers for speed improvements. There were none that would be worth noting let alone redoing the testing for.

If there were so much as a single bug noted in the review that was fixed by a new driver then all the testing would have been redone.

Again I say if anyone can show me a test result with a newer driver version that will change the outcome of the reviw then please... hit me up! Otherwise, stop whining because your feelings are hurt by the truth about a card that does not measure up toi its billing (let alone its bill).

[KillerG]

Originally posted by Pace
Hmm, a good start. In what way did the GeForce3 harm Matrox?

I did not say it harmed Matrox. It made them realize that they had both performance and feature deficits which had to be addresssed by a complete rethinking.

[KillerG]

Originally posted by Pace
So, the drivers wouldn't change your viewpoint. Can you imagine a situation where it might matter to someone? Clockspeed is irrelevant. Is the Radeon9700 less than 7% faster then a Ti4600? Is a Ti4600 36% faster than a Parhelia?

Clockspeed is irrelevent? Really? Then how is that the concern expressed in the bit you quote there shows itself to absolutley the bottom line as far as performance goes. There is a huge difference between being relative and scaling perfectly with performance.

[funky-d-munky]

"Oh, just in case you missed it, the 0 (zero) result at 1600x1200 is due to the fact that the Parhelia will not play games at this resolution when it is setup for use in TripleHead mode. As some of the games being tested here do actually play well at 16x12 and the competitive cards are able to use this resolution it had to be included"

That is the resoning given by you, in your review.
Thats LAME! It show you couldn't take the time to switch modes. Plain and simple. If you have stated a better reason in the review please share. I could have missed it. I am not as thorough as someone who write web reviews.
funky

[Greebe]

So far you've insinuated that perhaps half (maybe more) those replied thus far either haven't read all this thread, are idiots or mindless fans.

Your bad.

When all we see is another typical gamer review comparing apples to oranges. Hey if that winds your clock fine, but don't expect us kiddies (lol) to have a lick of respect for you when doing so, or worse addressing most everything with a Kylesque spin on reality.

Sigh, what was the point in posting here in the first place if everythng suggested is disgarded as rubbish? Didya expect a parade or that we would buy into your excuses and run away like good little clueless minions?.., maybe at first an atta boy was attainable, but not now.

[chhfchhf]

I am using 1.03 driver

[KillerG]

Originally posted by Greebe
So far you've insinuated that perhaps half (maybe more) those replied thus far either haven't read all this thread, are idiots or mindless fans.

Your bad.

When all we see is another typical gamer review comparing apples to oranges. Hey if that winds your clock fine, but don't expect us kiddies (lol) to have a lick of respect for you when doing so, or worse addressing most everything with a Kylesque spin on reality.

Sigh, what was the point in posting here in the first place if everythng suggested is disgarded as rubbish? Didya expect a parade or that we would buy into your excuses and run away like good little clueless minions?.., maybe at first an atta boy was attainable, but not now.

So far you have whined and moaned and said I did bad things and now you even stoop very close to childish name calling but you have yet to produce a single shred of evidence to support the accusations of false representation.

I grow tired of fools like you Greebe. Too bad that you are so unprepared to defend your honour. I was sort of enjoying myself and I had heard that the MURC folks were a good bunch. I guess that is only while they are huddled together waiting for a new driver, troubleshooting their cards and telling each other they didn't get ripped off.

As for Kyle.... Oh, yeah, right... Matrox didn't send him a card. There is a very good reason for that. As Kyle said at the time, "I take it as a compliment" or something akin to that.

I just had an urge to play Comanche4 strike me. Good thing I don't have that Parhelia card in my rig anymore. I wouldn't be able to play this game.

Oh but wait, that is cool cuz no casual Matrox sporting gamer would ever want to play that game. They don't play games like this one. If they did try and if it wouldn't play well (which it won't) that is becasue they are hardcore gamers so they have the wrong card or shouldn't be playing that game or something... zzzzzzzzzzzz......

Peace-Out

KG

[Hazmat2k]

Originally posted by KillerG
I just had an urge to play Comanche4 strike me. Good thing I don't have that Parhelia card in my rig anymore. I wouldn't be able to play this game.

I just had an urge to set my desktop to 1600x1200 and add you to my ignore list. Good thing I have a Parhelia in my "rig" cos I wouldn't be able to read the page with a non-Matrox card.
Oooh...I think I'll play in photoshop and zoom in on some edges so I can tidy them up a bit....good thing I have a Parhelia in my "rig" cos you can't do that properly* on any other non-Matrox card...etc etc etc ad nauseum

*properly= Zooming in on an area of the screen.Not pixel doubling like other manufacturers.

Oh yeah "Peace-Out" and "KillerG"?...pretty funny coming from a bald white guy.

[Pace]

Originally posted by KillerG
I did not say it harmed Matrox. It made them realize that they had both performance and feature deficits which had to be addresssed by a complete rethinking.

Depends what side of the fence you're on. It might've made them realise what their real qualities are. The reason most G400 owners bought Matrox was far quality, features and performance. If it only offered TNT2 performance with no added quality or features it would've flopped. So, Matrox realised that DualHead is a great feature, that good drivers, an excellent support network etc are all what Matrox owners desire. They focused on that

Originally posted by KillerG
Clockspeed is irrelevent? Really? Then how is that the concern expressed in the bit you quote there shows itself to absolutley the bottom line as far as performance goes. There is a huge difference between being relative and scaling perfectly with performance.

You're comparing clockspeeds on different architectures. It's safe to assume that a 250MHz Parhelia would be faster than the actual 220MHz one. However, when you compare a Parhelia clock speed against the clock speed of a different core you're comparing apples and oranges.

Take my 1667MHz Athlon and a 2GHz Pentium 4. Capisce?

P.

[William]

Originally posted by KillerG
I just had an urge to play Comanche4 strike me. Good thing I don't have that Parhelia card in my rig anymore. I wouldn't be able to play this game.

Hmm; since I've demonstrated that it's possible to play C4 well on a rage128, care to rethink that one? Perhaps if you actually looked at what was on screen rather than the FPS counter, you'd find gaming more fun.