Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Parhelia overtaken by ati9000?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Chrono_Wanderer
    R9600?

    P can't even compete with Ti4600 last time I checked! And i'd assume a 9600 is faster than a 4600

    well, good to see here are some who still love P. (I personally think its a failure for matrox.)
    4600 still packs quite a punch when compared to 9600Pro/5600Ultra in non AA, often winning by quite a bit, but losing (sometimes horribly) when AA is on. 9600Pro, 5600Ultra, and Parhelia overtake it considerably after the IQ gets bumped up, and the P still holds its own against those 2.

    Also, FWIW, compared against a few systems of similar speed and a 4600, my Parhelia outscores it by a thousand or 2 on Aquamark.

    Comment


    • #17
      Parhelia is definitly too expensive for a gamer, but I think the product itself is quite good, not perfect of course, but good. In my opinion the architecture has delivered a second chance on a new designed card (Pitou bla bla you know what I mean )...

      I'm a 'happy Parhelia user' and I won't ever change my P. for an other card.


      @Performance:
      It's always a question of bechmarks:
      Parhelia really performs like actual mid-performance cards in some actual benches, like R 9600 or FX 5600, but of course it would never beat a Ti 4600 in Q3A for example.
      P IV 3,06 Ghz, GA-8ihxp i850e, 512 MB PC-1066 RDRam, Parhelia 128 mb 8x, 40 + 60 gb IBM 7200 upm/2048 kb HD, Samtron 96 P 19", black icemat, Razer Boomslang 2100 krz-2 + mousebungee, Videologic sonic fury, Creative Soundworks

      Comment


      • #18
        I own a ATI Radeon 9000 Pro 64mb and a Parhelia 128mb. Using Unreal Tournament (The only game I play) the Parhelia absolutely stomps the 9000. Not to mention the visual quality is at another level.

        I really wanted to like the 9000 but the damn 2d just gives me a headache unless I ramp the refresh to 120 hertz. And even then I can tell a noticeable difference between the cards.

        Maybe my eyes are just getting picky in their old age. Who knows?
        Perspective cannot be taught. It must be learned.

        Comment


        • #19
          The 9000 series cards are known to have worse 2D than other ATI cards (the same is true for the 8500 series)
          7x00/9500/9600/9700/9800 should be better. Another thing to note is if it is a BBA or a cheap thrid party built one (like PowerColor, Club3D,...)
          But we named the *dog* Indiana...
          My System
          2nd System (not for Windows lovers )
          German ATI-forum

          Comment


          • #20
            If I remember correctly, the 2D on the 9000 Pro is the same as the 9700, etc...but the 8500 is quite a bit behind...
            Let us return to the moon, to stay!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              The 9000 is a retail ATI card bought at Best Buy. And I should note it is an improvement over the first Radeon AIW I tried. But it just doesn't compare to the Matrox cards.
              Perspective cannot be taught. It must be learned.

              Comment

              Working...
              X