Pitou

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by Enak
Incidently I get 20-25 FPS in UT2003 highest settings 1600x1200 16xFAA

It's playable

yeah, 25 fps in UT2K3 is playable (rotfl)

25fps is enough for Morrowind, but not for a high speed Online FPS

i prefer gaming @ 1600 with 8x AF - instead of 1024 with FSAA and AF @ crappy fps

[Sasq]

Then why exactly are you here?

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by Maggi


in any game that uses more than one light source ...

and why is the parhelia in EVERY game slower than a TI4600

(i speak about gaming, not professionals - even for professionals the Quadro series cards are faster)

[Maggi]

temper Sasq, temper ...

this guy is just way too funny to send him away !



[edit]I just inserted "to" between "funny" and "send"[/edit]

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by Sasq
Then why exactly are you here?

because i wanted a Matrox Card, but the Parhelia disappointed me so much that i had to return the slow card and got a ti4600

now i'm hoping for a Matrox Card which is about r9700 speeds

[Maggi]

Originally posted by Ulukay


and why is the parhelia in EVERY game slower than a TI4600

(i speak about gaming, not professionals - even for professionals the Quadro series cards are faster)

maybe because those reviews were all done on very early drivers ?

[candyman]

Originally posted by Ulukay
i don't give much on THEORETICAL tests

I would not call 3DMarks tests theoretical
All the crap nVIDIA is pushing about their nv30 card like "is 2x speed of GeForce4" or "3x bigger than gf4-chip" or "renders 100 dinosaurs at 100fps". That kind of meaningless bullshit is theoretical!

So watch your mouth boy

[GNEP]

No, I am intrigued Maggi - is Ulukay really a secret marketing agent employed by nVidia?

EDIT: WAAAAAAY too slow for this thread...

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by Maggi


maybe because those reviews were all done on very early drivers ?

and Matrox managed to get more than 50% Speed improvement, only with new drivers

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by candyman


I would not call 3DMarks tests theoretical
All the crap nVIDIA is pushing about their nv30 card like "is 2x speed of GeForce4" or "3x bigger than gf4-chip" or "renders 100 dinosaurs at 100fps". That kind of meaningless bullshit is theoretical!

So watch your mouth boy

first of all, i prefer MATROX Graphic cards, not nVidia or ATI Cards - BUT when i want to game, i need a fast card, so i had no choice

[Sasq]

Thats fair, do have a read of the front page news going back the last couple of weeks.

It may give some hints as to why

[Maggi]

Originally posted by Ulukay


and Matrox managed to get more than 50% Speed improvement, only with new drivers

so now you're telling us a Ti4600 is twice as fast as a Parhelia ?

[candyman]

Originally posted by Ulukay
first of all, i prefer MATROX Graphic cards, not nVidia or ATI Cards - BUT when i want to game, i need a fast card, so i had no choice

I see your point, Ulukay
But one of major points to consider a Parhelia is that you would not need to play @1600, since you get a pretty good picture and it's smoother @1024 with FAA.

/ candyman


Edit: I dont own a Parhelia myself, but I draw conclusions from other people's reviews. So I might be wrong afterall

[Ulukay]

Originally posted by candyman


I see your point, Ulukay
But one of major points to consider a Parhelia is that you would not need to play @1600, since you get a pretty good picture and it's smoother @1024 with FAA.

/ candyman

really? i think 1600 with 8xAF is much more sharp and clear (textures) - and i never had problems with the speed, why should 1024 with FSAA @Matrox be faster when i have less fps than on a ti?

[candyman]

Ulukay, you simply cant get a sharp picture on a TI with FSA enabled since you get your whole picture blured. I talk about Matrox Fragment-antialiasing, which is different and it does not make a big impact on card's performance

/ candyman