Go Matrox go!
- Thread starter 64ultramaniac
- Start date
OP
- Thread Starter
- #23
ooooooooooooooooooooo nastyB*A*G*G said:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #25
That's a very good point Josep.And I can't see why.Obviously some ppl either can't understand easily some things or they justJosep said:btw, someone should of made a new thread about this, i didn't go into this thread cause i thought everyone posting in here was showing matrox love
don't read the posts in a thread and rush themselves to make comments without thinking at all.In my first post I said "it's all about quality" , I wonder can some ppl unerstand this or they need a "special" explanation?I also gave that link with the 3DMark2001 test in which Parhelia surpassed even a ti4600 in maximum quality settings, but no, some ppl still didn't got it.Well...
My point is that I have nothing with nVidia,I use a nVidia card for
God's sake!But I admire my old favourite Matrox's try, to get back
again in the scene and I support their efforts and I like the way they are doing it,"quality above all".Some ppl just can't take that and they throw whatever bs they can to show what?What?Parhelia is not competing with 4600,Parhelia is in it's own "level".
Oh and I don't type this for starting a war(just in case some crazy,bad boys want to fire back),no thanx,keep your firing for yourselves,I had enough...bye.
I agree with most of the points you brought up, the parhelia did not deliver in the end. I guess Matrox' planned clockspeeds were around 270 core and 300 mem (judging by the 3.3 ns mem chips), but that didn't happen. Haig (a matrox rep) said they couldn't do it because that would need some stuff exceeding agp spec (propably voltage and size of cooler, but judging by the cooler on the final cards I'd say voltage).
However I do believe this was a good move from Matrox. It brought them back in the spotlight, and the next parhelia offspin might be a very decent card (die shrunk and with pixel shader 2.0 support, and occlusion culling), much like the g200 was kinda bad, while g400 was excellent. And as the parhelia is designed for next gen games anyway it will be interesting to see how it scales into the future in regards for example to the gf4.
BTW those "mem bandwidth tests" test memory efficiency, not bandwidth itself. In terms of raw bandwidth parhelia is way ahead of the competition, but the efficiency is something else entirely.
However I do believe this was a good move from Matrox. It brought them back in the spotlight, and the next parhelia offspin might be a very decent card (die shrunk and with pixel shader 2.0 support, and occlusion culling), much like the g200 was kinda bad, while g400 was excellent. And as the parhelia is designed for next gen games anyway it will be interesting to see how it scales into the future in regards for example to the gf4.
BTW those "mem bandwidth tests" test memory efficiency, not bandwidth itself. In terms of raw bandwidth parhelia is way ahead of the competition, but the efficiency is something else entirely.
