Firingsquad did one 2!

[Guru]

http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/parhelia

Have not read it yet so no comments!

[thop]

i think they swapped the colors in the graphs in the Q3A and JD2K Benchmark since every other review had the 4600 clearly in the lead, not the Parhelia (and the text also indicates that). but overall it seems to be a good review as it concentrates more on the features of the parhelia than raw FPS. havent read all yet though

[isochar]

I just saw that their Parhelia is running at 325mhz? (650mhz DDR)

[SteveC]

Originally posted by thop
i think they swapped the colors in the graphs in the Q3A and JD2K Benchmark since every other review had the 4600 clearly in the lead, not the Parhelia (and the text also indicates that). but overall it seems to be a good review as it concentrates more on the features of the parhelia than raw FPS. havent read all yet though

heh heh - D'oh!

[frankymail]

I think they've mistaken the Parhelia 128 memory speed with the specs announced at the same time as teh Parhelia-512 GPU that was said to have 20 GB or memory bandwidth, which implied 256-bits memory bus running at 325 MHZ; however, the final core speed is 220MHz(retail)/200MHz(Bulk) and memory is clocked at 275MHz(Retail)/250 MHz(Bulk)... I have to say I share Firingsquad's view almost %100, and when I get mine, i'll install the first compatible version of Powerstrip and overclock it right through the roof. Anyway, TripleHEad, Surround Gaming, 16xFAA, IQ nad upcoming(hopefully) high-quality Aniso is more than I needed to buy this card; anyway, anyone of you guys spends more time gaming than working in Windows? I spend about %90 of my time in windows...

[maharajah]

After reading this review, I might just change my mind and get this card. I may wait until I see how well it overclocks though.

[IcedEarth]

Excellent review IMO.

[Helevitia]

If you go on to read the comments about the review, the person who wrote it ahd this to say:

It's understandable that some of you are judging
the Parhelia purely on frame rates. However, from
the start, it has been stated that Matrox doesn't
intend to compete directly with NVIDIA and ATI on
just speed, they're competing on a much wider
range of things.

When you're putting down the Parhelia for its lack
of speed, keep in mind that just because it
doens't match a Ti4600 in framerates doens't mean
the card "sucks" or is "!@$%". Also, saying that I
don't know what I'm doing by giving it a rating of
87% is looking at things through tunnel vision. As
a reviewer, I'm expected to look at the big
picture, not just one part of the picture. There
are many things going for the Parhelia and those
things are in the features that it has. No other
card has better anti-aliasing, better 2D, better
color, better multi-display support, better
TV-out, etc. Sure, a GF4 Ti4600 is faster, but do
you get all the features that a lot of companies
are jumping on like with the Parhelia? You have
Adobe, the film industry, businesses, gamers, just
drooling over the features.

If all you do is play games, then that's fine, the
GF4 or Radeon would better suit you. However, that
doesn't warrant putting down the Parhelia just
because it's not targeted solely for gamers. I
like driving 4-door sedans, but it doens't mean
that 4x4's suck.

People complained that the GF3 was nothing more
than a GF2 second edition; no real enhancements or
architectural changes. People made a big fuss out
of that as well. Feature for feature, the Parhelia
is in a league of its own. And like the GF3, the
Parhelia is just a sign of bright things to come.
Was the GF3 the end-all be-all from NVIDIA? Of
course not, it was a display of what they had in
store. The Parhelia is really the stepping stone
of what can come out of great minds at work.

Again, broaden your views. Look at it from your
perspective, then ask yourself, "is this product
designed just for me?" The Parhelia is an example
of an all-around great card. It's not a
game-focused card and was not intended to be.

Speed is a good thing, but variety is the spice of
life.

[Znucke]

This is one of the best and more unbiased reviews of P. I've read IMHO...and the score isn't to shabby either!

[YngwieM]

I agree with you guys...

This was one of the most compreensive reviews so far... but have you seen the comments about the Leadtek GF4 2D? What do you think?

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by YngwieM
I agree with you guys...

This was one of the most compreensive reviews so far... but have you seen the comments about the Leadtek GF4? What do you think?

I'd be interested in what res, conditions, and applictations they performed their evaluation.

amish

[Michel Carleer]

However, at many places, comments like:
"considering the clock speed being lower than the competition by 100 MHz, it does fare very well" (not the exact words, but the meaning is there).
Sorry, but this kind of comment is not what I call unbiased.
Because then, considering the speed difference with today's machines, my old 5 MHz IBM PC also does a pretty good job.

[Guru]

Originally posted by Michel Carleer
my old 5 MHz IBM PC also does a good job.
Sorry, but this kind of comment is not what I call unbiased.

Clocked @ 5GHz it would still not be near as fast as a P3 500MHz CPU!

[Michel Carleer]

Guru,
That's exactly my point!

[thop]

busted