Matrox p650, P750

[yunglee]

What are the main differences between the two? Are the speeds the same clock-etc?

How will gaming be on an Intel 2.4 (800 bus) 512 ddr memory, on a Soltek springdale motherboard?

How is the 2d and 3d image quailty?

I am thinking of buyin one

Thanks

[az]

Quality should be the same. p650 is a little slower in 3d and passively cooled, and does only dualhead (though a triplehead addon is available), p750 is actively cooled and still too slow for gaming. Parhelia is the fastest, though it has a few bugs and still isn't what would widely be recognized as a gaming card.

AZ

[yunglee]

Info

I heard someone say that on P750 with an Intel 2.6 in 3dmark 2001 they scored 6,500pts does this seem to be in the area for this card?

[UtwigMU]

No, Parhelia is 7000+ with such CPU, P650/750 are half of that.

Here's a partial review.

It scored 4448 with Athlon 2400+.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

don't go Matrox for gaming... if you can wait, consider waiting a few more months for the next generation of gaming cards from NVIDIA or ATI.

They are supposed to be VERY fast...

[Kruzin]

There is nothing wrong with Parhelia for gaming, IF you prefer enjoying playing the games over counting frame rates and running benchmarks.
Particularly if you want to do surround gaming.

P750, however, is not a good choice for games. It's literally 1/2 the 3d speed of Parhelia.

[dZeus]

of course, not everyone necessarily shares your definition of 'playable framerates'.

[KeiFront]

I'm with Chrono_Wanderer, don't go Matrox for gaming, the only advantage it has is surround gaming (and Matrox's support for SG is also diminishing).
Go with an ATI or Nvidia if you're interested in gaming. If 2D and triplehead are important get a P650 (only dualhead) or P750.

[Kurt]

I'd love to get a P8X and see how good/bad it is for gaming...but I won't put the money in it just to see...I'm quite happy with my P750 and my 9800pro is just *fine* for games...

[leech]

I often consider building a second PC just for games and putting an ATI or nVidia in it... but then I look at Byock's computers... ATI's drivers still have a LOT of issues (for instance I tried switching the quality settings on a 9200 and the whole system became unusable, had to reboot... ) And even the control panel itself had display glitches... of course Byock said that it was only a 'lowly 9200' and I laughed.... if ATI can't even make a driver work properly on a 2D display, why should I trust any 3D? And a 9200 you'd think would have to have something like this fixed, since a 9200 is more likely to go into a workstation type computer...

nVidia's quality just sucks, so no going there either. Matrox needs to either pull it's head out, or there needs to be an up and coming graphics maker that has good linux support and speed. Still the only one with decent linux support is nVidia... Sad to say, but true... oh well, as long as I can use THI in linux under the Parhelia, I won't upgrade to something else, since I already have the triple-head...

Leech

[albatorsk]

What's wrong with ATI's drivers for Linux? I have a 9600 Pro, and allthough I've only had it for about 3 weeks I haven't had a single problem with it yet. It even works as advertised! That was a pleasant suprise after getting frustrated that Matrox after a year and a half still hasn't delivered drivers that doesn't hang my computer.

It was also wonderfully cheap and about twice as fast as my Parhelia. But it didn't have Triple Head. I'll live

Back on topic; stay away from Matrox if you plan on playing any games except Minesweeper or Hearts.

I'm sure the P-series are excellent cards, but Matrox has failed to deliver the professional quality support that they promised.

[The PIT]

Sadly for newbies the script doesn't work for checking what version of X is running. Under RH you can check yourself under suse I haven't found it yet.
You found the script was buggy yourself if I recall correctly. You were quite amused. So that may lead people astray. Remember people aren't quite up with your knowledge under non billy os.

[albatorsk]

Well, the script wasn't actually part of the drivers. It's like saying that the drivers for Windows are bad because you don't know if you're running Windows 95 or Windows XP.

Anyway, that script is fixed now (they probably just uploaded it in binary format instead of converting it to windows text), so that point is moot.