Will Matrox make an all new GPU or VPU in 2003?

amuro · Jan 6, 2003, 01:01 AM

Will Matrox make an all new GPU or VPU in 2003? specially one that will make the Parhelia look like the G400 made the G200 look

I really wonder about this since it took so long for Matrox to follow up the G400 chipset and the G450 and G550 were inferior architectures in 3d graphics. And to me at least it would have made more sence to just enhance and refine the G400 core architecture for workstation use.

I have a Matrox G400Max 32 AGP 4X videocard in my PIII 1Ghz, Intel VC820 with 512 ECC RDRAM all latest bios updates and drivers for WinXP Pro SP1.

The card works great with MOHAA, RTCW, QIII, Freedom Force, Jedi Outcast, Serious Sam 2 and Alien VS Predator.

I have also played these games on a GeForce 3 200 TI on a P4 Compaq system with 512MB of ram. And aside from T&L the 3d graphic's colors look washed out (in 32bit mode) while the G400 has solid colors.

I am very curious with the Parhelia but right now the chipset and drivers (specially .net based) do not appeal to me that much.

I also think that Matrox should have had the Parhelia ready back in February or Jan of 2002 instead of June or July and released the .net driver later, but then again this is their first real GPU card. If they would have done this maybe it would have helped them with sales.

Otherwise when the Parhelia was rerleased if it would have had WHQL drivers that would have boosted sales big time like how ATI is feeling growth from launching the 9700 with WHQL drivers.

ToshiroOC · Jan 6, 2003, 02:32 AM

The answer is "who knows?". I haven't heard any rumors at all abou the Parhelia's sucessor, and don't know if there will be one either. This is somewhat random speculation - Matrox has been historically pretty tight-lipped about things, and it would be unlikely for people to know...

UberLord · Jan 6, 2003, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by amuro

I am very curious with the Parhelia but right now the chipset and drivers (specially .net based) do not appeal to me that much.

The drivers are written in either C, C++ or x86 Assembly
Only the PowerDesk is written in .NET

TTCharon · Jan 7, 2003, 06:07 AM

The were some rumours at www.matroxusers.com about a new revision of the Parhelia which should be announced Q1 of 2003.

Anyway, I hope they release a kickass revision of it too. The G400Max kicked ass and I actually miss the superb IQ.

amuro · Jan 7, 2003, 11:52 PM

Yeah definetly.

I went to this small computer store and they had a PC with the Parhelia and 3 monitors running some space game.

I was floored when I saw this, as I already have 2 Monitors and a third one is not that expensive for me, but still for a videocard at such a low clock speed its kind of pricey.

I'm actually kind of hoping they release a special version of the Parhelia and maybe call it the Parhelia Max but thats just wishful thinking.

I think that being realistic if there is no new Matrox card, I'll just get a Nvida GeForce 4 Ti or a if I'm lucky an FX.

I don't really want to spend that much money on a card but I will be upgrading in about 6 months to an all new Intel CPU/Mobo setup.

ToshiroOC · Jan 8, 2003, 01:37 AM

Well, they already have a high-end version of the Parhelia with 256mb of RAM - I don't think that it will be economical to make an even higher version of the Parhelia... however, I agree with the sentiment - if they were cheaper and faster, I would most definitely go for one (even though I only have one monitor)

amuro · Jan 9, 2003, 03:48 AM

Well yeah I knew about the Parhelia 256MB AGP 4X version a while back at the Matrox forums page.

But that card is targeted at the Workstation market and its not a Matrox core speed enhancement that will greatly increase performance out of the Parhelia core.

The drivers are also targeted at the Workstation market. Both the 2D and 3D software segments.

Also the price keeps it from being something that the current Matrox fans would probably want to spend, specialy if its a workstation card and theres the option to get a R300 core based ATI Fire GL X1 (target price is around $800 to $1000) and to add insult to Matrox's injury, ATI already has experience in the 3D Workstation market.

In the end its better for Matrox to just make a core revision eventually (again wishfull thinking on my part)

I don't know first it seems like Matrox wants us (all around users) to get interested in the Parhelia and its architecture and then they turn around and say that its really for the workstation user.

I purchased a Workstation use ATI Fire GL 8800 128MB AGP 4X back in August for $300.00 brand new while the Parhelia came out at $400

I use it mainly for 3dsMax4 and its great (as long as you configure it properly)

But what the heck, I just wish Matrox best luck with their choices.

amuro · Jan 9, 2003, 03:51 AM

oh I almost forgot.

Hey UberLord how do you like your Parhelia so far and what have you used it with?

Also how do you like the drivers?

Zarathustra · Jan 9, 2003, 07:14 AM

I seriously doubt Matrox will come out with another new desktop card for awhile if ever again. The Parhelia was a total flop and Matrox is in financial trouble the last I heard

The G400Max was one of the best cards I ever had, too bad it only took Matrox 3 years to make a successor.

Dwarden · Jan 15, 2003, 09:29 AM

Because nVidia is getting slow and ATI is stronger and stronger (see FireGl X1 pro with 256MB (in fact little bit better 9700pro)) then any competetior is good...

i dont think that Trident XP4 and new DeltaChrome from S3 VIA can shake market heavy, sure not with 1st revisions ...

Maybe SIS and "Kyro" Serie 4 (i heard Intel was so impressed they licenced these technigues for theirs internal video chipsets)...

amuro · Jan 26, 2003, 03:59 PM

yeah I also feel that the Parhelia was a total flop, I mean they could have tried to anticipate the competition better at least.

Ahh whatever I don't want to wait another 3 years.

UberLord · Jan 28, 2003, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by amuro
oh I almost forgot.

Hey UberLord how do you like your Parhelia so far and what have you used it with?

Also how do you like the drivers?

Soz for the late reply

Parhelia was a no-go for me. Performance was just too poor in 2 games - UT2003 and NOLF2. Aside from that and a few unfixable hardware problems, the card was great! FAAx16 is simply the best AA I've ever seen - when it worked

Drivers are pretty good. I'd say the UI for the drivers is better than anyones and the drivers were pretty damn stable for everything I had from the get-go. However, a lot of peeps think that the main reason the P. is a poor performer is downto the drivers and not the card. But I understand the current drivers are a fair bit faster now.

These days I use a 9700 pro and haven't looked back!

gibbon565 · Feb 3, 2003, 07:30 AM

I have to admit that I followed in Uberlords footsteps tbh and for the very same reasons and performance issue's, I mean the Parhelia is a nice card with some great features but too many problems to go with that!

HsuGotaQ · Feb 3, 2003, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dwarden
Because nVidia is getting slow and ATI is stronger and stronger (see FireGl X1 pro with 256MB (in fact little bit better 9700pro)) then any competetior is good...

i dont think that Trident XP4 and new DeltaChrome from S3 VIA can shake market heavy, sure not with 1st revisions ...

Maybe SIS and "Kyro" Serie 4 (i heard Intel was so impressed they licenced these technigues for theirs internal video chipsets)...

You forgot BitBoys!!!

Than again, it is still has mysterious as DNF (Duke Nukem Forever... euh Never).

UberLord · Feb 3, 2003, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HsuGotaQ
You forgot BitBoys!!!

Who? At least PowerVR and SIS have actually released cards

HsuGotaQ · Feb 3, 2003, 12:43 PM

BitBoys : Check out here and here. Still in partially-hydrated-vaporware phase.

UberLord · Feb 4, 2003, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by HsuGotaQ
BitBoys : Check out here and here. Still in partially-hydrated-vaporware phase.

I know who they are and they "almost" released a card but Infineon pulled out of fabbing the chips (I think it was Infineon). Would have been a nice card for FSAA using emebbed RAM on the GPU

RIV@NVX · Feb 7, 2003, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
I know who they are and they "almost" released a card but Infineon pulled out of fabbing the chips (I think it was Infineon). Would have been a nice card for FSAA using emebbed RAM on the GPU

Really - they came that near? Hmm...
I remember long ago when Glaze3D was announced together with Riva TNT (how good that card was - I had Creative Labs one - it had passive heatsink and it was running at 90/115 (if I remember) and had AGP 2x support - wow!)

amuro · Mar 12, 2003, 04:28 AM

Well now that Microsoft made the official announcement that Direct X 9 wont be updated untill 2 or more years from now its a very good time for Matrox to just make a fully compliant Dx9 videocard with second generation triple head support and AGP 8X support.

All that and a core revision or speed improvement and they may stick with us.

UberLord · Mar 12, 2003, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by amuro
Well now that Microsoft made the official announcement that Direct X 9 wont be updated untill 2 or more years from now its a very good time for Matrox to just make a fully compliant Dx9 videocard with second generation triple head support and AGP 8X support.

All that and a core revision or speed improvement and they may stick with us.

It may take Matrox 2 years to exhaust their current supply of slow and faulty Parhelia chips

Vampyromaniac · Mar 12, 2003, 01:51 PM

When did you stop luvin the Parhelia, Uber?

amuro · Mar 13, 2003, 05:52 AM

Then again ATI is ver stiff competition to squash.

The ATI 9800Pro is just way too powerfull and its even running the Matrox reef demo with a little program.

UberLord · Mar 13, 2003, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vampyromaniac
When did you stop luvin the Parhelia, Uber?

When the banding problem occured, when they underclocked their cards without telling anyone and a few other little niggles such as the memory giving out.

gibbon565 · Mar 13, 2003, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
When the banding problem occured, when they underclocked their cards without telling anyone and a few other little niggles such as the memory giving out.

I would tend to agree with uber, the banding was too much tbh. Though there is talk of making the 3rd monitor, the primary. Therefore negating the banding as it uses an external dac.

Vampyromaniac · Mar 14, 2003, 01:40 AM

banding? like as if using 16-bit color?

UberLord · Mar 14, 2003, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vampyromaniac
banding? like as if using 16-bit color?

No. Like a horizontal line moving down the monitor - hard to describe really.
Only happens in a few situations - like a 3D app/game running in a window.

amuro · Apr 16, 2003, 03:09 AM

Well it looks like my question was finally answered, there will be new Matrox graphics cards and the Millenium name will return as I read this info on a news site.

But alas they will be a weaker version than the Parhelia, what a shame, what a shame indeed.

I just cannot understand why would a company make a weaker version of their new card instead of just trying to sell the same thing with a different name.