Slashdot Mirror
Matrox Parhelia 512 Preview
SpinnerBait writes "Finally, you don't have to sift through all the unreleased and unauthorized
bogus information around the net about Matrox's upcoming 3D Graphics chip,
called the Parhelia 512. Matrox has taken the wraps off their next
generation GPU and
this Preview over at HotHardware goes through its feature set with a fine
toothed comb.
They also give you a very rare glimpse inside Matrox's Montreal Headquarters,
as well as a look at some very impressive technology demos, rendered on their
new chip. Looks like impressive stuff for sure."
This Graphic card as almost more processing power then my two PC's combined! The only thing I wish is that Matrox could come back a bit in this market. They had made some good card in the past. More choices can only be good. And, do they have a good record of supporting Linux in the past? Funny, they are located in my town and I know less about them then all those US based company :)
I'd rather be sailing...
Good job my pc Blew up the other day, I now have a great excuse to upgrade..
Or more seriously, I wanted to upgrade before (from my G400) but GForce / ATI have poor 2D performance and some bad filters on there cards which require a bit of hacking to sortish out, and Matrox didn't have a viable home/gamer solution, sure there 10bit medical cards look nice, but not quite for me.
The only problems i have had in the past with matrox cards are,
Poor OpenGL support, though the drivers seemed to have been fixed as of Feb this year.
There Linux support is a little, well patchy. they do provide drivers, but there only half open and a bit of a pain to get working corretly, some of the problems may have been down to old X4 versions though.
Well I'll Buy one in the next couple of months and try to post a more informed comment!!
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Ok.. so it has AGP 8x. Nifty! What motherboard do I buy that has AGP 8x? I just bought an Abit KR7A-RAID with Via KT266 chipset, thinking this is a pretty decent board, but I doubt it supports AGP 8x.
Now we move on to monitors. Could someone recommend a monitor that I can use to accurately resolve 1 billion colors? I tend to run my 2 Viewsonic PT775's at 1600 x 1200 so I've grown accustomed to that much "real estate".
This sounds like an awesome card, but I really don't know where to go or what to get to reap all the benefits of it.
Lastly, precisely when and where can a fellow technogeek acquire one? Since the HotHardware site seems to be experiencing some serious "Slashdot Effect" I was unable to finish reading the entire article. MRP $$ and a release date would be very useful.
Vortran out
Knowledge is like ignorance.. too much can be just as bad as not enough.
Worried execs decided to announce the launch of the GeForce 5 later this year.
I kid you not!!!
I'm currently running an AGP Matrox G450 with 32mb of RAM with two CRTs. I like the card because it allows me to go up to 3200 x 1200 resolution with 32bit color.
...
I really like the prospect of having three monitors to eliviate the issue of having a giant gap between displays due to the thick boarder of any display. However
This new card claims it only does 3840 x 1024 resolution on three cards. It still has the max color depth, but the resolution has to drop. By going to this big fancy new card I'd only gain 100,000 pixels, which in reality is next to nothing.
Is it a driver limitation, or does it take more than a 512bit dual 400mhz 256mb video card to push 4800 x 1200 for simple 2D functions?
~LoudMusic
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
I got screwed by the same issue - The Matrox story was that Microsoft broke VfW in 2000, and there wasn't a direct show replacement for the chipset. After a year of bluescreening betas, they gave up. (I gave up because I added a second cpu, which would be a complete no-go, even if they got it working.)
Note that the capture cards weren't advertised as 2000 compatible, and the driver was sort of a 'best effort' by Matrox (an effort which failed). The cards worked fine in 98, which is what it said on the box.
And then CPUs/ATA disks got fast enough that you could do software capture with better results without futzing with some hacky low-end MJPEG board like the Rainbow Runner (which itself works OK in software mode).
The lesson I learned wasn't necessary that Matrox SuX0rs D00d, but instead that (1) video capture on Windows sux0rs in general because the lack of standardized APIs, and (2) If you are serious about vidcap, it's better to spec out a semi-pro system (like the Matrox RT card), get it working, and never upgrade your OS/hardware just because it would be cool to do so. If you aren't serious, get a cheeze software capture card (WinTV or ATI or something) and prepare for driver hell.
The G200 delivered beautifully on everything it promised. It allowed me to run 4 monitors. It wasn't a gamers chip, it was intended to help show more info than previously possible. Using the PCI version in Win2K with a special patch, I saw one PC that had 16 monitors attached. Amazing.
Do you want to remove linux?
Matrox doesn't actually have a good history of getting cards out in a decent time frame. Figure that by the time this card is actually available (anyone remember the g400? how many months did it take to get one after it supposedly became available?) it will be irrelevant.
The next problem is that Matrox ruined their reputation in my eyes with the G200 by lieing about OpenGL. Lieing about how they were going to have it in November, then December, and so on... they kept this up until they announced the G400 and then suddenly the g200 was a no-go.
Ever since the G400 series it seems Matrox has been coming up with feature laden cards... trouble was no one asked for the features they chose to offer. Now they added even more features and a buttload of performance to boot. Yet as before, GF5 will be announced about the time this card is supposed to ship, and most likely be in stores at the same time.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
It is unacceptable for broadcast because the Techs at the broadcast site have determined it is so, regardless of technical merit...
10 bit YCrCb IS different, and that was what I was stating!
With 10 bit per channel RGB, we can cheat- render RGB, convert it by rerendering it (still on the video card), and then blending it with the YUV video without losing any precision, all in the framebuffer of the graphics accelerator...
I.e. We don't want to use a keyer and output key-fill because if we did that (since our application (the yellow line for football and others)) we'd have to buy video delays in order to maintain field-accurate rendering...
We do understand the sampling scheme- Its just unfortunate.
If the industry went component instead of composite, or went for RGB over SDI instead of 601, (which unfortunately requires a "dual link"), it would make me a much happier person...