Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia

We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D, though
a Review at
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html" target="_blank">http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html</a> makes it
look useless amongst the rest. We never get a review comparing the 2D colour
accuracies and functionality of the 3D gamers cards and the serious 2D cards
like Matrox. Now I do graphics and want decent 2D graphics, but also I don't
see why I should be denied decent 3D, especially if I am doing some of the
graphics for the 3D arena ! Perhaps the days of the 3D card with pass
through facility should return, Matrox Millenium and a Voodoo 2 I recall,
best of both worlds and seemed sensible. Keep hearing that 3D cards are
developed with little thought to 2D but would a serious graphics person spot
the difference, what might those differences be ?
Lets have some comments reviewers please on how they compare for 2D as well,
or are they all top notch ?
What visibly does the Matrox Parhelia give on a single monitor setup that
makes it better at 2D than say a GeForce5959ultra ?
Steve

"Eric Gisin" <ericgisin.RemoveThis@graffiti.net> wrote in message
news:burduk02c0m@enews1.newsguy.com...
 > I don't see how a video card can have better colour calibration, there is
no
 > difference between various 8-bit DACs. They can differ in very hi-res
modes
 > you would use on a 21" monitor, that's about it.
 >
 > "Frederic W. Erk" <ada952954.RemoveThis@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
 > news:buqtls$gh3$1@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
  > > I am interested with Matrox hardware, especially the Parhelia LX series.
I
  > > am looking for multi-display, crisp quality, colour calibration and good
  > > platform for multimedia creation. I have experience with ATI AIW, which
are
  > > disappointing and not worth purchasing. ATI and NVidia mainstream
hardware
  > > are optimised for 3D games, not video or serious photography.
  > >
  > > I would be interested to hear from people with experience using Parhelia
LX
  > > series, and if possible, with former Matrox G550 (as a comparison).
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

Steve wrote:

 > We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D,
 > though a Review at
 > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html" target="_blank">http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html</a> makes it
 > look useless amongst the rest. We never get a review comparing the 2D
 > colour accuracies

Accurate color comes from accurate calibration, which has to be done in the
field with the board hooked up to the monitor with which it will be used.

 > and functionality

Define "functionality".

 > of the 3D gamers cards and the serious
 > 2D cards like Matrox. Now I do graphics and want decent 2D graphics, but
 > also I don't see why I should be denied decent 3D, especially if I am
 > doing some of the
 > graphics for the 3D arena ! Perhaps the days of the 3D card with pass
 > through facility should return, Matrox Millenium and a Voodoo 2 I recall,
 > best of both worlds and seemed sensible. Keep hearing that 3D cards are
 > developed with little thought to 2D but would a serious graphics person
 > spot the difference, what might those differences be ?
 > Lets have some comments reviewers please on how they compare for 2D as
 > well, or are they all top notch ?
 > What visibly does the Matrox Parhelia give on a single monitor setup that
 > makes it better at 2D than say a GeForce5959ultra ?
 > Steve
 >
 > "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin.RemoveThis@graffiti.net> wrote in message
 > news:burduk02c0m@enews1.newsguy.com...
  >> I don't see how a video card can have better colour calibration, there is
 > no
  >> difference between various 8-bit DACs. They can differ in very hi-res
 > modes
  >> you would use on a 21" monitor, that's about it.
  >>
  >> "Frederic W. Erk" <ada952954.RemoveThis@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
  >> news:buqtls$gh3$1@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
   >> > I am interested with Matrox hardware, especially the Parhelia LX
   >> > series.
 > I
   >> > am looking for multi-display, crisp quality, colour calibration and
   >> > good platform for multimedia creation. I have experience with ATI AIW,
   >> > which
 > are
   >> > disappointing and not worth purchasing. ATI and NVidia mainstream
 > hardware
   >> > are optimised for 3D games, not video or serious photography.
   >> >
   >> > I would be interested to hear from people with experience using
   >> > Parhelia
 > LX
   >> > series, and if possible, with former Matrox G550 (as a comparison).
  >>

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

Frederic W. Erk wrote:
 > I am interested with Matrox hardware, especially the Parhelia LX series. I
 > am looking for multi-display, crisp quality, colour calibration and good
 > platform for multimedia creation. I have experience with ATI AIW, which are
 > disappointing and not worth purchasing. ATI and NVidia mainstream hardware
 > are optimised for 3D games, not video or serious photography.
 >
 > I would be interested to hear from people with experience using Parhelia LX
 > series, and if possible, with former Matrox G550 (as a comparison).
 >
 > - FWE.
 >
 >

In short terms, I went back to my G550 from ATI. Gaming was better with
the ATI, ...

Niclaas.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

I fail to see what this review has to do with colour calibration. This is a
typical gaming test, nothing more.

"Steve" <aerographics DeleteThis @NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HUBRb.1653$s72.15843571@news-text.cableinet.net...
 > We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D, though
 > a Review at
 > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html" target="_blank">http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html</a> makes it
 > look useless amongst the rest. We never get a review comparing the 2D colour
 > accuracies and functionality of the 3D gamers cards and the serious 2D cards
 > like Matrox.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

 >What visibly does the Matrox Parhelia give on a single monitor setup that
 >makes it better at 2D than say a GeForce5959ultra ?
 >Steve

IMHO I have amongst other things a G400MAX and P650 and a Gforce Ultra 5200

I play the odd game but this is very much a sideline and usually on a
Nvidia equipped laptop so I will put the gaming to one side.

The 5200 gave a very curious cast to all the colours on the screen. Nothing
was remotely accurate and even trying to do some colour calibration
produced only limited results. I have now put this in my 3 yr old sons PC
as he does not care

I then swapped the G400MAX for the P650 and tried this for about a week
(should say that all this is on 22" iiyama CRT screens) At the end of this
I noticed no real world difference at all and both had very good colours.

The only reason I switched back to the G400 was a shortcut that was
available in the G series drivers that was not in the P series drivers.

Just my 2p worth.

Andy<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

 > I then swapped the G400MAX for the P650 and tried this for about a week
 > (should say that all this is on 22" iiyama CRT screens) At the end of this
 > I noticed no real world difference at all and both had very good colours.


Very interesting stuff. According to DisplayMate's website, the G400 Max is
the best choice - including the GeForce 4 Ti series and Matrox Parhelia
ones - for optimal display quality on CRT monitor.

I am very interested to buy a G400 Max, but some users have complained about
compatibility issues with new motherboards. Something to do with voltage of
the AGP port.

I would like to use the G400 Max on an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe with Windows XP.
Has anyone had problems with the G400 Max on this kind of hardware?

Frederic.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

Frederic W. Erk wrote:

  >> I then swapped the G400MAX for the P650 and tried this for about a week
  >> (should say that all this is on 22" iiyama CRT screens) At the end of
  >> this I noticed no real world difference at all and both had very good
  >> colours.
 >
 >
 > Very interesting stuff. According to DisplayMate's website, the G400 Max
 > is the best choice - including the GeForce 4 Ti series and Matrox Parhelia
 > ones - for optimal display quality on CRT monitor.

Read the fine print--they say that to be included a product must get a good
review by a magazine that uses their software to test. So that leads to
the the question of how many magazines use their software and what they
have tested.

List doesn't seem to be very current either.

 > I am very interested to buy a G400 Max, but some users have complained
 > about compatibility issues with new motherboards. Something to do with
 > voltage of the AGP port.
 >
 > I would like to use the G400 Max on an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe with Windows XP.
 > Has anyone had problems with the G400 Max on this kind of hardware?
 >
 > Frederic.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 12:04:38 +0100, "Frederic W. Erk" <ada952954 RemoveThis @wanadoo.fr>
wrote:

  >> I then swapped the G400MAX for the P650 and tried this for about a week
  >> (should say that all this is on 22" iiyama CRT screens) At the end of this
  >> I noticed no real world difference at all and both had very good colours.
 >
 >
 >Very interesting stuff. According to DisplayMate's website, the G400 Max is
 >the best choice - including the GeForce 4 Ti series and Matrox Parhelia
 >ones - for optimal display quality on CRT monitor.
 >
 >I am very interested to buy a G400 Max, but some users have complained about
 >compatibility issues with new motherboards. Something to do with voltage of
 >the AGP port.
 >
 >I would like to use the G400 Max on an ASUS A7N8X Deluxe with Windows XP.
 >Has anyone had problems with the G400 Max on this kind of hardware?
 >
 >Frederic.
 >
FWIW, I used a G400 (not max) on my Asus P2B and XP, with no problems.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

"J. Clarke" <jclarke DeleteThis @nospam.invalid> a écrit dans le message de
news:bvg8sr01l5n@enews3.newsguy.com...

 > Read the fine print--they say that to be included a product must get a
good
 > review by a magazine that uses their software to test. So that leads to
 > the the question of how many magazines use their software and what they
 > have tested.
 >
 > List doesn't seem to be very current either.

Yes, that is correct. Good point. Researching on Matrox, I have found some
information about their problems with the Parhelia series. It is said that
the card is overpriced. Its released had been postponed due to financial
issues. Food for thought.

Frederic.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

I could not find information about the AGP voltage required to use a G400
Max. I suspect it is 3.3v. My Asus A7N8X requires graphic cards with 1.5v
AGP. That would be really too bad.

I would appreciate if someone could confirm this. Thank you!

- Frederic.
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 11:18:39 +0100, Frederic W. Erk pondered exceedingly, then
took quill in hand and carefully composed...

| I could not find information about the AGP voltage required to use a G400
| Max. I suspect it is 3.3v. My Asus A7N8X requires graphic cards with 1.5v
| AGP. That would be really too bad.
|
| I would appreciate if someone could confirm this. Thank you!

G400s that are AGP 4x are 1.5V. If there's a 4A in the part number, it's
compatible with a motherboard requiring a 1.5V card.

Technically, I understand that all G400s can operate at 1.5V, but older cards
don't properly signal the motherboard that they can. There is a fix that can
reportedly correct that problem, but I've never been able to get a clear and
concise step-by-step explanation on how it's done. It involves grounding
connector pin #2, but precisely how and "to what?" remain mysteries.

Larc



§§§ - Please change planet to earth to reply by e-mail - §§§
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia 

"Frederic W. Erk" <ada952954.DeleteThis@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

 >I could not find information about the AGP voltage required to use a G400
 >Max. I suspect it is 3.3v. My Asus A7N8X requires graphic cards with 1.5v
 >AGP. That would be really too bad.
 >
 >I would appreciate if someone could confirm this. Thank you!
 >
 >- Frederic.
 >

I am using my G400 MAX on a A7N8X boards. No problems at all.

I have also used a plain G400 PCI card without any problems.

Not with Win XP I add but it works with Linux and Windows 2000.

Hope this helps

Andy<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia