Figuring out the graphic card universe...need for a database

[ddrueding]

How come ATI top end cards are about 25% slower in pixel fill rate, top end, yet get great reviews against the ATI topend cards?

128 mb of memory, and more, need only apply.

s

I believe it's when you enable AA and AF that the ATI cards really shine...that would be CPU, not fill rate...

 

[Santilli]

Well, then that's cool, since cpu horsepower I have...
Dual 2.8 Xeons...

s

 

[ddrueding]

Sorry, my bad....GPU, not CPU. Hence the fact that it is the video card outperforming the other video card. But still not directly related to fill rate.

 

[Santilli]

My bad. It should have been Ati vs. Nvidia.
From the list, the ATI cards had fill rates at 3 million, Nvidia 4 million, yet the ATI cards are now THE card.

Weird.

s

 

[ddrueding]

My bad. It should have been Ati vs. Nvidia.
From the list, the ATI cards had fill rates at 3 million, Nvidia 4 million, yet the ATI cards are now THE card.

Weird.

s

to re-iterate what I said before (only correctly this time)

Fill-rate is not the man, when you are doing high-end AF and AA, the GPU (proc on video card) is more important. This is where the ATI card shines. If you turn off all the eye-candy, an nVidia card will be faster.

(disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about, I didn't proof read, and I'm drunk) - this should be my new sig...

 

[blakerwry]

yes, i can see you're drunk on kitty litt... er kitty liquor.

 

[Santilli]

OK:
But, what's this stuff about the Perihelia being faster then any of them?

I thought Matrox put out cards that were 3-4 years behind the top cards, in playing quake 3, etc.?

While the dual Matrox G550 is a great 2d card, for this rig, I want a world class video card, for doing HD, and playing Q3, etc. While I don't do it often, I want dual monitors, plus great game speed, and 2 d graphics.

Should I go Matrox, or AtI?

s

 

[Platform]

OK:
But, what's this stuff about the Perihelia being faster then any of them?

I thought Matrox put out cards that were 3-4 years behind the top cards, in playing quake 3, etc.?

While the dual Matrox G550 is a great 2d card, for this rig, I want a world class video card, for doing HD, and playing Q3, etc. While I don't do it often, I want dual monitors, plus great game speed, and 2 d graphics.

Should I go Matrox, or AtI?

OK:

I thought we were originally talking about (in another thread) a graphics card that did slam-dunk 2-D, was stable, and *could* play games at least reasonably fast. The Parhelia and P-series can do that.

Now if you are talking about WORLD CLASS game playing, high definition video (HD?), 2-D performance (colour accuracy, pixel clarity, etc), then that card really does not exist -- at least at this point in time. You are simply going to have to pick the lesser of the 2 or 3 evils (deficiencies) from existing graphics card models for what you want out of computing.

As for me, I have no freaking desire to play games -- even if I had the "spare time" to do so, nor do I particularly care about watching television or DVD movies on a computer monitor. So, I can't tell you about the nuances about these two experiences. If you spend a majority of your time doing "normal" 2-D work on a computer (word processing, WWW, writing source code) *and* you perform digital photography which is important to you, then the choice is clearly (no pun intended) a P-650/750 or one of those expensive Parhelia models. If you throw in gaming crapola, then, like I said, it's definitely going to be a compromise of some sort, which will point you to an ATI or nVidia product.

If you want the low-down on how the Parhelia matches up with today's ATI and nVidia products (not the one's that existed when the Parhelia first came out), then you will need to go ask around at some website or newsgroup where there are knowledgeable people on the subject. However, I suspect that it will be very hard to find such people though as most of the brains of hardcore 24x7 gamers may be suffering from advanced stages of sugar rot. Yo! I go off the deep end with sarcasm! OK, but do you get my point? You will need to interface with some quasi-flakos for opinions. The last I heard was that the *Parhelia* 128 was generally the overall equivalent of the fastest Geforce 2 at Quake (or was that Doom?) and the GeForce 3 was a bit faster at Quake.

 

[Santilli]

bump

 

[Pradeep]

An interesting side bar to such a list would be the comparative performance of current laptop graphics chips. I don't think it'd necessarily have to be in the main database since laptop graphics aren't generally replaceable....

Funny you should mention that. I was looking at some new-model laptops (probably Dells, although I don't remember and I'm too lazy to look) today and happened to notice upgradeable GPUs on some of the newer models.

I think it's a bad trend, since it's another way that fleets can end up non-uniform, and a faster GPU is sure to suck batteries faster as well.

Undoubtedly the GPUs would need to be pin compatible. I seriously doubt ATI is forward thinking enough to consider pin compatibility among their GPUs. That pretty much leaves NV and we know that their unified drivers won't have a problem between GPUs. That is to say, among a fleet of laptops whos GPUs may change at any time, it would not be any more difficult keeping track of drivers than for a fleet which did not change.

Faster GPUs draining batteries quickly is not a function of the upgradable socket. Any fast GPU in an upgradable socket or not with drain batteries faster. However, if you realized that when you purchaced your laptop that you over speced it and the battery life is abysmal; downgrading the GPU would be a way to recover battery life.

Actually it's not the GPU that's upgradeable, but the whole video mini-board. You just pull out the old, and in with the new. All dependent on BIOS support etc. And of course in the move from insipron 8200 to 8500/8600, they decided to put an extra fan on the video card, making upgrades not so possible anymore.

 

[Santilli]

Why don't the Matrox Parahelia or the 750 go down in price?

s

 

[Mercutio]

Probably because there's a stable demand for those cards at their current price point. You have to figure that, by now, Matrox has recouped its R&D and Marketing costs on the Parhelia, and that leads me to conclude that they're leaving it at that high price because that's what their customers are willing to pay.

 

[Platform]

Why don't the Matrox Parahelia or the 750 go down in price?

The Parhelia (spelled P A R HELIA) sells well these days as a CAD graphics card. Various CAD programs can take explicit advantage of Parhelia features. There was only 2 or 3 games that ever that could take explicit advantage of certain Parhelia features -- most notably triple-head display (a.k.a -- surround gaming). These days, it's certain CAD users who are using up to 3 separate screens.

As for the P-750: P-650 is generally a better buy than the P-750 (and the P-650 has no fan). There will probably be a new Parhelia once 90 nm process is in wider use by foundries. The current Parhela is based on the rather-old-nowadays 180 nm manufacturing process. It should have been 130 nm.

By the way, Matrox is making money hand over fist these days in the semi-pro motion video arena.

 

[CougTek]

The current Parhela is based on the rather-old-nowadays 180 nm manufacturing process.

 

[Santilli]

Splash:
If they are doing pro-editing, will their new cards be targeted at that market, and how would that differ from the current cards?

I just got done reading a real good review of the card,

http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/matrox_parhelia/index.shtml

The guy did a great job of really going through the card, and I would be one of those people that use 2400x 600 gaming resolutions. I could easily add the monitor I have on the other desk to this setup, make them all the same height, and have a LOT of fun, not to mention being very productive.

s

 

[Santilli]

The only problem with the database stuff is it's missing the 650 and 750, so comparing them to the PWHATEVER :wink: is king of hard.

PARHELIA, PARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPAR
HELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELI
APARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPA
RHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHEL
IAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPA
RHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHEL
IAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPA
RHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHEL
IAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPA
RHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHEL
IAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIAPARHELIA


:mrgrn:

gs


[edit - place well-needed carriage returns in this very long string] - handruin

 

[Handruin]

Scrolltastic

 

[Santilli]

Thank you.

s

 

[.Nut]

If they are doing pro-editing, will their new cards be targeted at that market, and how would that differ from the current cards?

I just got done reading a real good review of the card,

http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/matrox_parhelia/index.shtml

We're talking apples and oranges here. When I mentioned motion video earlier, I was talking about the RT.X10/100 series (and DigiSuite), not the Parhelia or P-650 -- though you can use either a Parhelia or P-650 or even an ATI or nVidia card as your display card with the RT.X10 or RT.X100.


http://www.matrox.com/video/products/rtx100xtremepro/home.cfm

http://www.matrox.com/mga/workstation/video/hw_companion/home_video.cfm

 

[Splash]

If they are doing pro-editing, will their new cards be targeted at that market, and how would that differ from the current cards?

Well, here's a *strange* variant on the Parhelia lineup. This is apparently the first-ever true PCI-X graphics card (notice that I did not say PCI Express, but PCI-X). It is a Parhelia with basic video input capability:

http://www.matrox.com/mga/workstation/video/news/press_rel/2004/parhelia_pci.cfm

 

[Santilli]

Well, I just looked at two empty PCI-x slots when installing my last cheetah.

I guess I could move my G550 to Travel Whore's machine, and put the PCI-X card in place.

I'm sold on the Matrox multi screen gaming, and abilities.

I'm must wondering if 700 bucks is a bit much for a card, that in about 4 months is SOL?

s

 

[.Nut]

Well, I just looked at two empty PCI-x slots when installing my last cheetah....

1.) I mentioned this (upcoming) PCI-X Parhelia only to highlight a curiosity-of-a-graphics-card.

2.) It won't actually cost THAT much (street price versus suggested retail price).

3.) This is a card ONLY for professional use, i.e. -- for a specific need. You would be nutz to use it for home use, especially since an AGP version would cost less and give you better performance. This PCI-X version would esentially be for those installing *multiple* Parhelia cards (many a triple heads).

4.) As far as a Matrox product goes, currently, the P-650 will give you the most bang-for-the-buck. Not a Parhelia 128 or 256. (And, the P-650 doesn't need a cooling fan -- the P-750 does.)

 

[Buck]

And what a beautiful combination the P-650 is: Excellent 2-D performance, and very, very quiet.

 

[CityK]

Given that the Hungarian site hasn't updated its table since January, I thought it worth mentioning that there are similar efforts elsewhere:

- Adrian Rojak has a table or two, but its kind of a lame layout
- some other site had a better table, but wouldn't you know it, I can't for the life of me remember which abode it is right now
- The Tech Report also has one

 

[Santilli]

Anybody used the cable and software they are selling for the P-650 into a thread head machine?

By the way I went with your suggestions, and now the G-550 is in the other machine, where it's incredible, and the G-650 is working great in my machine.

s

 

[Bookmage]

Toms hardware has several charts and comparisons on vga GPUs.
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/index.html
The last page has links to the first 3 charts.

Anandtech also did a comparison of modern GPUs.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2195
Lots of useless er... interesting information for those who care.

For the record, I have a Gainward Geforce 2 Titanium 400 series card.
Running dual monitors with my Voodoo 5 5500 PCI.

And this is a dumbed down version with the basics
http://www.pcvsconsole.com/features/video/

 

[CityK]

Thanks for the additions Bookmage. To think, nearly a year ago, there was nary a resource.

 

[Bookmage]

heh, I was just scroling down, and realised it wasn't november, and the year was 2004, not 2003....

Am I the only one who wrote 2003 on a recent assignment?

My, my, how time flies.
Soon, I will be populating my storage server with 500GB drives and not be limited to a 2TB logical partition.

 

[Santilli]

Bump.

 

[Santilli]

Anyone have infor on the new X800 cards? Appears they double the 9800 Pro specs...

s

 

[Santilli]

Wow. That chart is really helpful. I was looking at 9500 ATI cards last night, and they are half the price of the 9800 cards, but give 1/3 the preformance.

GREAT CHART. Thank you

:mrgrn:

s

 

[Buck]

Gigabyte makes a nice X800 card, it doesn't use a fan for cooling -- that'll make for fast and quiet video rendering.

 

[ddrueding]

I'm currently using Gigabyte's fanless 6800. It works quite well, but I did have to install an additional Nexus 120mm fan @ 5V to keep it under control in my extremely quiet/low airflow case during heavy gaming.

 

[Handruin]

The RX80L256V SilentPipe might be the gigabyte card Buck is refering to. It looks good to me.

If you’re planning on building a silent, or near-silent PC, Gigabyte’s GV-RX80L256V SilentPipe is clearly the best RADEON X800 XL card on the market for you. Thanks to Gigabyte’s unique heat pipe cooling, they’re the only manufacturer that can boast 100% silent operation. If you plan on overclocking, you might want to place an additional case fan near the card to ensure longevity, but for regular use board temperatures remained in check. Gigabyte’s engineering team has certainly been on a roll lately, delivering cards to the market that are certainly innovative, the GV-RX80L256V SilentPipe is another fine example of this. Kudos to them.

 

[Santilli]

At about 130, it would be perfect...
s

 

[Buck]

The RX80L256V SilentPipe might be the gigabyte card Buck is refering to. It looks good to me.

There is also the RX80L256D, which is the plain X800, not the X800 XL.

 

[Buck]

The RX80L256V SilentPipe might be the gigabyte card Buck is refering to. It looks good to me.

There is also the RX80L256D, which is the plain X800, not the X800 XL.

Let me correct my typing:

GV-RX80L256V - X800 XL
GV-RX80256D - X800

Both are silent; the X800 is below $300.00 and the X800XL is above $300.00. There is also the:

GV-RX70128D

...which is based on the X700 and costs less, below $200.00.

 

[time]

Wouldn't the GV-NX66T128VP (fanless "turbo force" 6600GT) be a better buy than an X700?

 

[Buck]

Wouldn't the GV-NX66T128VP (fanless "turbo force" 6600GT) be a better buy than an X700?

The prices seem to be similar, and I thought their performance was also similar. But I could be wrong.

 

[time]

No, the 6600GT is significantly faster than an X700 Pro, let alone the slower X700. This is on paper as well as in practise.

A straight X700 would have more of chance with a straight 6600, but the latter of course is far cheaper.

A quick google threw up two comparisons between the 6600GT and the X700 Pro:

http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=1746&p=1

http://www.thechannelinsider.com/article2/0,1759,1743459,00.asp

I suspect ATI's time in the sun is coming to an end. GeForce 6 is a vastly improved proposition over GeForce 5 in every aspect.