Anybody going to bite the bullet?

[Doomtrooper]

Don't believe everything you read, hmmm 8X problems on new motherboards..go figure.
The same thing happened with 4X AGP, lockups etc..there will be some growing pains but Tbreak used a 8X board with no issues...


http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?id=136

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 "Northwood" 2.53GHz running at 133MHz FSB
Memory: 1 x 256MB Corsair XMS3000 DDR-333 Memory Module
Motherboard: ASUS P4S8X (SiS 648 chipset supporting AGP 8X)
Sound Card: Creative SB Live! 5.1
Optical/Hard Drives: Plextor DVD/CDRW Combo, Maxtor ATA-133 7200RPM 40GB IDE
Monitor: Relisys 17" Monitor
Operating System Windows XP Professional
Motherboard Drivers SiS 1.10.03 AGP, 2.01.02 IDE

Note: That review is for Creative's version of the R9700 may have a few differences like newer bios for instance. (don't know)

Hard OCP had problems...

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzQw

"The card also supports AGP8X although at the time of testing the card we were not able to get the card stable on either a SiS 648 or VIA P4X400 mainboard. All of the benchmarks shown here are using a AGP4X bus."

http://www.ocworkbench.com/

I would like to clarify some questions raised regarding the review of our Gigabyte GV-R9700Pro. Firstly, the mainboard we used is the Shuttle AS45GTR SiS648 Mainboard.

Initally, we wanted to choose 8x within BIOS but there wasn't such a setting. I went on to install it with the 6143 beta drivers and also SiS AGP 1.10. In Powerstrip, it reported 4x AGP only, so is Madonion 3Dmark2001SE.

In fact, I tested it on the MSI 648 mainboard and I get similar results. We contacted the relevant companies involved and I was told that the latest AGP 1.11 will enable 8X support on the SiS648 board. I downloaded it off from SiS website, installed, restarted the machine. Tada, 8x is available.

Due to the time constraint as we need to return the card, we are unable to test the difference between 4x and 8x agp mode. Below is a screen shot of the Powerstrip which shows the 8x mode available.

 

[Nagorak]

Why are you guys ordering Parhelias? Matrox should have just called the card Pariah instead... the only thing it seems to offer is 3 monitor support, and while that seems like a cool feature, it's too slow to be practical! Not to mention who has 3 monitors?

 

[KimB]

Doom, just because some people didn't have any problems reaching 8x AGP doesn't mean others won't have problems.

As a case in point, rarely have I ever seen a hardware incompatibility that was absolute. In fact, I can't remember one.

Your example of a system that worked at AGP8x doesn't discount those that didn't.

In particular, this is a very good reason for pretty much anybody who either already owns, or plans to soon purchase, an AGP8x motherboard to hold off a bit before purchasing a 9700. As a quick note, placing blame here is meaningless...what we are seeing is almost certainly a result of "growing pains" in ironing out AGP8x support. It just means that it would be very prudent to hold off for a little while if you were planning on buying the hardware necessary to run at AGP8x.

 

[Typedef Enum]

I'll tell you exactly why the Parhelia...

I said this the day the things debuted several months ago...Tangible features.

I know for a fact...and hell, I haven't even tried it yet, that Surround Gaming will end up being one of those deals that you just sit back and go, "This is what I'm f'ing talking about man...To hell with Shaders, and the like. This is something that I can enable right now, and it will literally change my whole gaming experience."

That was the main thing. I just started getting back into flight simulations, which are things I've been away from for a _long_ time (like, > 10 years). I used to be a Space nut as well.

Guess what? Imagine playing Flight Simulator 2002 on a Parhelia w/ 3 displays!

I'm realistic enough to know that this product can't touch a 9700 when it comes to raw performance...

However, I also have spent a ridiculous amount of time doing real work these last several months, and I now have a huge requirement to have perfect 2D.

With that said, I've got 2 20" TFT's right now, and I'm about to get a third....How well do you think the 2nd TFT looks right now, as I'm looking at the thing via the Analog output from this GF4? It's horrible...and I do mean HORRIBLE. There are these vertical lines all over the place, and it's fuzzy as all hell.

So, chalk up dual DVI to the list as well...along with awesome overall 2D.

Parhelia IQ

GF4 IQ

Any questions?

Last but not least...Just to reinforce something I said before. Look, the 9700 is an amazing board. In fact, if they had them here in stock, I would probably have one right now. Be that as it may, I finally came to the conclusion that I wanted something that would _really_ change the gaming experience.

Does running the game @ 16x12 w/ FSAA really do that? No. Sure, it makes the thing look nicer, but it's not going to blow me away. I know for a fact that Surround Gaming, though a niche concept, will definitely do that.

I mean, I'm just positive that if I had a 9700 in here right now, I would be pretty amazed @ the performance levels...and then, it would be like...OK, now what? Same games, run @ higher resolutions...

By the time something like Doom III comes along, I'm sure there will be even better options...but between now and then, I'll enjoy playing the games that I have w/ S.G.

Oh yeah...although not perfect, the FAA feature also looks awesome.

 

[Above]

Um....I'm going to upgrde to the 9700 from a TI4600......why? Better, sharper AA, usable AF......in fact, the V5 still has better AA than any nVidia product....I've missed the AA quality of my V5 for 2 years.....don't miss the speed, though. Of course, IF you can't or don't want to afford the 9700.....what the heck are you posting in this thread for?

Quite the nasty piece of work aren't you, insinuating I can't afford $300 and that I should go away? Are you then so rich and preoccupied with money you have the leisure all day to make such unpleasant posts?
Take a tip from Snap who can present a civil argument.

The idea of my post is that we know hardware speed roughly doubles every 18 months. Assuming $300 to spend every 3 years, I thought better results would be obtained by buying a $150 card every 18 months. The alternative, buying the latest $300 card, exposes the user to driver issues for the first months, and then in the last year to a particularly slow card, like the V5 must have seemed.
I did not come here for rudeness, I thought this was a more civil and intelligent forum than Anandtech.

 

[KimB]

Parhelia IQ

GF4 IQ

Any questions?

Yes!

Just wondering, what situation did these pics come from?

 

[Basic]

Typedef:
You don't need to justify your choice to me, if surround gaming and the extra notch in 2D quality is what you want and will use, then there's not much competition.

But the images you showed weren't fair.
I assume that you've taken a shot of the monitor with a digital camera.
The Parhelia shot had some moire which hints that the monitor pixel<=> camera pixel ratio is aproaching 1.
The GF4 shot is taken conciderabely closer to the monitor. Monitor pixels is ~50% larger (linearely) compared to the Parhelia shot. So there's no suprise that the moire realy kicks in here

I don't doubt that Parhelia has better analog output than GF4, but I doubt those shots are anywhere near fair.

 

[alexsok]

I don't doubt that Parhelia has better analog output than GF4, but I doubt those shots are anywhere near fair.

It's actually a very known fact that when it comes to 2D (including everything related:video, etc...), Matrox hands down has no competition!

They were always the best when it comes to everything related to 2D, even R300 can't compete with the 2D quality and the quality of the analog output P512 provides!

Professionals use only Matrox, that's also a well known fact.

If not for their awesome 2D, I doubt Matrox would have survived till now...

 

[PiNkY]

Professionals use only Matrox, that's also a well known fact.

troll

 

[Althornin]

I don't doubt that Parhelia has better analog output than GF4, but I doubt those shots are anywhere near fair.

It's actually a very known fact that when it comes to 2D (including everything related:video, etc...), Matrox hands down has no competition!

They were always the best when it comes to everything related to 2D, even R300 can't compete with the 2D quality and the quality of the analog output P512 provides!

Professionals use only Matrox, that's also a well known fact.

If not for their awesome 2D, I doubt Matrox would have survived till now...

All of your "facts" are based on hear-say and computer geek mythos.
Show me one good comparion of the Parhelia analog output to the R300 output and i'll believe you arent just stating "what everyone knows".
But, as you say yourself, that is exactly what you are saying. The problem is, "everyone" doesnt really know. They just heard that "everyone knows blah" - and so the myth is self perpetuating.

Now, i aint saying the R300 output is better - i am saying, i'd like some FACTS here - not a perpetuation fo the Matrox 2D mythos.

 

[alexsok]

All of your "facts" are based on hear-say and computer geek mythos.
Show me one good comparion of the Parhelia analog output to the R300 output and i'll believe you arent just stating "what everyone knows".
But, as you say yourself, that is exactly what you are saying. The problem is, "everyone" doesnt know shit.

Every review of P512 clearly implies on it!

For example, read Digit-Life's review.

 

[Althornin]

All of your "facts" are based on hear-say and computer geek mythos.
Show me one good comparion of the Parhelia analog output to the R300 output and i'll believe you arent just stating "what everyone knows".
But, as you say yourself, that is exactly what you are saying. The problem is, "everyone" doesnt know shit.

Every review of P512 clearly implies on it!

For example, read Digit-Life's review.

Laugh all you want - was the R300 out and in their hands when they did their parhelia review? (i honetly dont know, but i dont think it was).
And implication is worthless anyways. I want FACTS.
i just checked Digit-lifes review - they compare to the 8500 - looks like ytou are perpetuating myths, not facts.

 

[alexsok]

troll

O.k, so professionals mostly use Matrox cards.

No need of name calling.

 

[alexsok]

For example, read Digit-Life's review
Laugh all you want - was the R300 out and in their hands when they did their parhelia review? (i honetly dont know, but i dont think it was).
And implication is worthless anyways. I want FACTS.

You want FACTS? Go to every single board on the net and see how disappointed people are from the 2D on every single card except Matrox card, this has been going on for YEARS!

 

[Althornin]

You want FACTS? Go to every single board on the net and see how disappointed people are from the 2D on every single card except Matrox card, this has been going on for YEARS!

You just dont get it do you? Those arent facts!
And besides, have YOU been to every single board on the net?
I highly doubt it. have you read every post on every board and seen whether or not it disses 2D iq, and if so, whose company it disses?
Oh wait, no you havent.
So basically, you are perpetuating a myth in the guise of a fact.
Stating "everyone knows blah blah" is a well know logical fallacy.
Sorry, kid. your "arguments" dont cut the mustard.

Notice: I am not saying "matrox 2D sucsk" or "R300 2D rocks" but rather, just stating that there has yet to be a comparison between the two in 2D (your aforementioned review compares the parhelia to the 8500, not the 9700) and that your ASSUMPTION (thats right, you conclude based on NO data) is worthless.

 

[alexsok]

Althornin: Whatever u say...
Matrox always are the best in 2D and always were, starting from Matrox Mystique and finishing with P512 (read all the previous reviews of Matrox cards).

Bottom line is, R300 dominates the market at 3D right now, but P512 at 2D. Just my 2 cents.

Note: I base my conclusions, not assumptions on the fact that I own a Matrox card and that ancient card I own gives me better 2D than my gf4ti4600.

 

[Tahir2]

Matrox best
R300 and GF4 v good 2D.

Want some facts.. then go to www.tech-report.com

There are some readings there, not just subjective reviews but hard numbers on frequency response etc etc... want a direct link? Aint got one

You want the facts - go look yourself.

alexsok
"Every single board..." blanket statements like that are so easy to disprove. Me for example... v impressed with 2D on Radeon 8500LE and equally as impressed with 2D on Gainward GF4 Ti4200.

 

[alexsok]

alexsok
"Every single board..." blanket statements like that are so easy to disprove. Me for example... v impressed with 2D on Radeon 8500LE and equally as impressed with 2D on Gainward GF4 Ti4200.

You're right, I was just trying to prove my point, so I had to start somewhere...

I do agree with u though, Matrox are indeed the best, while R8500, gf4ti & r300 offer very good 2D.

 

[Rodéric]

Is there any tests I can use to see how well my card handles 2D ?

I'm using a RadeOn 8500 64MB on my DVI flat screen and the image is really nice.

 

[Nagorak]

You don't need to justify anything... but I'm telling you surround gaming is going to be too slow. It's like FSAA on the original Geforce, essentially useless. I won't argue that it's a cool feature, and the images of it looked cool. But that doesn't change the fact that the Parhelia is going to have trouble running at 1024*768, let alone 3072*768. If you plan on playing any newer games that actually support surround gaming, I just think you're going to be majorly disappointed.