1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Matrox Parhelia LX P650 vs Mainstream ATI or NVidia

Discussion in 'Matrox' started by Frederic W. Erk, Jan 23, 2004.

  1. 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.
     
    Frederic W. Erk, Jan 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Frederic W. Erk

    Eric Gisin Guest

    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" <> wrote in message
    news:buqtls$gh3$...
    > 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).
     
    Eric Gisin, Jan 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Frederic W. Erk

    Steve Guest

    We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D, though
    a Review at
    http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html 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" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:buqtls$gh3$...
    > > 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).

    >
     
    Steve, Jan 27, 2004
    #3
  4. 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.
     
    Niclaas Grehling, Jan 27, 2004
    #4
  5. Frederic W. Erk

    J. Clarke Guest

    Steve wrote:

    > We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D,
    > though a Review at
    > http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html 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" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> 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" <> wrote in message
    >> news:buqtls$gh3$...
    >> > 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)
     
    J. Clarke, Jan 28, 2004
    #5
  6. Frederic W. Erk

    Eric Gisin Guest

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

    "Steve" <> wrote in message
    news:HUBRb.1653$...
    > We read about the Parhelia being wonderful at 2D, and 'so so' at 3D, though
    > a Review at
    > http://www20.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/vga-charts-04.html 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.
     
    Eric Gisin, Jan 28, 2004
    #6
  7. Frederic W. Erk

    Guest


    >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
     
    , Jan 29, 2004
    #7
  8. G400 Max compatibility with motherboards and Windows XP?

    > 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.
     
    Frederic W. Erk, Jan 31, 2004
    #8
  9. Frederic W. Erk

    J. Clarke Guest

    Re: G400 Max compatibility with motherboards and Windows XP?

    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)
     
    J. Clarke, Jan 31, 2004
    #9
  10. Frederic W. Erk

    ttfg Guest

    Re: G400 Max compatibility with motherboards and Windows XP?

    On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 12:04:38 +0100, "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.
    >
    >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.
     
    ttfg, Jan 31, 2004
    #10
  11. Re: G400 Max compatibility with motherboards and Windows XP?

    "J. Clarke" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news:...

    > 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.
     
    Frederic W. Erk, Feb 2, 2004
    #11
  12. G400 3.3v AGP?

    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.
     
    Frederic W. Erk, Feb 2, 2004
    #12
  13. Frederic W. Erk

    Larc Guest

    Re: G400 3.3v AGP?

    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 - §§§
     
    Larc, Feb 2, 2004
    #13
  14. Frederic W. Erk

    Guest

    Re: G400 3.3v AGP?

    "Frederic W. Erk" <> 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
     
    , Feb 2, 2004
    #14
  15. Frederic W. Erk

    Prof.Magneto Guest

    Re: G400 3.3v AGP?

    Larc wrote:
    > Technically, I understand that all G400s can operate at 1.5V, but older cards
    > don't properly signal the motherboard that they can.


    This problem was only on G400Max cards... all other G400s are 1,5V
    signaling capable.

    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


    If you want an explanation, see on the end of this thread on the MURC site:

    http://forums.matroxusers.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30954

    Prof.Magneto
     
    Prof.Magneto, Feb 3, 2004
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ellipse1000

    Matrox P650 vs Nvidia Ti4200

    ellipse1000, Sep 10, 2003, in forum: Matrox
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    510
  2. nova4
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    411
    nova4
    Sep 28, 2003
  3. cheezemurda
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    357
    R. S.
    Oct 5, 2003
  4. cheezemurda
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    464
    Bratboy
    Oct 6, 2003
  5. cheezemurda
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    326
    cheezemurda
    Oct 5, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page