If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Parhelia 128/256 Mgs. Memory Performance Difference?
I'm considering purchasing the Parhelia, probably on ebay, and had a
couple of questions that I hoped could be answered he What kind of performance difference are we looking at when comparing the 128 mg board with the 256 mg board? Currently I'm running a P3 with 1.5 gigs of ram on a motherboard- Asus CUV4X- with AGP 4X- would it be a waste to use the Parhelia with this board? Thank you. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
nubis wrote:
I'm considering purchasing the Parhelia, probably on ebay, and had a couple of questions that I hoped could be answered he What kind of performance difference are we looking at when comparing the 128 mg board with the 256 mg board? Currently I'm running a P3 with 1.5 gigs of ram on a motherboard- Asus CUV4X- with AGP 4X- would it be a waste to use the Parhelia with this board? Thank you. No, it would be a good match for your CPU/MB. The problem is that the Parhelia is so expensive that you can get a new motherboard, CPU *and* graphics card that significantly outperforms the Parhelia for the same price or less. The only reasons to get a Parhelia is if you either need triple-head 3D, or use two displays with occasional playing old 3D games. As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Regards, -- *Art |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:45:28 -0400, "Arthur Hagen"
wrote: nubis wrote: I'm considering purchasing the Parhelia, probably on ebay, and had a couple of questions that I hoped could be answered he What kind of performance difference are we looking at when comparing the 128 mg board with the 256 mg board? Currently I'm running a P3 with 1.5 gigs of ram on a motherboard- Asus CUV4X- with AGP 4X- would it be a waste to use the Parhelia with this board? Thank you. No, it would be a good match for your CPU/MB. The problem is that the Parhelia is so expensive that you can get a new motherboard, CPU *and* graphics card that significantly outperforms the Parhelia for the same price or less. The only reasons to get a Parhelia is if you either need triple-head 3D, or use two displays with occasional playing old 3D games. As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Regards, Thank you for the reply. I'm really interested in 2d and I know the Parhelia aces that department, but then again so do most of the Matrox cards. Which other cards were you referring to when you said that I can get a graphics card that outperforms the Parhelia? I've considered the ATI cards, 9800 pro, but I'm not convinced I will get the same 2d quality with ATI that I would with Matrox. Reading the following review got me very interested in the Parhelia: http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/matrox...ia/index.shtml |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"nubis" wrote in message ... On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:45:28 -0400, "Arthur Hagen" wrote: nubis wrote: I'm considering purchasing the Parhelia, probably on ebay, and had a couple of questions that I hoped could be answered he What kind of performance difference are we looking at when comparing the 128 mg board with the 256 mg board? Currently I'm running a P3 with 1.5 gigs of ram on a motherboard- Asus CUV4X- with AGP 4X- would it be a waste to use the Parhelia with this board? Thank you. No, it would be a good match for your CPU/MB. The problem is that the Parhelia is so expensive that you can get a new motherboard, CPU *and* graphics card that significantly outperforms the Parhelia for the same price or less. The only reasons to get a Parhelia is if you either need triple-head 3D, or use two displays with occasional playing old 3D games. As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Regards, Thank you for the reply. I'm really interested in 2d and I know the Parhelia aces that department, but then again so do most of the Matrox cards. Which other cards were you referring to when you said that I can get a graphics card that outperforms the Parhelia? I've considered the ATI cards, 9800 pro, but I'm not convinced I will get the same 2d quality with ATI that I would with Matrox. Reading the following review got me very interested in the Parhelia: http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/matrox...ia/index.shtml What do you need a Parhelia for? I too was considering one, but decided I did not need the extras, so I bought a P650 instead. Very pleased with it so far. -- Doug Ramage [watch spam trap] |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:42:24 +0100, "Doug Ramage"
wrote: "nubis" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:45:28 -0400, "Arthur Hagen" wrote: nubis wrote: I'm considering purchasing the Parhelia, probably on ebay, and had a couple of questions that I hoped could be answered he What kind of performance difference are we looking at when comparing the 128 mg board with the 256 mg board? Currently I'm running a P3 with 1.5 gigs of ram on a motherboard- Asus CUV4X- with AGP 4X- would it be a waste to use the Parhelia with this board? Thank you. No, it would be a good match for your CPU/MB. The problem is that the Parhelia is so expensive that you can get a new motherboard, CPU *and* graphics card that significantly outperforms the Parhelia for the same price or less. The only reasons to get a Parhelia is if you either need triple-head 3D, or use two displays with occasional playing old 3D games. As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Regards, Thank you for the reply. I'm really interested in 2d and I know the Parhelia aces that department, but then again so do most of the Matrox cards. Which other cards were you referring to when you said that I can get a graphics card that outperforms the Parhelia? I've considered the ATI cards, 9800 pro, but I'm not convinced I will get the same 2d quality with ATI that I would with Matrox. Reading the following review got me very interested in the Parhelia: http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/matrox...ia/index.shtml What do you need a Parhelia for? I too was considering one, but decided I did not need the extras, so I bought a P650 instead. Very pleased with it so far. Does the P650 have DVI? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Arthur Hagen" wrote in message news:cgapk9 As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Where did you get this info? Have you got a link? Cheers ss. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
nubis wrote:
I too was considering one, but decided I did not need the extras, so I bought a P650 instead. Very pleased with it so far. Does the P650 have DVI? Yes, I have mine connected to a pair of IIyama TFTs on 2 DVI Cables. My P650 cam with analogue cables and converters, I had to buy the DVI cables separately. Andy |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Synapse Syndrome wrote:
"Arthur Hagen" wrote in message news:cgapk9 As for speed, the retail models are clocked faster than OEM models, and the 128 MB models are clocked faster than the 256 MB models. Thus, the retail 128R model is the fastest. Unless you need to load up more textures than the 128 MB board can hold, the 256 MB board will be slower. Where did you get this info? Have you got a link? It's been discussed in the Matrox support forums, and there's numerous other references on the web. The 128R runs at 220MHz with 550MHz RAM speed, while the OEM and 256MB models run at 200MHz with 500MHz RAM speed. Do your own search. -- *Art |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
On the brink of madness... | I.C. Koets | General | 18 | January 31st 05 10:49 PM |
PC2100 versus PC2700 | Marc Guyott | Asus Motherboards | 3 | January 20th 05 02:32 AM |
fsb speed - why does it matter? | James Hanley | Overclocking | 52 | November 7th 04 12:04 PM |
I still don't completly understand FSB.... | legion | Homebuilt PC's | 7 | October 28th 04 03:20 AM |
Buying Kingston RAM chips... | Wald | General | 7 | December 6th 03 04:56 AM |