<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Parhelia Pathetic ?</title>
	<link>http://www.bigkid.com.au/2002/06/25/parhelia-pathetic/</link>
	<description>Games news &#038; reviews, Australian game developers</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: devo</title>
		<link>http://www.bigkid.com.au/2002/06/25/parhelia-pathetic/#comment-1078</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2002 07:51:38 +1000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bigkid.com.au/2002/06/25/parhelia-pathetic/#comment-1078</guid>
					<description>Following up - it seems that the benchmarks &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020625&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;were right&lt;/a&gt;. But there are a lot of caveats to the scores, and everyone agrees the 2D and general image quality is top notch. As the review says:&lt;blockquote&gt;Matrox does not see the Parhelia as being the GeForce 4 killer. Instead of going for maximum benchmark scores, the Canadian company focuses on excellent performance at maximum image quality.&lt;/blockquote&gt;This is echoed in just about every other site, with &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1645&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Anandtech summing up&lt;/a&gt; the core advantages as:&lt;ul&gt;&lt;li&gt;Games that make extensive use of quad-texturing&lt;li&gt;Games with lots of complex pixel/vertex shader programs&lt;li&gt;Fragment Anti-Aliasing&lt;li&gt;Surround Gaming (3 monitors)&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;The problem being, for gamers, that just about zero games support that stuff right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Following up - it seems that the benchmarks <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020625" rel="nofollow">were right</a>. But there are a lot of caveats to the scores, and everyone agrees the 2D and general image quality is top notch. As the review says:<br />
<blockquote>Matrox does not see the Parhelia as being the GeForce 4 killer. Instead of going for maximum benchmark scores, the Canadian company focuses on excellent performance at maximum image quality.</blockquote>
This is echoed in just about every other site, with <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1645" rel="nofollow">Anandtech summing up</a> the core advantages as:
<ul>
<li>Games that make extensive use of quad-texturing
<li>Games with lots of complex pixel/vertex shader programs
<li>Fragment Anti-Aliasing
<li>Surround Gaming (3 monitors)</li>
</li>
</li>
</li>
</ul>
The problem being, for gamers, that just about zero games support that stuff right now.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: devo</title>
		<link>http://www.bigkid.com.au/2002/06/25/parhelia-pathetic/#comment-1079</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2002 08:21:35 +1000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.bigkid.com.au/2002/06/25/parhelia-pathetic/#comment-1079</guid>
					<description>John Carmack has &lt;a href=&quot;http://bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=1&amp;time=20020627230700&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;chimed in&lt;/a&gt; with his views on the matter - on other upcoming cards.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John Carmack has <a href="http://bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/finger.pl?id=1&#038;time=20020627230700" rel="nofollow">chimed in</a> with his views on the matter - on other upcoming cards.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
