Am I Stupid For Wanting This Video Card?

http://www.matrox.com/mga/3d_gaming/...0_ut2003_4.jpg


http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/parhelia/home.cfm


This looks so cool. I already have two of the same monitors so why not buy one more and this card?

there are already more games that support this

http://www.matrox.com/mga/3d_gaming/surrgame.cfm

that and this card will actually help me with video editing.

Right now I can only hook up 2 monitors. I have a Radeon 7200 (ive waited to long to replace this) and the built in video card in the monitor.
The card will let me hook up 3 monitors to it, i will take out the radeon and I can connect a forth screen to the motherboard

the only problem is the price :(

One more monitor would be another $200. The card itself is either $320 for the 128 mb version and $590 for the 256 mb.

I have the money but is it really worth it?

EDiT More pictures. :)

Jeez, what is this a newspaper ad in the reatail section? :lol:

K-lite electronics 100 % off sale :lol:

They really look impressive but they suck in a benchmark comparison with most other video cards. Wait a while and see if they kick it a bit.
With 256 megs memory they should perform a lot better than they do.

i'd be wary of the 3D performance and driver support on this card.

If you could elimanate the plastic modeing between each monitor so they were right next to each other,and the cards performance was much better I might consider this setup.

You can buy a monitor with 3 montors with like || of plastic between them

it costs 13,000 or so

or you could buy 3 lcds with 16ms refresh. since they have much less plastic between them, and would cost a lot less then 13,000. it'd be a better deal, but you should prolly just stick with dual moniters, and but a radeon 9500 or better.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by gamer@16 July 2003 - 16:45
16ms refresh.

---

i'd prefer more than 6.25 fps
don't know about you though....?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+16 July 2003 - 16:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 16 July 2003 - 16:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-gamer@16 July 2003 - 16:45
16ms refresh.

---

i&#39;d prefer more than 6.25 fps
don&#39;t know about you though....? [/b][/quote]
That&#39;s 62.5 fps

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lynx+16 July 2003 - 17:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (lynx @ 16 July 2003 - 17:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@16 July 2003 - 16:52
<!--QuoteBegin-gamer

---

Quote:

---

@16 July 2003 - 16:45
16ms refresh.

---

i&#39;d prefer more than 6.25 fps
don&#39;t know about you though....?

---

That&#39;s 62.5 fps [/b][/quote]
:">

i bloody hate it when i get my units wrong

Quote:

---

shn Posted on 16 July 2003 - 10:21
&nbsp; Jeez, what is this a newspaper ad in the reatail section?&nbsp;

K-lite electronics 100 % off sale&nbsp;

---

:lol:

I think i will get it. but more for video editing and not gaming. I care more about color quality than frame rate

That would be cool for a flight simulator. One screen in the front and a screen on bothe sides.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wienerschnitzel@20 July 2003 - 13:29
I think i will get it.&nbsp; but more for video editing and not gaming.&nbsp; I care more about color quality than frame rate

---

i&#39;m sure it&#39;s great for those purposes. i&#39;ve just heard a lot of comments about the parhelia not living up to the hype as far as game performance goes.

from what i&#39;ve read, ATI Radeon cards also have very respectable color accuracy. Nvidia cards seem to be hit-or-miss in that area, because so many different manufacturers make them and they don&#39;t all use the same quality of parts.