Am I Stupid For Wanting This Video Card?

[wienerschnitzel]

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.

[shn]

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

K-lite electronics 100 % off sale

[balamm]

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.

[3RA1N1AC]

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

[Twigboy]

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.

[Acecool]

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

it costs 13,000 or so

[gamer]

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.

[3rd gen noob]

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....?

[lynx]

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

[3rd gen noob]

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'>

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

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

i bloody hate it when i get my units wrong