GeForce FX 5900 XT vs Matrox Parhelia 256 MB

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureParhelia (2002−2006)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameParhelia-512NV35
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date25 June 2002 (22 years ago)12 May 2003 (21 year ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Core clock speed200 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors80 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate0.83.200
ROPs44
TMUs48

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceAGP 4xAGP 8x
Length175 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRDDR
Maximum RAM amount256 MB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz350 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 GB/s22.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX8.19.0a
OpenGL1.51.5 (2.1)
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 25 June 2002 12 May 2003
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 128 MB
Chip lithography 150 nm 130 nm

Matrox Parhelia 256 MB has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FX 5900 XT, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, and a 15.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Matrox Parhelia 256 MB and GeForce FX 5900 XT. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Matrox Parhelia 256 MB
Parhelia 256 MB
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 XT
GeForce FX 5900 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1.6 10 votes

Rate Matrox Parhelia 256 MB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 15 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.