So Nvidia has cancelled production of ALL AGP cards except the 6800Gs?

Benjamin Gawert wrote:

McGrandpa schrieb:

Basically, it's because everyone is manufacturing FOR PCI-e now, to
follow
the dominator, Intel. BUT, AMD smoothly steps in and ON the giant in its
own game He he! Love it.

Sorry to disappoint you, but PCIe is not "intels game". Like PCI, PCIe
is an open standard that's available to everyone. PCIe has been invented
several years ago already as a result of the even at that time upcoming
limitations from the standard PCI bus...

Nice attempt at spin. If Intel had not adopted it across the board and
abandoned AGP completely nobody would have ever heard of it. If Via, SiS,
and AMD had adopted it across the board and abandoned AGP completely and
Intel stayed with AGP they'd have all tanked but Intel.

And as AMD being smoother for the AGP-PCIe transition, that's nonsense.
The chipset makers for AMD CPUs (especially Nvidia, and also VIA, ULi
and SiS) have been as fast with PCIe chipsets as intel.

ROF,L. You have to be _very_ young to not remember the agonizing wait for
the first PCI Express chipset for AMD. And given the troubles that people
seem to be having with it it may well have been rushed.

With AMD, you
can use a S939 CPU with AGP and PCIe mainboards, but you can't for
Socket 754

You need to tell that to Chaintech, Tul, Biostar, ASRock, Foxconn, ECS, MSI,
Abit, Gigabyte, Epox, Soltek, Jetway, and ASUS, as they all seem to be
laboring under the misconception that they are making boards with PCI
Express and Socket 754.

and Socket A (there are no PCIe boards for them).

Why would one _want_ to use a PCI Express video board with a 32-bit Athlon
with the 64s going starting at 65 bucks?

Same is
valid for intel: you can use Socket 775 CPUs with PCIe and also with AGP
boards (yes, there are both), but the older Socket 478 has no path to
PCIe.

The AMD platform is in no way better regarding compatibility
with/availability for AGP than intel...

Matter of opinion.

Benjamin

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

I can get 44.6 FPS at 800x600, 2xAA, 8xAF in Doom3:ROE. What kind of
benchmarks do you get at 1024x768, 4xAA, 8xAF? I can get 30FPS at most,
which matches Toms Hardwares scores on an Athlon 64 4000 w/a 9800XT. It's a
waste to have your Athlon 64 running a 9800 Pro. Just think what your rig
would do even with say, a 6800GT. Do you have a s939 motherboard? What do
you think of the dual PCIe/AGP Athlon 64 motherboards? Are any of them any
good?

Thanks for the benchmarks BTW. I'm still thinking I'm going to upgrade my
video card before going PCIe-Athlon 64. I don't think I'd see much of a
diff. going with an A64 at this point.

--
Doug
"First of One" wrote in message
...
? I had an AthlonXP 1600+ (1.4 GHz, 133 FSB) on a cheap ECS board that did
not permit multiplier adjustment. Going from that to a A64 3200+ (2.0 GHz,
200 FSB) doubled from framerates in Doom 3. The game is now borderline
fillrate-limited.

Anyway, if you really wanted know:

Doom3 1.3.1302 (thru ROE expansion)
800x600 Hi Q - 58 fps
640x480 Med Q - 70 fps

That's with the 9800Pro 128MB at 415/732 running Cat 5.9. The CPU is
running at stock speeds because of the fillrate-limited condition in
games, though I suppose it can be a decent overclocker (90 nm Winchester,
1.38V default) if pushed.

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

"pigdos" wrote in message
. ..
What exactly are your framerates in Doom3? I'd love to hear since I've
got
a 9800 Pro and an Athlon XP-M @ 2577Mhz. I'll bet you're not getting
ANYWHERE close to double the framerates my rig's getting. I'll bet you're
not even getting 25% more framerates than my rig (with your 9800 Pro in
your A64 3200+) in Doom3.

"First of One" wrote in message
...
If this were several months ago, a S939 AGP mobo made sense. I replaced
my
AthlonXP 1600+ with an A64 3200+ and actually noticed doubled framerates
in
Doom 3, while keeping the Radeon 9800Pro.

In article , pigdos
says...
What do
you think of the dual PCIe/AGP Athlon 64 motherboards? Are any of them any
good?

I have the Asrock 939Dual SATA2 board. It is of excellent quality and
doesn't feel anything like a budget board. The packaging and
accessories are as you'd expect from Asus.

Have used it both for a 6600GT AGP card and a 7800GT PCI-e card. Runs
like a dream and has great overcloking options. Currently running a
AMD64 3500+ at 3800+ on standard voltage and rock solid.




--
Conor

I'm so grateful to the USA for their contribution to the war on terror.
After all, if they hadn't funded the IRA for 30 years, we wouldn't know
what terror was.

Well, other companies will continue production sa long as there is a market
for them, so I wouldn't expect it to dry up for at least two years. By then
allot will change and people will have a clearer choice for upgrade options.

"pigdos" wrote in message
. com...
This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.

--
Doug

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Benjamin Gawert wrote:

McGrandpa schrieb:

Basically, it's because everyone is manufacturing FOR PCI-e now, to
follow
the dominator, Intel. BUT, AMD smoothly steps in and ON the giant in
its
own game He he! Love it.

Sorry to disappoint you, but PCIe is not "intels game". Like PCI, PCIe
is an open standard that's available to everyone. PCIe has been invented
several years ago already as a result of the even at that time upcoming
limitations from the standard PCI bus...

Nice attempt at spin. If Intel had not adopted it across the board and
abandoned AGP completely nobody would have ever heard of it. If Via, SiS,
and AMD had adopted it across the board and abandoned AGP completely and
Intel stayed with AGP they'd have all tanked but Intel.

And as AMD being smoother for the AGP-PCIe transition, that's nonsense.
The chipset makers for AMD CPUs (especially Nvidia, and also VIA, ULi
and SiS) have been as fast with PCIe chipsets as intel.

ROF,L. You have to be _very_ young to not remember the agonizing wait for
the first PCI Express chipset for AMD. And given the troubles that people
seem to be having with it it may well have been rushed.

With AMD, you
can use a S939 CPU with AGP and PCIe mainboards, but you can't for
Socket 754

You need to tell that to Chaintech, Tul, Biostar, ASRock, Foxconn, ECS,
MSI,
Abit, Gigabyte, Epox, Soltek, Jetway, and ASUS, as they all seem to be
laboring under the misconception that they are making boards with PCI
Express and Socket 754.

and Socket A (there are no PCIe boards for them).

Why would one _want_ to use a PCI Express video board with a 32-bit Athlon
with the 64s going starting at 65 bucks?

Same is
valid for intel: you can use Socket 775 CPUs with PCIe and also with AGP
boards (yes, there are both), but the older Socket 478 has no path to
PCIe.

The AMD platform is in no way better regarding compatibility
with/availability for AGP than intel...

Matter of opinion.

Benjamin

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Oh, I ain't worried about any of it. This is my hobby. Has been for a
quarter century now. I just look on the major mobo makers sites and see
what they got and what they ain't got. It's a lot easier to do today than
20 years ago. We get more new stuff to play with faster now too. Makes me
happy And me, I am not a guru, I'm just a guy.
But I do remember why I left off AMD and went Intel.... pci
McG.

"pigdos" wrote in message
om...
I can get 44.6 FPS at 800x600, 2xAA, 8xAF in Doom3:ROE. What kind of
benchmarks do you get at 1024x768, 4xAA, 8xAF? I can get 30FPS at most,
which matches Toms Hardwares scores on an Athlon 64 4000 w/a 9800XT.

I get 52 fps at 800x600, 2xAA/8xAF, HQ, in Demo1. Raising the settings to
1024x768, 4xAA/8xAF drops the framerate to 27 fps, not really playable. This
is now with Cat 5.12.

waste to have your Athlon 64 running a 9800 Pro. Just think what your rig
would do even with say, a 6800GT. Do you have a s939 motherboard?

Or X800XT, for that matter. My 9800Pro still gets 50-60 fps in Quake 4
multiplayer at 800x600. Other games like UT2004 and BF2 are also smooth, as
long as I don't enable AA. So performance is satisfactory for now.

I have a Soltek K8TPro-939, bought in April for just over $100 CAD, so I
won't hesitate to replace my mobo if the price difference between equal PCIe
and AGP cards widens enough. :-)

What do you think of the dual PCIe/AGP Athlon 64 motherboards? Are any of
them any good?

There's... one board, the ASRock 939Dual. Being ASRock, it is limited in
overclocking options, and is priced very low - it may end up being the least
expensive component in your rig. Unless the buyer currently has an expensive
AGP video card (6800Ultra/ X850XT), I really don't see a reason to use it.

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

"First of One" wrote in
:

I was referring to Athlon64 owners. A socket-A CPU is of course a
different animal. Your RAM can carry over, though.

I had a socket 754 (A64 3200) I had to ditch it to upgrade to PCI.

It meant I had to buy a new CPU, new mobo, new graphics card.

From the onset, S754 was a platform with no future. It was *not intended* by
AMD to receive faster CPUs. Did you buy it at a time when S939 boards were
not available?

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

"Dean Jarratt" wrote in message
...
"First of One" wrote in
:

I was referring to Athlon64 owners. A socket-A CPU is of course a
different animal. Your RAM can carry over, though.

I had a socket 754 (A64 3200) I had to ditch it to upgrade to PCI.

It meant I had to buy a new CPU, new mobo, new graphics card.

"First of One" wrote in
:

From the onset, S754 was a platform with no future. It was *not
intended* by AMD to receive faster CPUs. Did you buy it at a time when
S939 boards were not available?

I did indeed.

"NightSky 421" wrote in message
...

My concern at this point is if most owners of AGP-based systems will have
a fast enough CPU in their system to feed some of the uber video cards out
there. My main computer (built in 2003) has AGP, but has a P4 2.8GHz
Northwood C processor and it's already been proven that you cannot even
see the full potential of a card like the ATI X800XL with such a CPU, to
say nothing of a card like the GeForce 7800GT/GTX.

Excellent point, who needs the latest card when you can't even use the
proper CPU to utilize it.

I also think the PCI-e standard will go through a few revisions (like AGP
did) before its power is fully utilized. In a year or two we might be
complaining how all the new cards require a PCI-e Rev 2.0 slot.