| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 49702 | 2004-09-27 23:27:00 | AGP vs PCI video card | bk T (215) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 276282 | 2004-09-27 23:27:00 | Which is better, should I choose AGP or PCI display card? Cheers |
bk T (215) | ||
| 276283 | 2004-09-27 23:55:00 | Depends whether you are asking AGP over PCI or AGP over PCI-Express But either way, AGP in my opinion |
45South (4769) | ||
| 276284 | 2004-09-27 23:58:00 | AGP is faster you need a AGP slot however PCI is slower | kiwibeat (304) | ||
| 276285 | 2004-09-28 00:48:00 | will all depend on what your motherboard has, ie does it have a agp slot and which speed, 1x,4x or 8x??? or does it only have pci slots, agp cards are the easier to get whereas if you wanna get for example a radeon 9000 agp they are nearly impossible to find in pci HTH |
Patrick 2003 (277) | ||
| 276286 | 2004-09-28 01:28:00 | yes, with the release of pci express and nvidia sli support pci express should soon outperforom agp 3.0 (8x) by 40 - 90% this is only when you have two video cards sharing the load normally taken by one. when new games have better support for this is when it will be good to get. i wonder if you can get 2 budget sli cards and connect them to get performance similar to say.. radeon 9600XT? all in good time. go for agp. |
Nighthawk (5846) | ||
| 276287 | 2004-09-28 02:23:00 | >yes, with the release of pci express and nvidia sli support pci express should soon outperforom agp 3.0 What a load of bollocks, PCIe doesnt offer better preformance over AGP. It has the potential to offer better preformance but due to the fact that no video card currently on the market is capable of saturating the AGP bus there is no difference. Its just like SATA, n00bs and morons think that because the inferface is faster the drive must be faster. Theres no point having a fast interface if you dont have a device capable of providing enough data. Alot of AGP 8x cards on the market will work fine in AGP 4x slot without any negative effect on preformance because they are'nt capable of fully utilizing the interface. Due to the fact that alot of the PCIe cards actually use bridging chips to convert their native AGP interface into a PCIe interface, it could be expected that the PCIe card will actually preform worse due to higher latency created by the bridging chip. Even if you were using two cards in SLI that doesnt mean that PCIe is the reason for better preformance, the reason for better preformance is the second video card. >i wonder if you can get 2 budget sli cards and connect them to get performance similar to say.. radeon 9600XT? Highly unlikely, currently the cheapest card to support SLI is the 6600GT, which has preformance similar to the 9800PRO. Bk T you really do need to provide more information. What do you want to use the card for? Gaming? or is it just for basic office/home use? Do you have a AGP slot on your motherboard? Whats your budget like? But as a general rule AGP is better than PCI due to the faster interface. |
Pete O'Neil (250) | ||
| 276288 | 2004-09-28 03:18:00 | yea sorry ill shut up now | Nighthawk (5846) | ||
| 276289 | 2004-09-28 04:20:00 | > yea sorry ill shut up now at least you can say u tried :D in the end go for a agp card if you got a agp slot of course, if you wanna get into gaming i advise you to get a agp card because intergrated graphics is slow and not soo good for gaming, mind you i can play MOHAA,COD and SOF2 with my intergrated graphics and Farcry but its not playable, i think its the amount of RAM i have and the intergrated graphics. go agp :D |
Patrick 2003 (277) | ||
| 1 | |||||