PDA

View Full Version : So Nvidia has cancelled production of ALL AGP cards except the 6800Gs?


pigdos
December 23rd 05, 08:36 AM
This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.

--
Doug

Benjamin Gawert
December 23rd 05, 12:06 PM
pigdos schrieb:

> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.

I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the
AGP-PCIe brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards
is still fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation
cards also want a faster system that will have PCIe.

So what?

Benjamin

Dean Jarratt
December 23rd 05, 12:57 PM
Benjamin Gawert > wrote in news:412422F1d1adlU1
@individual.net:

> pigdos schrieb:
>
>> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>
> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the
> AGP-PCIe brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards
> is still fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation
> cards also want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>
> So what?

You make some excellent points Benjamin, however I'm still a little
confused as to why AGP has been ditched so quickly. GPU's still can't
consume the AGP 8x bandwidth.

It all seems a bit pushy by the developers to move everyone for monetary
purposes. It almost seems like hardware developers are thinking that AGP
was too good to begin with and has held back money making opportunities.

Michael Tipotsch
December 23rd 05, 03:03 PM
"Dean Jarratt" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
> Benjamin Gawert > wrote in news:412422F1d1adlU1
> @individual.net:
>
>> pigdos schrieb:
>>
>>> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>>
>> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
>> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
>> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the
>> AGP-PCIe brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards
>> is still fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation
>> cards also want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>>
>> So what?
>
> You make some excellent points Benjamin, however I'm still a little
> confused as to why AGP has been ditched so quickly. GPU's still can't
> consume the AGP 8x bandwidth.
>
> It all seems a bit pushy by the developers to move everyone for monetary
> purposes. It almost seems like hardware developers are thinking that AGP
> was too good to begin with and has held back money making opportunities.

Yeah, they force us to buy new hardware.
The only advantage of PCIe is IMHO the possibility of SLI.
I am using my 6800gt on a crappy 4xAGP board...the difference to 8xAGP is
<5%.

Cu, Michael

tod
December 23rd 05, 05:17 PM
Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.
So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.

"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> pigdos schrieb:
>
>> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>
> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the AGP-PCIe
> brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards is still
> fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation cards also
> want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>
> So what?
>
> Benjamin
>
>

Benjamin Gawert
December 23rd 05, 05:52 PM
tod schrieb:

> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.
> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.

Thats BS. Over 80% of sales ATI and Nvidia make comes from system
builders, and these are using PCIe only for over a year now.

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 23rd 05, 06:19 PM
Dean Jarratt schrieb:

> You make some excellent points Benjamin, however I'm still a little
> confused as to why AGP has been ditched so quickly. GPU's still can't
> consume the AGP 8x bandwidth.

No, AGP 4x would be still fast enough...

> It all seems a bit pushy by the developers to move everyone for monetary
> purposes. It almost seems like hardware developers are thinking that AGP
> was too good to begin with and has held back money making opportunities.

You ignore that unlike AGP PCIe is not only for gfx cards. The problem
with AGP PCs is not the gfx interface (AGP) but the slow shared bus
(PCI) which is needed for expension boards. PCI _is_ a limiting factor
already, and the PCI enhancements (PCI64, PCI-X) have a higher bandwidth
but still suffer from the same problem (shared bus). So there was a need
for something really new, even when most home users didn't reach the limits.

Unlike AGP (which basically is just a faster PCI interface) and PCI
which both are parallel busses PCIe is a serial point-to-point
connection with accumulated bandwidth (which means you can combine
several lanes to increase bandwidth). That means PCIe devices don't have
to share bandwidth with other devices. Of course this also has
advantages to gfx cards while AGP is a single card system only which
also has several limitations and bottlenecks.

So it's clear that at some point simply a cut was necessary because the
limitations through PCI weren't getting better over time...

And honestly, I see no problem. Of course the majority of old systems
are AGP but what do you expect? It's not a PCIe specific problem that
doing an upgrade often comes with the need for upgrading other
components. Want examples? CPU too slow -> new CPU has new socket or
different FSB -> new mobo that supports CPU. Oops, the new mobo also
wants new RAM because the old RAM is too slow or also from a different
type (i.e. SDRAM). So that means buying new RAM, too. And after You're
done with that you probably find that the HD also is slow and that it's
better if the new disk you gonna buy doesn't has parallel ATA but SATA
because your new mobo has two or four ports waiting for a fast drive.
And so on...

I know that lots of people are upset because AGP is dead. But then, the
AGP cards that are still available (ATI X800 class or GF6800 series) are
more than fast enough even for the fastest AGP systems. Cards like the
7800GTX or ATI X1800 also want a system that has a fast CPU and also a
fast bus system (i.e. memory interface), otherwise most of the potential
of these cards is just wasted as is the money that has been spent for
them. And for people that have an older computer from i.e. the Athlon XP
generation or a socket 478 P4 every upgrade would also mean new mobo
which should be PCIe...

Benjamin

deimos
December 23rd 05, 06:21 PM
Dean Jarratt wrote:
> You make some excellent points Benjamin, however I'm still a little
> confused as to why AGP has been ditched so quickly. GPU's still can't
> consume the AGP 8x bandwidth.

That's exactly the point, no AGP system ever practically used all the
available bandwidth. Even 8X. There were fundamental obstacles to
overcome in the AGP architecture that were bottlenecks to performance.
Plus, the entire system performance suffered from legacy interfaces like
PCI. PCIE provides far more total system bandwidth and the ability to
actually carry it, not just over the graphics bus.

Advances like the NForce architecture and the last KT400's were about
the best you would ever get in AGP. It seems very silly to put
something like a Athlon 64 X2 4200 in a system where both memory and
graphics performance would be limited by the system itself. There was
very little return for increasing processor and FSB speeds on AGP systems.

J. Clarke
December 23rd 05, 06:55 PM
tod wrote:

> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.

And your source for that information is?

> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.
>
> "Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
> ...
>> pigdos schrieb:
>>
>>> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>>
>> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
>> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
>> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the
>> AGP-PCIe brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards
>> is still fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation
>> cards also want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>>
>> So what?
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>

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

Bill
December 23rd 05, 08:17 PM
In article t>,
says...
> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.

Did that hurt when you pulled it out?

> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.
>
<snip>

You don't know much about business do you?

Bill

pigdos
December 23rd 05, 11:53 PM
I had thought that Nvidia had ceased production of all 6800 GPU's -- except
for the 6800GS. The best nvidia GPU available for AGP was the 6800ultra
right?

--
Doug
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> pigdos schrieb:
>
>> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>
> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the AGP-PCIe
> brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards is still
> fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation cards also
> want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>
> So what?
>
> Benjamin
>

NightSky 421
December 24th 05, 12:11 AM
"pigdos" > wrote in message
. com...
> This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>


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.

Glen
December 24th 05, 12:34 AM
"NightSky 421" > wrote in message ...
> "pigdos" > wrote in message
> . com...
> > This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>
> 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.

If the title of this thread is true, I'd advise buying eBay stock.

Heavily.

Absolutely outrageous. As if I'm about to trash a $2,000
P4 3.8MHz computer just to upgrade a ****ing video card.
It's sad to see Nvidia trying to shove a new, unnecessary
standard down the market's throat. ATI is trying the same
thing and their bottom line has been in the ****ter ever since.

Gus
December 24th 05, 12:54 AM
I can't really afford to buy any new hardware right now.

Gus


"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> pigdos schrieb:
>
> > This is what I read over on Rage3d. That sucks. Really sucks.
>
> I don't understand your point. First, Nvidia makes _GPUs_ (ICs), not
> videocards. Second, they stopped production of GPUs with native AGP
> interface, but board makers still can make AGP cards by using the
> AGP-PCIe brigde chip. Third, AGP is dead. The current crop of AGP cards
> is still fast enough for the latest AGP systems, and next generation
> cards also want a faster system that will have PCIe.
>
> So what?
>
> Benjamin
>

First of One
December 24th 05, 02:25 AM
This is the same self-centered crap that's been thrown around here for
months. "If I'm using AGP and ma aunt Betsy-Mae's using AGP, I figured
everyone must be using AGP." Asus alone ships over 1 million PCIe
motherboards *per month*. Wonder where they all went...

BTW, before 3dfx died, its Voodoo5 cards were the best-selling retail cards
ever made. Even such "leadership" couldn't help when the entire retail
segment accounts for about 10% of the market.

--
"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."

"tod" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.
> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.

First of One
December 24th 05, 02:38 AM
"Glen" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> If the title of this thread is true, I'd advise buying eBay stock.

Hard to say, especially since I'll have to take money out of oil stocks...

> Absolutely outrageous. As if I'm about to trash a $2,000
> P4 3.8MHz computer just to upgrade a ****ing video card.
> It's sad to see Nvidia trying to shove a new, unnecessary
> standard down the market's throat. ATI is trying the same
> thing and their bottom line has been in the ****ter ever since.

nVidia started the PCIe-only trend with the 7800GT several months before ATi
did. Half of nVidia's marketing efforts (SLi) fundamentally hinges on PCIe.

AMD users have it a bit easier. All they need to do is change the
motherboard (for now), not that expensive compared to the $400-$500 spent on
a high-end video card.

--
"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."

oldwolf
December 24th 05, 03:43 AM
AMD users have it a bit easier. All they need to do is change the
motherboard (for now), not that expensive compared to the $400-$500 spent on
a high-end video card.

Why do you say that?? My amd 3200 wont fit in a s939 board, and Im not
throwing away 2gig of ram just to upgrade the vid card.
I can play fear, and cod2, and others, quite nicely at the moment, with a
6600gt. got no problems with fps, or stuttering, or any thing else.
Sure I would like to go up to a supercard, but I aint ditching everything.
(for a start the missus would kill me. ;-) )



oldwolf

First of One
December 24th 05, 04:17 AM
I was referring to Athlon64 owners. A socket-A CPU is of course a different
animal. Your RAM can carry over, though.

--
"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."


"oldwolf" > wrote in message
...
> Why do you say that?? My amd 3200 wont fit in a s939 board, and Im not
> throwing away 2gig of ram just to upgrade the vid card.
> I can play fear, and cod2, and others, quite nicely at the moment, with a
> 6600gt. got no problems with fps, or stuttering, or any thing else.
> Sure I would like to go up to a supercard, but I aint ditching everything.
> (for a start the missus would kill me. ;-) )

Benjamin Gawert
December 24th 05, 08:32 PM
Glen schrieb:

> Absolutely outrageous. As if I'm about to trash a $2,000
> P4 3.8MHz computer just to upgrade a ****ing video card.

Why should you trash the whole computer? Simply get a new mainboard
instead...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 24th 05, 08:35 PM
oldwolf schrieb:

> Why do you say that?? My amd 3200 wont fit in a s939 board,

You have an Athlon XP?

> and Im not
> throwing away 2gig of ram just to upgrade the vid card.
> I can play fear, and cod2, and others, quite nicely at the moment, with a
> 6600gt. got no problems with fps, or stuttering, or any thing else.
> Sure I would like to go up to a supercard, but I aint ditching everything.
> (for a start the missus would kill me. ;-) )

Well, a 6800GT/Ultra AGP is probably the maximum that is useful with an
Athlon XP that has several performance bottlenecks. A 7800GTX would be
wasted...

That's a good example for what I said: it's not really a problem that
new cards are PCIe. For your system an ATI X800 or Nvidia Geforce
6800GT/Ultra would be more than enough. Everything higher would require
a faster computer to be useful...

Benjamin

Larry Roberts
December 25th 05, 02:45 AM
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 20:35:49 +0100, Benjamin Gawert >
wrote:

>oldwolf schrieb:
>
>> Why do you say that?? My amd 3200 wont fit in a s939 board,
>
>You have an Athlon XP?
>
>> and Im not
>> throwing away 2gig of ram just to upgrade the vid card.
>> I can play fear, and cod2, and others, quite nicely at the moment, with a
>> 6600gt. got no problems with fps, or stuttering, or any thing else.
>> Sure I would like to go up to a supercard, but I aint ditching everything.
>> (for a start the missus would kill me. ;-) )
>
>Well, a 6800GT/Ultra AGP is probably the maximum that is useful with an
>Athlon XP that has several performance bottlenecks. A 7800GTX would be
>wasted...
>
>That's a good example for what I said: it's not really a problem that
>new cards are PCIe. For your system an ATI X800 or Nvidia Geforce
>6800GT/Ultra would be more than enough. Everything higher would require
>a faster computer to be useful...
>
>Benjamin

What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.

First of One
December 25th 05, 05:08 AM
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.

Now is not a good time to "want" a S939 mobo, with Socket M2 coming in a
month or so (and probably *requiring* DDR2). nVidia timed the
discontinuation of the 6800GT/Ultra GPUs correctly. By the time most of the
existing inventory is exhausted, few people would spend $300 on an AGP card.

And once Socket M2 gains a foothold, DDR1 DIMM prices will rise due to
reduced production. Spot pricing for DDR2 chips today are already lower than
DDR1 chips, thanks to Intel's market dominance. One fewer reason to keep a
"legacy" system up-to-date.

--
"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."

"Larry Roberts" > wrote in message
...
> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.

First of One
December 25th 05, 05:09 AM
I think Intel users face a more expensive upgrade, since PCIe support is
tied-in with LGA775 CPU package and DDR2 memory.

--
"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."


"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> Why should you trash the whole computer? Simply get a new mainboard
> instead...
>
> Benjamin

tod
December 25th 05, 08:15 AM
Maybe it is 70% of retail sales?

"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> tod schrieb:
>
>> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.
>> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.
>
> Thats BS. Over 80% of sales ATI and Nvidia make comes from system
> builders, and these are using PCIe only for over a year now.
>
> Benjamin
>

John Lewis
December 25th 05, 09:02 AM
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 23:08:47 -0500, "First of One" >
wrote:

>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.
>
>Now is not a good time to "want" a S939 mobo, with

an affordable

> Socket M2 coming in a
>month

.... 6-9 months

> or so (and probably

... definitely

> *requiring* DDR2). nVidia timed the
>discontinuation of the 6800GT/Ultra GPUs correctly. By the time most of the
>existing inventory is exhausted, few people would spend $300 on an AGP card.
>

John Lewis

>And once Socket M2 gains a foothold, DDR1 DIMM prices will rise due to
>reduced production. Spot pricing for DDR2 chips today are already lower than
>DDR1 chips, thanks to Intel's market dominance. One fewer reason to keep a
>"legacy" system up-to-date.
>
>--
>"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."
>
>"Larry Roberts" > wrote in message
...
>> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
>> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
>> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.
>
>
>

Glen
December 25th 05, 09:03 AM
The bottom line is, ATI's financial bottom line has been in the
****ter ever since they started eliminating AGP models. So
system builders certainly do not account for a majority of
total card sales.

"tod" > wrote in message ink.net...
> Maybe it is 70% of retail sales?
>
> "Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
> ...
> > tod schrieb:
> >
> >> Currently 70% of the graphics card sold are AGP.
> >> So AGP is still a money maker for NVIDIA and ATI.
> >
> > Thats BS. Over 80% of sales ATI and Nvidia make comes from system
> > builders, and these are using PCIe only for over a year now.
> >
> > Benjamin
> >
>
>
>

Andrew
December 25th 05, 09:12 AM
On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 08:03:37 GMT, "Glen" > wrote:

>The bottom line is, ATI's financial bottom line has been in the
>****ter ever since they started eliminating AGP models. So
>system builders certainly do not account for a majority of
>total card sales.

You haven't bothered to read any of their financial statements
recently have you.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 09:31 AM
tod schrieb:

> Maybe it is 70% of retail sales?

Retail sales are just a very small pecentage, despite what some poeple
here are dreaming. The bulk of money in the gfx card does _not_ come
from retail sales but from sales to system integrators (builders)...

You can ignore it, or you can accept it, it doesn't matter. But fact is
AGP _is_dead_. Neither ATI nor Nvidia give a **** about it any more. If
it were still such a huge market as some of you are dreaming, then
wouldn't you imagine they still would serve that market?

Just read the annual financial reports from ATI and Nvidia....

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 09:34 AM
Larry Roberts schrieb:

> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.

If you had a 6800GT AGP, and want upgrade to A64, then buying a S939 AGP
board would just be plain stupid. The better way would be to sell the
6800GT AGP (you get a helluva money for them now that AGP has deceased!)
and get a PCIe gfx card, most probably the money you get for the AGP
card would be enough to get a 6800GT/U PCIe...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 09:37 AM
First of One schrieb:

> I think Intel users face a more expensive upgrade, since PCIe support
> is tied-in with LGA775 CPU package and DDR2 memory.


Glen wrote about a 3.8GHz P4 which is LGA775 already (there are no
3.8GHz CPUs for SOcket 478). And there are PCIe boards that use DDR
instead of DDS2, so no need to buy new RAM...

Benjamin

Glen
December 25th 05, 11:10 AM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message ...
> First of One schrieb:
>
> > I think Intel users face a more expensive upgrade, since PCIe support
> > is tied-in with LGA775 CPU package and DDR2 memory.
>
>
> Glen wrote about a 3.8GHz P4 which is LGA775 already (there are no
> 3.8GHz CPUs for SOcket 478). And there are PCIe boards that use DDR
> instead of DDS2, so no need to buy new RAM...

In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.

Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
and no one has explained why people with these systems such
as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
motherboard and video card companies rich.

Glen
December 25th 05, 11:22 AM
"Andrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message ...
> On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 08:03:37 GMT, "Glen" > wrote:
>
> >The bottom line is, ATI's financial bottom line has been in the
> >****ter ever since they started eliminating AGP models. So
> >system builders certainly do not account for a majority of
> >total card sales.
>
> You haven't bothered to read any of their financial statements
> recently have you.

As a matter of fact I have, Andy. You obviously haven't:
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.asp?Symbol=US:ATYT&Feed=AP&Date=20051221&ID=5370929

http://ir.ati.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=105421&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=764828&highlight=

Etc.

Revenues are down $60M from last year. Net loss for the quarter was
$104M. Here's why:

"The primary factor behind the decline was lower sales of performance
and enthusiast desktop products in the Add-in-Board (AIB) and retail
channels."

In other words, the market ain't biting on this PCIe nonsense.

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 01:52 PM
Glen schrieb:

> In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
> 250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.

So it's an overclocked system....

> Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
> that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
> and no one has explained why people with these systems such
> as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
> motherboard and video card companies rich.

Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
needed again...

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 01:55 PM
Glen schrieb:

> Revenues are down $60M from last year. Net loss for the quarter was
> $104M. Here's why:
>
> "The primary factor behind the decline was lower sales of performance
> and enthusiast desktop products in the Add-in-Board (AIB) and retail
> channels."

Correct...

> In other words, the market ain't biting on this PCIe nonsense.

That's your interpretation which comes from you aversion against PCIe
but has _zero_ to do with reality...

The losses are because ATI was lacking a comparable gfx solution in the
high end gamer area (the X850 couldn't keep up with Nvidias 7800GT/GTX
series, and the X1x00 cards came delayed)...

Benjamin

Glen
December 25th 05, 02:05 PM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message ...
> Glen schrieb:
>
> > In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
> > 250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.
>
> So it's an overclocked system....
>
> > Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
> > that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
> > and no one has explained why people with these systems such
> > as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
> > motherboard and video card companies rich.
>
> Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
> needed again...

Good lord you're full of yourself.

Clueless and arrogant is a nasty combination.

You, Nvidia and ATI can pretend 9 out of 10 computer users
do something that requires PCIe, or AGP8X for that matter,
and it won't make a **** of difference in the reality of the
situation. Financials of these companies will spiral downward
as the gap between what consumers need and what they're
being offered gets larger every year.

And again I'll restate my original advice: buy eBay stock.

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 03:24 PM
Glen schrieb:

>>Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
>>needed again...
>
>
> Good lord you're full of yourself.
>
> Clueless and arrogant is a nasty combination.
>
> You, Nvidia and ATI can pretend 9 out of 10 computer users
> do something that requires PCIe, or AGP8X for that matter,
> and it won't make a **** of difference in the reality of the
> situation. Financials of these companies will spiral downward
> as the gap between what consumers need and what they're
> being offered gets larger every year.

Another proof that you just didn't understand a single word I wrote,
you're just blindly repeating the same BS again and again. Every further
word is wasted...

Nevertheless Merry Xmas!

EOD

Benjamin

Glen
December 25th 05, 03:44 PM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message ...
> Glen schrieb:
>
> >>Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
> >>needed again...
> >
> >
> > Good lord you're full of yourself.
> >
> > Clueless and arrogant is a nasty combination.
> >
> > You, Nvidia and ATI can pretend 9 out of 10 computer users
> > do something that requires PCIe, or AGP8X for that matter,
> > and it won't make a **** of difference in the reality of the
> > situation. Financials of these companies will spiral downward
> > as the gap between what consumers need and what they're
> > being offered gets larger every year.
>
> Another proof that you just didn't understand a single word I wrote,

Uh, not even close. First you asked me if I've seen the
latest financials from ATI, implying they're making money
-- which they aren't --, then you sidestep the entire issue
of whether the industry needs a new bus standard for
video when it can't even make full use of the old one.

> you're just blindly repeating the same BS again and again.

Right back at ya. Bottom line: for ATI and Nvidia to just
slam the door on the 85% of the market who still has AGP
video is nothing short of outrageous. You can try and dolly
up that fact as much as you want, it's still an incredibly ****ty
way to treat loyal customers.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 05:04 PM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> Glen schrieb:
>
>> Absolutely outrageous. As if I'm about to trash a $2,000
>> P4 3.8MHz computer just to upgrade a ****ing video card.
>
> Why should you trash the whole computer? Simply get a new mainboard
> instead...
>
> Benjamin

some people have off the shelf name brand systems that won't let you easily
do that, AYWK mate! With homebrew stuff, no big deal. $100 gets a fairly
usable PCI-e mobo now.
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 05:17 PM
"Larry Roberts" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 20:35:49 +0100, Benjamin Gawert >
> wrote:
>
>>oldwolf schrieb:
>>
>>> Why do you say that?? My amd 3200 wont fit in a s939 board,
>>
>>You have an Athlon XP?
>>
>>> and Im not
>>> throwing away 2gig of ram just to upgrade the vid card.
>>> I can play fear, and cod2, and others, quite nicely at the moment, with
>>> a
>>> 6600gt. got no problems with fps, or stuttering, or any thing else.
>>> Sure I would like to go up to a supercard, but I aint ditching
>>> everything.
>>> (for a start the missus would kill me. ;-) )
>>
>>Well, a 6800GT/Ultra AGP is probably the maximum that is useful with an
>>Athlon XP that has several performance bottlenecks. A 7800GTX would be
>>wasted...
>>
>>That's a good example for what I said: it's not really a problem that
>>new cards are PCIe. For your system an ATI X800 or Nvidia Geforce
>>6800GT/Ultra would be more than enough. Everything higher would require
>>a faster computer to be useful...
>>
>>Benjamin
>
> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.

That situation is exactly what I was in this past August. There are a lot
of Socket 939 boards around now and quite a few are AGP. PCI-e seems more
plentiful though and their cost is about even with AGP versions. Right now
is a great time to go PCI-e, but you don't have to. I chose to keep using
a very new eVGA 6800GT 256 meg, so I chose a Gigabyte socket 939 AGP board.
Fine board too. I've just now started thinking about building a second AMD
64 rig, for the living room :) I'll have to get a PCI-e board and PCI-e
vid card, likely a 7800gtx 512meg.
This really gave me the room to stretch and relax :)
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:02 PM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> Larry Roberts schrieb:
>
>> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
>> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
>> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.
>
> If you had a 6800GT AGP, and want upgrade to A64, then buying a S939 AGP
> board would just be plain stupid. The better way would be to sell the
> 6800GT AGP (you get a helluva money for them now that AGP has deceased!)
> and get a PCIe gfx card, most probably the money you get for the AGP card
> would be enough to get a 6800GT/U PCIe...
>
> Benjamin

Hm. Some of us have other ideas for what to do during and somewhat because
of the demise of AGP. I can use a better 2nd rig than I have running right
now. It's a P3 800 with 98SE. I'd also like to do some gaming on it but
the games I want to play need more than this rig has. So...my plan is
playing out like clockwork so far.

I had a P4 3.0E with 2 gigs PC3200 and my 6800GT. I had the itch, and
scratched it with a A64 X2 4800+ (gave up a LOT of green stuff for that
ointment! ), GA K9NS Ultra 939 (AGP, nForce3 Ultra), 2 gigs PC3200, and put
the 6800GT in this kit. I put an old but very reliable GF4 Ti4600-128 in
the P4-3.0E rig and used two older hd's for 100gigs hd space and XP Home.
Gave that one to my oldest dotter for a personal graphics workstation. Does
very well for that.

I want to get a PCI-e socket 939 mobo, another 2 gigs of ram and a lesser
A64 cpu, like a s939 A64 3800+, and a PCI-e 7800GTX 512 meg vid card. There
will be two resulting rigs.

1) A64 X2 4800+, s939 PCI-e mobo, 2 gigs ram (ddr2 yet for these?), 7800GTX
512, XP Pro x64. 2 19" LCD flat panels both on DVI.
This will be the main rig for my use on my desk. Gaming and graphics.

2) A64 3800+, GA K8NS Ultra 939 AGP, 2 gigs PC3200, eVGA 6800GT 256, XP Pro
x64. 1 17" LCD flat panel on analog VGA.
This will be the 2nd rig for everyones use in the LR on a computer cart.

I haven't made the move to SATA yet. Still have a bunch of PATA ide drives
to play with. Will likely put 1 SATA 250g or better in the X2 box. Will
also likely partition it for using both XP x64 and Linux 64.

Sound like a plan? Does to me! Socket M isn't anywhere in sight yet, and I
already have the X2 and some other stuff. I think I can complete this with
right at $1000 USD for all the parts I'll need.

Merry Christmas EVERYONE!!!!
Michael
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:13 PM
"Glen" > wrote in message
k.net...
> "Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
> ...
>> First of One schrieb:
>>
>> > I think Intel users face a more expensive upgrade, since PCIe support
>> > is tied-in with LGA775 CPU package and DDR2 memory.
>>
>>
>> Glen wrote about a 3.8GHz P4 which is LGA775 already (there are no
>> 3.8GHz CPUs for SOcket 478). And there are PCIe boards that use DDR
>> instead of DDS2, so no need to buy new RAM...
>
> In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
> 250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.
>
> Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
> that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
> and no one has explained why people with these systems such
> as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
> motherboard and video card companies rich.
>
>
PCI-e fixes some bandwidth and control issues (I think) inherent with PCI
2.n and also gives video bus bi-directional capability. Mostly, it helps
Intel, its designer, to paint itself out of a corner it put itself in years
ago. We should be used to the steady marching on of technology by now.
ISA 8 bit, ISA 16 bit, various efforts at 32 bit with Vesa Local Bus having
a brief win until PCI 1.0 at 33 mHz, then PCI 2.0 at 66 mHz, AGP 1.0, 2.0
and 3.0 versions, and now culminating in PCI-Express which help with bus
control issues and general system bandwidth, not just video card. With
PCI-e being a serialized bus, perhaps we will now look for the blending of
PCI-e and SATA into some sort of new tutti-frutti flavor of the year? :)
Remember, it isn't JUST about the video bus.
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:14 PM
"Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
...
> Glen schrieb:
>
>> In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
>> 250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.
>
> So it's an overclocked system....
>
>> Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
>> that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
>> and no one has explained why people with these systems such
>> as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
>> motherboard and video card companies rich.
>
> Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
> needed again...
>
> Benjamin

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. :)
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:21 PM
"Glen" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> "Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Glen schrieb:
>>
>> > In fact it's a 3GHz Northwood P4, socket 478, running at
>> > 250FSB 1:1, 3.75GHz.
>>
>> So it's an overclocked system....
>>
>> > Point noted about the PCIe/DDR boards, but the issue here is
>> > that *nothing* currently uses the full bandwidth of even AGP8X,
>> > and no one has explained why people with these systems such
>> > as myself should need or want PCIe, except of course to make
>> > motherboard and video card companies rich.
>>
>> Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
>> needed again...
>
> Good lord you're full of yourself.
>
> Clueless and arrogant is a nasty combination.
>
> You, Nvidia and ATI can pretend 9 out of 10 computer users
> do something that requires PCIe, or AGP8X for that matter,
> and it won't make a **** of difference in the reality of the
> situation. Financials of these companies will spiral downward
> as the gap between what consumers need and what they're
> being offered gets larger every year.
>
> And again I'll restate my original advice: buy eBay stock.
>
Well, nVidia and ATI both have to follow the leader, Intel, with PCI-e and
its chipsets. The other major chipset makers, in order to compete and stay
competitive, must also follow this major shift. In fact, they all agreed to
it. CPU's, GPU's, motherboards and chipsets. Intel, AMD, nVidia, ATI are
the big 4 (of the lot) that hammered this one out.
And I think that at least 8 out of 10 computer users do something that will
require PCI-e (but not AGP3.0 at 8X). They will upgrade.
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:31 PM
"Glen" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> "Benjamin Gawert" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Glen schrieb:
>>
>> >>Maybe you should read my posting in which explained why PCIe indeed is
>> >>needed again...
>> >
>> >
>> > Good lord you're full of yourself.
>> >
>> > Clueless and arrogant is a nasty combination.
>> >
>> > You, Nvidia and ATI can pretend 9 out of 10 computer users
>> > do something that requires PCIe, or AGP8X for that matter,
>> > and it won't make a **** of difference in the reality of the
>> > situation. Financials of these companies will spiral downward
>> > as the gap between what consumers need and what they're
>> > being offered gets larger every year.
>>
>> Another proof that you just didn't understand a single word I wrote,
>
> Uh, not even close. First you asked me if I've seen the
> latest financials from ATI, implying they're making money
> -- which they aren't --, then you sidestep the entire issue
> of whether the industry needs a new bus standard for
> video when it can't even make full use of the old one.
>
>> you're just blindly repeating the same BS again and again.
>
> Right back at ya. Bottom line: for ATI and Nvidia to just
> slam the door on the 85% of the market who still has AGP
> video is nothing short of outrageous. You can try and dolly
> up that fact as much as you want, it's still an incredibly ****ty
> way to treat loyal customers.
>
Actually, the whole industry EXCEPT AMD did that to the loyal customers.
AMD did keep socket 939, both for the shift from AGP to PCI-e *and* for the
addition of X2 dual core CPU's. With Intel, if you want dual core, I
believe you MuST go PCI-e and use new memory as well. Intels trying to play
catch up with AMD is hurting its users.
With AMD, you can use any mix of A64 single core, A64 dual core, AGP8X and
PCI-e. AMD provided a far smoother transition. The GPU makers simply have
to provide both AGP and PCI-e, with AGP being phased out. At some point,
they'll stop making enthusiast products for AGP. Look for a few somewhat
less capable mainstream AGP products for years to come though. Just as ATI
and nVidia have kept some things on the shelves for the PCI bus, there will
likely be some few for AGP.
McG.

McGrandpa
December 25th 05, 06:57 PM
"Glen" > wrote in message
k.net...
> "Andrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 08:03:37 GMT, "Glen" > wrote:
>>
>> >The bottom line is, ATI's financial bottom line has been in the
>> >****ter ever since they started eliminating AGP models. So
>> >system builders certainly do not account for a majority of
>> >total card sales.
>>
>> You haven't bothered to read any of their financial statements
>> recently have you.
>
> As a matter of fact I have, Andy. You obviously haven't:
> http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.asp?Symbol=US:ATYT&Feed=AP&Date=20051221&ID=5370929
>
> http://ir.ati.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=105421&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=764828&highlight=
>
> Etc.
>
> Revenues are down $60M from last year. Net loss for the quarter was
> $104M. Here's why:
>
> "The primary factor behind the decline was lower sales of performance
> and enthusiast desktop products in the Add-in-Board (AIB) and retail
> channels."
>
> In other words, the market ain't biting on this PCIe nonsense.
>
>
Oh wrong, man. What the financial report from ATI itself shows me is that
this is ALL part of its transitional plan. PCI-e not even mentioned in the
report, new desktop product families released (PcI-e only, right?), delayed
wafer starts...'timing the market'. They expected lower sales in the
performance and enthusiast sector. Thing is, the industry movers and
shakers are ALL committed to PCI-express. I've / WE've been looking at
this that is happening today for the last 5 years man. I've faced it, it's
happening across the board whether I like it or not, I've accepted it. It's
Happening FULL STOP. The Transition Is Occurring.
When you look at the combined financial reports of ATI, nVidia, Intel and
AMD you'll see that this particular lull in sales is expected and accounted
for. They ALL prepared for it. It's not like we haven't had plenty of
warning, yaknow?
McG.

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 08:49 PM
McGrandpa schrieb:

>>Why should you trash the whole computer? Simply get a new mainboard
>>instead...
>>
>>Benjamin
>
>
> some people have off the shelf name brand systems that won't let you easily
> do that, AYWK mate!

Well, there are no P4 3.8Ghz brand name systems that still use AGP, all
these systems already are PCIe. The first one that incorporated PCIe
were the big brands...

> With homebrew stuff, no big deal. $100 gets a fairly
> usable PCI-e mobo now.

Exactly.

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert
December 25th 05, 08:57 PM
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...

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. With AMD, you
can use a S939 CPU with AGP and PCIe mainboards, but you can't for
Socket 754 and Socket A (there are no PCIe boards for them). 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...

Benjamin

pigdos
December 25th 05, 11:04 PM
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.

--
Doug
"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.
>
> Now is not a good time to "want" a S939 mobo, with Socket M2 coming in a
> month or so (and probably *requiring* DDR2). nVidia timed the
> discontinuation of the 6800GT/Ultra GPUs correctly. By the time most of
> the
> existing inventory is exhausted, few people would spend $300 on an AGP
> card.
>
> And once Socket M2 gains a foothold, DDR1 DIMM prices will rise due to
> reduced production. Spot pricing for DDR2 chips today are already lower
> than DDR1 chips, thanks to Intel's market dominance. One fewer reason to
> keep a "legacy" system up-to-date.
>
> --
> "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."
>
> "Larry Roberts" > wrote in message
> ...
>> What if I already had a 6800GT, and didn't want to move up to
>> a 7800GT/GTX just yet, but did want a new Athlon64, or FX CPU. There
>> are a good many Socket 939 boards with AGP.
>
>
>

First of One
December 26th 05, 03:03 AM
? 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.

MarkJ
December 27th 05, 11:39 AM
Indeed, this is especially poor for intel users who already have a 3.0Ghz+
CPU, theres no critical reason to upgrade the CPU but you have too just get
PCIe to get a new gfx card

J. Clarke
December 27th 05, 04:26 PM
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)

pigdos
December 27th 05, 09:45 PM
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.
>
>
>

Conor
December 27th 05, 11:33 PM
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.

Spoogemeister
December 28th 05, 02:01 AM
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
>

McGrandpa
December 28th 05, 02:32 AM
"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.

First of One
December 28th 05, 08:09 AM
"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."

Dean Jarratt
January 4th 06, 04:58 PM
"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
January 5th 06, 01:56 AM
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.

Dean Jarratt
January 5th 06, 10:21 AM
"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.

Tim
January 6th 06, 04:00 AM
"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.