Why are agp users upgrading their gfx cards?

doodleplop · 5 Nov 2006 at 09:59

Thanks for all the input, it makes for interesting reading.

Jonny

Mitch007 · 5 Nov 2006 at 10:08

I've stuck with AGP to Avoid complete re-install of windows....

I've upgraded CPU secon=-hand 4 -times
I've been through 3-motherboards, all SIS chip-set (i know, but the MSI 645 Ultra i had initially was a top budget board).
And gone through Gf3Ti200, Gf4Ti200, gg00GT and now 7600GT.....All AGP.

Rig benches ok and plays most games i like at max or near max detail on my Hyundai TFT 19' er

I's been a quartely cheap upgrade path, but i'm at the end of the road....

(unless i can find a 655TX board and they release a 8600GT in AGP!!! :confused:

)

flying grouse · 5 Nov 2006 at 15:31

Mitch007 said:
I've stuck with AGP to Avoid complete re-install of windows....

I've upgraded CPU secon=-hand 4 -times
I've been through 3-motherboards, all SIS chip-set (i know, but the MSI 645 Ultra i had initially was a top budget board).
And gone through Gf3Ti200, Gf4Ti200, gg00GT and now 7600GT.....All AGP.

I's been a quartely cheap upgrade path, but i'm at the end of the road....

(unless i can find a 655TX board and they release a 8600GT in AGP!!! )

Had the same problem, I went from a Asus P4C800ED with a Pentium 3.4EE to an Asus P4PGL with Pci Express which takes my CPU and DDR RAM and have not looked back, was a painless upgrade...................PS....CPU obtained secondhand

Nikumba · 5 Nov 2006 at 16:09

The main reason for me not moving to PCI-E is cost.

I currently have a P4 3.2Ghz Extreme Edition, 9800 Pro, 1Gb of ram. It plays all my current games, granted it struggles on occasion with CoD2, Supreme Commander Beta, but I always said to myself that i would upgrade for Sup Comm since it looked like an awesome game

An upgrade to 2Gb of ram and a ATi 1950Pro will ensure my system can run for at least another 18 months or so. The upgrade would only cost me about £300ish a move to PCI-E will cost me over £900 so for me its a cost thing, but with Core Duo and now Kentsfield coming and DX10 next year it also does not make sense to upgrade to PCI-E yes either.

So im sticking with AGP and giving it a little upgrade to extend its life some what

Kimbie

achitophel · 5 Nov 2006 at 16:36

One other little "cost" of such upgrade (i.e. AGP to PCI-E and so new mobo) is a new version of Windows XP! I certainly hadn't realised until I read another thread on this board that the OEM version is essentially locked to the mobo and so changing this gives a further cost...

Looks like it's retail versions for me from here on in

V F · 5 Nov 2006 at 16:47

Secret_Window said:
Yes, some people (Skt A users) will have trouble upgrading boards without having to purchase a new cpu.

Yeah like myself. XP3200+ 3 years old passed, got it when it was released more or less. Been a really good chip to me.
Though if I was to go PCI-E, new CPU, DDR2, Graphics card, maybe Soundcard too. As I don't know yet if I'm going to keep my Socket A running with XP come near the summer or just build an entire new system again and put Vista on it.
As it would be rather pointless buying a socket939 board now to run DDR. As aren't they EOL now? Only the AM2 sockets require DDR2.

marc2003 said:
i wouldn't stick a top end agp card in a socket a board. even when i used to run a 6800gt with an xp2500@3200, i felt my system was slightly cpu limited....

It is...? even though on mine I can run Quake4, BF2, FarCry and the likes smoothly with HDR on a XP3200+, NF7-S v2.0, 2GB mem and a 7800GS+ at high quality at 4xAA/8XAF sometimes 16xAF and native at 1920x1200.
I may not get blistering 3 number fps digits like most seem to crave for here and other sites, but at least its smooth and pretty quality.

That was the reason I got the 7800GS+, the x850xt wasn't able to run CS:S smoothly with HDR. It was also a slideshow in quake4 at 1920x1200.

achitophel said:
One other little "cost" of such upgrade (i.e. AGP to PCI-E and so new mobo) is a new version of Windows XP! I certainly hadn't realised until I read another thread on this board that the OEM version is essentially locked to the mobo and so changing this gives a further cost...

Looks like it's retail versions for me from here on in

Thats quite crap, as I have a OEM copy too :/ I guess MS doesn't know hardware fails or productions end therefor if it all of a sudden just dies kiss your XP copy goodbye

Though I remember when I first got XP Pro, it was installed on a VIA chipset in 2000/01 XP Pro was put onto a nForce1 then was eventually changed over to a nForce2. Don't know how I got past those 3 changes. Even though each required activation. Unless MS has recently changed their licensing in the past year or so now...

achitophel · 5 Nov 2006 at 19:47

V F said:
Thats quite crap, as I have a OEM copy too :/ I guess MS doesn't know hardware fails or productions end therefor if it all of a sudden just dies kiss your XP copy goodbye

Though I remember when I first got XP Pro, it was installed on a VIA chipset in 2000/01 XP Pro was put onto a nForce1 then was eventually changed over to a nForce2. Don't know how I got past those 3 changes. Even though each required activation. Unless MS has recently changed their licensing in the past year or so now...

From what I can see having googled it, it looks like a change made via the EULA during 2005. Now, as to whether that change is meant to apply with retrospective effect (i.e. to versions of XP bought before that date), I have now idea...BTW - are you sure you don't have the retail version of XP Pro rather than the OEM, since it appears that you CAN still change the mobo if you bought the retail version.

V F · 5 Nov 2006 at 22:05

Well its not THE OEM that you would get with the likes of other pre-installed Windows/PC manufacturers which IIRC their licenses had changed in 05. Which rings a bell now after you mentioned that. As the OEM I got when XP first launched was just like what OCUK sell. I do not know if it ties itself to the motherboard...

edgaruy1980 · 6 Nov 2006 at 06:39

Really, why people starts against agp!?
AGP is a parallel technology, the performance, of a 7800GS+ 512mb at 500Mhz core and 700Mhz memory is about 51.1Gb/s bandwidth and 12 Gpix/s fill rate, practical,tested, not the rhetorically nvidia crap!
Also it was too bad the under development on AGP.
AGP could do great SLI as they send information in parallel in small burst, even there was some testing in dual agp slots, where one can send and other receive, in synchrony.
AGP technology is only 2 GB/s but in a bus of 533MHZ so, when you have 800Mhz or 1066 front bus, you are wasting yourself.
At 1066Mhz bus, AGP could do 4GB/s, is just exponential to the bus.
I heard they are developing a new generation like the pci express 2.0 or better.
Just I hope one day, the technology will be develop not to make you upgrade from agp to pci, or stuff like that, just full development.
When we don't have bottlenecks! Chipsets and memory (RAM)needs to improve lots, they can't keep the pace to the new generation of cards, and CPUs are being hostages as they depend a lot from the chipset.

ledbythereaper · 6 Nov 2006 at 12:11

Money reasons, if you want to play some of the latest games but have an nForce 3/2 board and you can't afford to upgrade everything then a new AGP card is a good idea, my brother had been running an MX440 for a couple years but most games looked awful so he got a 7600GS, only cost £100 and now he can play most games at high (annoys me cause I still have a FX5950 Ultra)

Cyber-Mav · 6 Nov 2006 at 12:34

if your using a gfx card that does not use hyper memory or turbo cache then why would you need more than 500 megabytes per second over the gfx card interface? once all the data has been pulled from the hard drive into system ram how long would you think it takes to fill up 512mb of gfx card ram with a 2gigabytes per second interface?

its all to do with money.....

Spook · 6 Nov 2006 at 19:33

I generally do a full upgrade every 2 years with a graphics refresh in between, however right at the moment I sse it as a poor time to do a full system upgrade.

I will update my graphics soon to extend the life of my current system until early next year when I will do a complete upgrade.

doodleplop · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:02

Ok I give in, you guys have persuaded me. With quad core on the way, and valve telling us that this will be better for games than dual core. Also AMD have yet to put their quad core offering on the table which is bound to be good as it will be true quad core. Direct x10 is on the way.

I just can't afford to keep getting new upgrades, so, I think for now I will upgrade my gfx card to something more meaty, hopefully for a lot less than £100. I dont think my cpu should bottleneck something like a 6800 or 6600, should it? Or what are the ATI offerings that will beat my current card into submission.

Ideally the card must be under £100 or available on a well known auction site for under £100.

Any suggestions welcome

Thanks

Jonny

melbourne720 · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:09

doodleplop said:
I think for now I will upgrade my gfx card to something more meaty, hopefully for a lot less than £100.

Meaty? I think it will be Quorn for less than a ton

If we can assume AGP, I think a S/H 6800 GT would do the trick. All depends on (a) Games running (b) resolution running at and (c) level of eye-candy deemed 'acceptable'.

melbourne720 · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:11

you could even get a 6800 GS and try to unlock the pipes - I did and got a major speed increase.

Either way, put an aftermarket cooler on it (Arctic cooling or Zalman VF 900) and overclock it like mad

doodleplop · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:15

Thanks for the quick replies, I thought of the 6800 as my friend has a gs and he is really happy with it and he plays the likes of bf2 and so on on full settings on a 20" monitor. I myself have a 17" that I am quite content with, lots of the 6800 cards on a well known auction site I just visited look quite well priced, whether prices will rise too high for my liking remains to be seen. What would the ATI offering be, is the x800 xt any good??

Thanks

Jonny

4T5 · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:18

Because it is easy and because we don't have as much money as you. Rocket science it is Not.

My 939 A64 3500 + Gainward 7800GS+ plays All the games i want at Excellent settings. I get over 8k in 3D Mark 05 and still have room to clock the crap out of it when i am feeling brave.
Upgrade took around 5 minutes and all my temps, progs and games are great.

If there ws a Massive difference between PCI-E and AGP i may be tempted. If the games i played took advantage of Dual core i also may be tempted but they don't.
If i was convinced the games i play would run as good on a PCI-E or dual core i may be tempted but oncce again i am Not.

Basically my system performs as i want it and i know and trust it, Why woud i change to hardware i don't know and am Not convinced would be a Major improvement over my current set up.

The whole thing just doesn't make me inclined to way out my dough and go for a major rebuild.

Just my opinion of course.

J.D · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:42

doodleplop said:
What would the ATI offering be, is the x800 xt any good??

Yes. It's even more powerful than the 7600gt. The only advantage the 7600gt has over it is HDR and SM3.0 but with the 7600gt HDR isn't really useful as it draws too much from the card in most games.

I went from the Asus X800XT P.E to the 7600GT OC from BFG and it lasted 3 weeks in my PC. I didn't like it compared to my X800.

6800GT/Ultra - X800/X850 - 7800GS <--- This is not in order but just a few good cards to go for.

doodleplop · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:48

All sounds good, so general consensus, 6800, how long will this last me before I need to upgrade. If it will last till the end of the usefulness of dx9 cards for gaming then this is all I need.

Thanks

Jonny

melbourne720 · 7 Nov 2006 at 10:57

doodleplop said:
All sounds good, so general consensus, 6800, how long will this last me before I need to upgrade. If it will last till the end of the usefulness of dx9 cards for gaming then this is all I need.

Until (a) You start running games at a higher resolution than 1280x1024 (b)you want to play DX10 games (c) You want to play FEAR or Oblivion or (d) you want to play current stuff with AA or AF.

Also a lot depends on your tolerance of low frame rates...