R600 Agp

Liqourice · May 22, 2007, 04:28 PM

I read this today.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/d...521054545.html

This sounds interesting since I'm about to go buy a X1950 PRO or XT.

What kind of performance could I expect from a HD2600 XT/PRO compared to the older X1950 cards, besides the support for DX10?

How much more expensive would they be, if more at all?

Nick0323 · May 22, 2007, 07:06 PM

Looking in comparison...

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards....=520&card2=471

(HD2600XT Vs. X1950PRO)

NO. lol.

128-bit DDR vs 256-bit DDR...bah
8 Texture units vs. 12...bah
4 Raster operators vs. 12...o dear

The only thing this card wins in is the "Shader Operations" which appears to be quad what the x1950pro has. Any reviews in the near future would be interesting but to be honest i'd just go and buy the x1950pro, get the newer HIS V2 1950pro which has 1.2ns DDR 512mb DDR memory

Judas · May 23, 2007, 02:48 PM

A AGP verison of a slimmed down HD2900 would probably be quite interesting though.

Nick0323 · May 23, 2007, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

A AGP verison of a slimmed down HD2900 would probably be quite interesting though.

Yes, a HD2900PRO AGP would be nice

**ChaosMinionX** · May 23, 2007, 10:11 PM

I think they better fix the PCIE before they make an AGP

Dark Lord · May 23, 2007, 10:22 PM

ya saw this a couple days ago. really quite unfortunate that its such a crap card. was hopeing that these would be on par/slightly below the 1950xts so i could return mine and go with a less power hunger, less heat produceing card.

Nick0323 · May 24, 2007, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX

I think they better fix the PCIE before they make an AGP

They have fixed it, its called pcie 2.0 lol

H3X4D3C1M4L · Jun 3, 2007, 12:48 AM

AGP would bottleneck the card... as well as the fact that you'd need about 14 molex plugs to power the damn thing since you can't A) use PCI-e plugs on an AGP card (they don't design it that way for some reason) and B) AGP supplies next to no power compared with PCI-e.

It'd be interesting to see how long the sparkler-like display would last before the inevitable aftermath

But seriously... AGP would bottleneck its performance unless it got gimped down hardcore.

Liqourice · Jun 9, 2007, 05:59 AM

Is that so? I mean, there is a myth that AGP cards are slower than their PCI-E counterparts. Though, tests shows that this isn't true, not as far as when it comes to X1k-cards.

I don't know, maybe the new line of cards are that much faster so it will be bottlenecked by the AGP bus but I haven't seen anything to indicate that yet.

OldBuzzard · Jun 9, 2007, 06:28 AM

Take a look at the DH review of the X1950 PC-e vs. AGP. There was almost no difference in performance. Vid cards still haven't reached the speed where AGP is a bottleneck. In 2-3 more generations, maybe, but right now the "PCI-e is faster" is just BS. PCI-e is CAPABLE of being faster, but the hardware hasn't begun to use it. The same thing happened when we went from PCI to AGP. It took the vid cards a couple of generations untill the AGP ones were clearly faster than the best PCI cards.

I'm not sure that system that is on an AGP mainboard is capable of running a 2900 flatout, however, the 2900 AGP would give the AGP people DX10, which will extend the life of their systems a bit longer.

EDIT:

Liqourice,, I just noticed that you have an X2 5200! That shouldn't bottleneck a 2900. If I was in your place, I'd go for the 2900 over the 1950 just for the DX10.

RoyBatty · Jun 9, 2007, 06:46 AM

The 2600 and 2400 (I have not seen any signs of any 2900 AGP card yet) probably are not much faster (IF they are faster) than X1950 series. Therefore I'd say that the AGP won't be bottlenecking them.

Liqourice · Jun 9, 2007, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBuzzard

Liqourice,, I just noticed that you have an X2 5200! That shouldn't bottleneck a 2900. If I was in your place, I'd go for the 2900 over the 1950 just for the DX10.

Ya..

But then I need a new motherboard as well since there aren't any AGP R600-cards yet.

I can get a X1950Pro for 1/3 the price of a HD2900. The amount of games using DX10 are still so few... I don't think theres a point in getting a DX10 card until maybe late this year. Lets say september-october.. so I might try to stretch the X850 a bit more, or get the 1950 and wait until next year for a decent DX10 card.

OldBuzzard · Jun 10, 2007, 05:48 AM

OOOPPPSSS

Thought at first you were talking about a 2900AGP as apposed to a 2600. That changes things some.

Let's assume that the 2600 is going to have similar performance to the 1950 Pro. If that is the case, and the $$ is going to be close, and it becomes available fairly soon, that gives you one more option.

You could get the 2600 instead of the 1950, which would give you DX10 now, and still wait until next year for a better DX10. The advantage to that is you get DX10 right away, and the next update/Gen DX10 cards will be a bit more mature, and some of the power issues may be resolved by that time.

~~hackerx~~ · Jun 17, 2007, 08:31 AM

just curious

but how many AGP based computers are out there right now?
I'm talking in tems of percentage of market

Am i wrong if i say more than 70% is pci-e based?

OldBuzzard · Jun 17, 2007, 10:19 AM

I'd say that your estimate is way too high. I'm betting that there are more computers in use with AGP cards as opposed to PCI-e.

Now if you are talking about the ENTHUSIST market, then you are probably close.

CDsDontBurn · Jun 17, 2007, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBuzzard

I'd say that your estimate is way too high. I'm betting that there are more computers in use with AGP cards as opposed to PCI-e.

Now if you are talking about the ENTHUSIST market, then you are probably close.

would i count as "enthusiast"? lol.

my rig is pretty much maxed out except for the CPU.

H3X4D3C1M4L · Jun 19, 2007, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldBuzzard

Take a look at the DH review of the X1950 PC-e vs. AGP. There was almost no difference in performance. Vid cards still haven't reached the speed where AGP is a bottleneck. In 2-3 more generations, maybe, but right now the "PCI-e is faster" is just BS. PCI-e is CAPABLE of being faster, but the hardware hasn't begun to use it. The same thing happened when we went from PCI to AGP. It took the vid cards a couple of generations untill the AGP ones were clearly faster than the best PCI cards.

I'm not sure that system that is on an AGP mainboard is capable of running a 2900 flatout, however, the 2900 AGP would give the AGP people DX10, which will extend the life of their systems a bit longer.

EDIT:

Liqourice,, I just noticed that you have an X2 5200! That shouldn't bottleneck a 2900. If I was in your place, I'd go for the 2900 over the 1950 just for the DX10.

I seriously doubt that AMD/ATI will even release any R600 for AGP. Its dead. (And I only have AGP systems for gaming at the moment).

I mean come on if you can afford one of those video cards you can afford a system upgrade too.

Besides I still insist that the AGP bus itself would become a limiting factor for pure fill rate and things like that.... an X1950 is one thing but the 2900's are much faster than those cards.

Dark Lord · Jun 19, 2007, 12:19 PM

not entirely true. i could afford to upgrade my old x800 to a 1950xt, but theres no way i could have gone to pci-e. that would have been a new mother board, new cpu (S754 right now) and new ddr2 ram.

Yousaif · Jun 19, 2007, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDsDontBurn

would i count as "enthusiast"? lol.

my rig is pretty much maxed out except for the CPU.

You're an enthusiast on a budget

aNy_oNE · Jun 20, 2007, 03:25 AM

I'm pretty sure I saw some diagram somewhere on AMD's website comparing the spec of various versions of 2900, 2600 and 2400 and I'm sure I saw an AGP version based on each.. (in that diagram.. don't know if it will actually happen)

Liqourice · Jun 20, 2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H3X4D3C1M4L

I seriously doubt that AMD/ATI will even release any R600 for AGP. Its dead. (And I only have AGP systems for gaming at the moment).

I mean come on if you can afford one of those video cards you can afford a system upgrade too.

Besides I still insist that the AGP bus itself would become a limiting factor for pure fill rate and things like that.... an X1950 is one thing but the 2900's are much faster than those cards.

I got this system a few months ago because I couldn't afford everything at once. I got the mobo with AGP since I had a decent gfx card, the X850XT. My budget couldn't take getting a new gfx card as well.

Now I seem to be able to get a new gfx card but I can't afford more than that, not even a new mobo as well. I've noticed that the X850XT is somewhat limited sometimes so an X1950 would be a good choise. I'd love to go for the X2900 but I don't have that kind of money, not even for just the card.

I can wait.. sure... but then there are some games I can't play.

And DX10.. will it even be avaliable for XP? I'm not gonna go Vista until everything is absolutely sure to work anyway. The game I enjoy the most, WWIIOnline does NOT work in Vista and won't for a while. Hence, why get a DX10 card when I can't use DX10 anyway.

RaveneR · Jun 21, 2007, 11:12 PM

Vista still doesnt seem to be friendly with quite alot of things, or am i behind time?

I was told that there is a dx10 release for XP, with limited performance or something like that, but when i look for it, there's no such thing.

I think most of us have the same problem, being unable to upgrade to a new comp due to tight budget...