BX board that support 1/3 AGP multiplier

[Biggs]

Does the Abit BE6 II v2.0 support this feature? How about the MSI BX Master?

 

[Vegito]

1/3, BX only has 1/1 or 2/3 multiplier. No BX in the world, course I could be wrong, that I know of, unless it just came out yesterday has a 1/3 or ability to keep 66mhz at 133FSB.. if thats what you're asking for.

 

[odog]

no...

 

[Spook]

Like he said... it isn't the Manufacturers, its the chipset, it isn't capable of 1/3 divider.

 

[oldfart]

If you need that feature, look at an 815e based board.

 

[LXi]

NO motherboards have 1/3 AGP divider, I dont know what AGP multiplier is, but only VIA 133A, i820, i815, i840, i850 and newer chipsets have 1/2 AGP divider(133MHz*1/2=66MHz default AGP).

 

[Biggs]

Ok, but I do believe the board supports 2 AGP divider ratios. So if one is 2/3, what's the other one?

 

[Ornery]

Does he need that feature?

AGP Performance: Installation and Issues Jeff Brubaker, December 18th, 2000

• Finally, the BX chipset has been around for quite some time and was not originally intended to be used in conjunction with a 133MHz front side bus. As a result, there is no 1/2 multiplier for the AGP bus (although there is a magical 1/4 multiplier for the PCI bus). As a result, the BX benchmarks listed in the forthcoming pages are somewhat misleading because the AGP bus is actually running at 89MHz while the other two boards are running at 66MHz. The 89MHz bus translates to 712MB/s of bandwidth, a 34% increase over the 533MB/s of "standard" AGP 2X. Note that AGP 4X yields a peak transfer rate of 1.06GB/s. For further discussion on AGP standards and performance considerations, see our article on BX chipsets at 133MHz FSB speeds. We don't consider this to be a major problem, however, as this is still a common setup for gamers wishing to stick with their current BX boards, enjoy the extra performance with minimal overclocking, or take advantage of the tried and true nature of the chipset. Further, most cards work fine at 89MHz. The only exception that comes to mind is Matrox's new G450.

 

[LXi]

Biggs:

The other one would be 1/1(66MHz*1/1=66MHz AGP default)


Ornery:

I believe he does. To my knowledge TNT2 cards dont work at 89MHz, some GeForce/GeForce2 cards dont work at 89MHz, almost all of the ATI cards, including Radeon dont work at 89MHz, and like the passage stated, Matrox cards dont work righ at 89MHz. Only 3dfx cards function normally at 89MHz because they dont utilize AGP. Of course Side Band Addressing can change the story. But better be safe than sorry, BX is outdated anyway.

 

[oldfart]

Biggs, one is 2/3. The other is 1/1. As far as "needing" it. I purposefully left that open.

 

[Taz4158]

<< But better be safe than sorry, BX is outdated anyway. >>



Not really, they are still capable of fast and stable performance. And the Radeon LOVES running at 89 and higher. Guess you've never owned one or tried it!

 

[Biggs]

So which would have more performance, a 440BX with 89MHz AGP bus or an i815e with 66Mhz AGP bus?

 

[LXi]

I know the Radeon well enough to tell people about it, I would definitely get i815E, BX is outdated, no more needed, retired, has its jersey hanged, into the hall of fame.

 

[odog]

BX hands down.... benchs show that BX133 smokes 815...

 

[Taz4158]

Look for some mem benchmarks and see what running your AGP at 89 can do.

 

[LXi]

Definte &quot;smoking&quot;. 165fps vs 150fps? Dont make a flying fart to me.

 

[Taz4158]

<< I know the Radeon well enough to tell people about it, I would definitely get i815E, BX is outdated, no more needed, retired, has its jersey hanged, into the hall of fame. >>


Sorry but I DON'T think you know the Radeon well enough to tell people about it since you were spreading incorrect information. It happens to run quite decently at 100 FSB, and I've owned ALL the Radeons. 89 is a cakewalk for it.

 

[Ornery]

How pathetic are the &quot;new&quot; boards if they are outperformed in any way by the ancient BX? Sad, very sad...

 

[LXi]

<<and I've owned ALL the Radeons>>

Whoa, now that something. ALL? You serious? You mean preowned all the Radeons before ATI sell them? I know many Radeon owners who had trouble running it at 89MHz.

 

[Taz4158]

<< Whoa, now that something. ALL? You serious? You mean preowned all the Radeons before ATI sell them? I know many Radeon owners who had trouble running it at 89MHz. >>


Well let's see going back to August I've owned the AIW, the 32 meg SDR, the 32 meg DDR and both a VIVO 64 and non VIVO so yepper Sparky I've owned them all. You've owned none and are passing on hearsay information which means nothing. Why not buy one and THEN report on your experiences which THEN would mean something. Until then you're just blowing in the wind.

 

[LXi]

I thought you mean all the Radeon cards ATI has produced, yes I mean all, I dont know how many million they shipped but you sounded like you owned them all before they sold them to retail channels and OEMs and such.

Again, I dont have to use it or own it to know enough about it, I recommended the 32MB to a friend who is currently running Abit BE6-2, he was running his 700E at 1050 with his V3 and boom! Guess what? It wouldnt even go above 112MHz. He's really pissed at me and thats why Im reluctant to recommend BX boards again, Im not trashing the Radeon, its just personally I hate running everything overclocked to funny buses. Hey, if you got a solution for him, I think he'd be delighted to hear about it.

Either way, ATI cards are not known to take overclock AGP buses well, in Anand's report he stated that the Rage128s wont take high AGP buses even with SBA on. It doesnt change the fact that many other video cards such as Matroxes and TNT2s dont like 89MHz, it doesnt change the fact that 89MHz AGP sucks. Doesnt change the fact that i815E has taken over and there is no reason for a BX. Doesnt change the fact that AMD solutions are all around superior and there is no reason for Intel.

Speaking of blowing wind, you can very well be the one thats doing so, unless you have some soundn statistical data that shows all Radeon run well on 89MHz and above, we're all blowing winds.

 

[Taz4158]

<< Either way, ATI cards are not known to take overclock AGP buses well, in Anand's report he stated that the Rage128s wont take high AGP buses even with SBA on. >>


Well seeing as though that's a Rage and a Radeon is a Radeon methinks the two don't really coalesce do they? Rather old review wasn't it?



<< Hey, if you got a solution for him, I think he'd be delighted to hear about it. >>


Tell him to PM or email me, I'd be more than happy to help him out.



<< it doesnt change the fact that 89MHz AGP sucks >>


You might be surprised if you actually had done any testing eh?



<< Doesnt change the fact that i815E has taken over and there is no reason for a BX. >>


Again, why not run some comparisons and come back with some valid findings? And by the way I'm sure Intel would be VERY pleased about what you said.

I'd be curious as to just what you're running.

 

[LXi]

<<Well seeing as though that's a Rage and a Radeon is a Radeon methinks the two don't really coalesce do they? Rather old review wasn't it?>>

It wasnt that old.


<<Tell him to PM or email me, I'd be more than happy to help him out.>>

He doesnt come to the AT boards. His ICQ is 3003643.


<<You might be surprised if you actually had done any testing eh?>>

Oh yes I have. Please dont accuse me with these kind of blanket statements.


<<Again, why not run some comparisons and come back with some valid findings? And by the way I'm sure Intel would be VERY pleased about what you said.>>

Im fully confident about my position, I can care less about what Intel thinks. Check some of those i815e numbers, tell me if its 160fps vs 150vs, doesnt mean a thing to me nor to anyone.


<<I'd be curious as to just what you're running.>>

I bought the VIA 133A board to replace my BX, well I guess you already know what the reason is. i815E wasnt available back then but Im thoroughly pleased with my purchase. This is my test results with a TNT2, not much of anything but enough for me to drop BX off the consideration list, take into account that the i815E is faster than VIA, so the difference difference is even less, or should I say totally negligable. No I didnt just made that up.


VIA Apollo Pro 133A VS Intel 440BX Performance Comparison


System setup:
Pentium III - 600E FC-PGA
Asus P3V4X*, Asus P2B-F*
KTI/Kingmax 128MB PC133 -7ns SDRAM
Guillemot MaxiGamer Xentor32, TNT2 Ultra, 32MB(175/183)*
Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live! MP3+*, Live! Value*
Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 40 20GB, DiamondMax Plus 2500 10GB
NetGear FX310 NIC
Adaptec AVA-2906 SCSI-2
Yamaha CRW4416S CD-RW
Acer CD640A 40X
(*= See note)

____________________________________________________________
Quake 3 Arena Demo, Fastest and Normal, all options turned on, high sound quality, Demo 001(all tests taken in 16bit)

3D Marks 2000, 640x480x16bit
------------------------------------------
*Note:
Asus P3V4X (BIOS revision 1001), Asus P2B-F (BIOS revision 1008)
Asus P3V4X was tested with version 4.17 of the VIA 4-in-1 drivers.
Guillemot Xentor32 was tested with version 3.68 of the nVidia detonator drivers.
SB Live! Value, and SB Live! MP3+ were tested with Creative?s Live!ware 3.
____________________________________________________________


Mobos: Asus P3V4X (VIA 133A)------------Asus P2B-F (Intel 440BX)

600MHz(100MHz)
Q3A Fastest________75.3 fps ------------77.9 fps
Q3A Normal________65.6 fps ------------65.7 fps
3D Marks 2000________3591 ------------3784

744MHz(124MHz)
Q3A Fastest________85.8 fps ------------91.9 fps
Q3A Normal________71.7 fps ------------75.1 fps
3D Marks 2000________4160 ------------4423

800MHz(133MHz)
Q3A Fastest________93.5 fps ------------failed
Q3A Normal________76.3 fps ------------failed
3D Marks 2000________4591 ------------failed

 

[Nessism]

I'm not looking to get into a flame war but I love my Asus CUBX board. I am running a 32MB Radeon at 89mhz - 133mhz FSB- with good reliability. I have never seen a review that indicates that AGP 4x will provide any real improvement over 2x and I also have never heard of a 815, or VIA chipset board, that could match BX for memory performance. Just my $0.02

 

[LXi]

VIA 133A memory tweak guide, if memory performance is your argument then I have to offer something to counter.