GeForce 3 PCI!

[Duckers]

I was wondering if nVIDIA had any plan to create a PCI version of their upcoming video card.

I recently bought a voodoo 5 5500 PCI for $199 and I was wondering if I have any chance to get a better PCI solution in the near future.

 

[xtreme2k]

It would be a TOTALLY Waste of Money if a GF3 is sitting on a PCI slot.

 

[NFS4]

Waste of money...end of story

 

[Duckers]

is the Voodoo 5 5500 also considered a waste of money?

you would be surprised, since I have never seen a voodoo 5 5500 AGP perform significantly better than its PCI version.

 

[Mule]

<< It would be a TOTALLY Waste of Money if a GF3 is sitting on a PCI slot >>


Why do you say that? Until now most PCI video cards gave the same amount of performance as AGP cards, and they're even more overclockable! If performance is a LITTLE BIT worse then an AGP card, it's no big deal.

EDIT:


<< Of course, that's just my opinion; I could be wrong. >>


Well you're certainly wrong this time!

 

[xtreme2k]

The Voodoo5 is a special case.

V5 is basically designed as if it is really a PCI card. It takes no advantage of the AGP other than using the AGP2x Transfer rate, therefore comparing a PCI v5 and a AGP v5 will show little difference.

However, the GF3 is a totally different story. It is designed to take advantage of the AGP slot, and it will show up a lot more.

If you dont believe me, look at those G2MX PCI and AGP difference, they show up huge in benchmarks.

 

[rommel]

why would you even buy a pci video card?

 

[xtreme2k]

I certainly wont.

It is like putting a P3 on EDO RAM.

 

[NFS4]

<< Why do you say that? Until now most PCI video cards gave the same amount of performance as AGP cards, and they're even more overclockable! If performance is a LITTLE BIT worse then an AGP card, it's no big deal. >>


As was stated above, the Voodoo 5 5500 is a special case because IT IS BASICALLY A PCI CARD IN ANY FORM. It uses no AGP features.

NVidia cards OTOH live and die by the AGP bus. Why do you think that you don't see many PCI NVidia cards?? Because the performance is severly castrated.

The GeForce3 will be another monster relying in AGP traffic


<< Well you're certainly wrong this time! >>


PROVE ME WRONG!

 

[Rand]

Take a look at the GF2 MX PCI vs. AGP scores, the GeForce relies too much upon AGP. A PCI GeForce3 would be held way back from it's potential.
The V5 5500 AGP was effectively a PCI card that used the extra bandwidth provided by the AGP slot, that's why there was little difference between the PCI and AGP V5 cards.
The best PCI video card is still the V5 and will likely remain that way.

 

[chuckieland]

wonder how much performance v5 can gain, if it take full advantage of agp slot

 

[Duckers]

as an additional question, should I just live happy with this voodoo 5 PCI since nVIDIA nor any other company will attempt to make a better PCI video card?

 

[xtreme2k]

Stick with V5 for as long as you can before you get some AGP capable motherboard.

 

[NFS4]

I guess Mule doesn't want to or can't prove us wrong

 

[Soccerman]

doesn't want to or can't prove us wrong

the Geforce 3 would care less if it was on a PCI or AGP slot, unless:

-you need system memory for textures
-you are running games that max out the PCI bus with T&amp;L data from the CPU.

if your case is B, then you shouldn't even BUY a Geforce 3.. the whole point of the GF3 is to be good at high polygon count games that require T&amp;L data IN HARDWARE, in which case the PCI bus isn't utilized much at all compared to normal games.

in Quake 3, sure you can run a Geforce 3 on a PCI bus.. at low res you'll see a performance hit compared to AGP, but when you're running older games on such a powerful card, you normally don't even run such low res.. I would suspect that you would run 1024X768X32 + resolutions, where the video card is more limiting (still) then the PCI bus ever would be.

the short answer to this comment {Waste of money...end of story) is that you are wrong.

 

[NFS4]

<< in Quake 3, sure you can run a Geforce 3 on a PCI bus >>


What's the point, who wants to run a $600 video card in an inferior slot technology.


<< at low res you'll see a performance hit compared to AGP, but when you're running older games on such a powerful card, you normally don't even run such low res >>


If you buy a GF3, you should be shot for running it at low resolutions anyway


<< the short answer to this comment {Waste of money...end of story) is that you are wrong. >>


It is a waste of money. You show me the benchmarks proving otherwise and we can talk. If it wasn't a waste, NVidia would be producing GeForce2 GTS and GeForce2 MX cards (in volume) for the PCI-only motherboards like 3dfx did. 3dfx didn't have anything to lose b/c their cards were basically PCI anyway.

PCI GeForce2 MX vs AGP GeForce 2 MX

http://www.viahardware.com/pcimx1.htm

Take a look at the Quake 3 scores and the 3DMark T&amp;L/Non-T&amp;L scores. And a quote from the T&amp;L scores:


<< Ouch. The PCI MX really feels the burn when the T+L engine is stressed. The AGP MX is nearly twice as fast, and the GTS nearly 3 times the speed. >>