Video-related Rant: AGP 8X is just a marketing ploy people, it doesn't add anything functional yet!

[Shazam]

The same thing applies to AGP. Try running AGP x1 on a 2800+ or a 3.06 GHz P4 and you'll see a very large difference in performance compared to AGP x4, especially if you have a fast GPU like the Radeon 9700 Pro which sucks up any traffic it gets, and especially if you play modern games. AGP x8 is not a necessity yet but we will need it eventually so it's good to start planning for it.

Well, if AGP 8X actually does make a difference with a 3GHz CPU, I can finally say that AGP, 5 YEARS after it's introduction, is finally not useless (but perhaps not useful .

 

[qhunter]

Well I've got a question in the "help or hype" debate. Is the 8mb buffer on some WD HDDs actually going to show some benefit for me in the A7N8X, xp 2600, xms 3500c2, TI 4200 (128mb) system that I am putting together? or will the usual 2mb buffer be fine? If that sounds like a stupid question at least I had already figured out the 8x agp hype on my own

 

[BFG10K]

66 MHz 64-bit PCI cards would have done just the same as AGP 2X to this point, for example.

No, they wouldn't have. AGP is much more than simply PCI that's clocked at a higher frequency. The main benefit is its advanced pipelining features that allows it to process and despatch multiple instructions and data in parallel. This increases effective bandwidth and decreases latency.

The whole issue here is not that AGP 8X is worthless (note this thread isn't called "AGP 8X is worthless"), just that right now it does not add any tangible performance gain, and unaware buyers may be mislead into thinking it's much faster.

Agreed.

Well, if AGP 8X actually does make a difference with a 3GHz CPU, I can finally say that AGP, 5 YEARS after it's introduction, is finally not useless

AGP has been useful since the first generation of T&L cards arrived on the scene (GeForce DDR). The performance gains over PCI were apparent, even back then.

 

[Shazam]

AGP has been useful since the first generation of T&L cards arrived on the scene (GeForce DDR). The performance gains over PCI were apparent, even back then.

LOL! What, the 1-2% gain? *shudder* Tom's Hardware Article

 

[mechBgon]

It sounds like AGP 3.0 has a lot of changes which are not really going to show up on a run-of-the-mill gaming card edit: for a while, anyway... stuff trickles down. Throw a nice $5000-$10000 3DLabs Wildcat 4 in there, and maybe you'll sing a different tune. I do agree that the hype machine upsets me sometimes, no matter what is being hyped. Sort of an insult to one's intelligence...

 

[BFG10K]

LOL! What, the 1-2% gain?

1-2%? What benchmarks are you referring to? The only time it would be that low is if you had something ridiculously slow like a Pentium 60 or you were playing games that didn't even support basic fixed hardware T&L functions.

Tom's Hardware Article

That article is full of meaningless theory. Once upon a time it might have been true but it hasn't been applicable for years.

Are you honestly totally unaware of the performance delta between PCI and AGP cards? I thought it was common knowledge but I guess I was wrong. Here, I quickly found this for you to look at.

It tests GF2 MX AGP vs GF2 MX PCI performance and although it's quite old and it uses a slow CPU, you can still see a 10-20% performance difference in non-GPU limited situations. Today the difference would easily be 50%, especially in games like UT2003 when paired with fast processors and powerful GPUs. PCI, at least for gaming, has been dead for years.

It's not hype, it's not marketing, it's not trickery - it's simply reality.

 

[Shalmanese]

were not arguing PCI vs AGP, were arguing AGP4x vs AGP8x.

 

[BFG10K]

were not arguing PCI vs AGP,

Actually, "we" are:

Heck, even AGP 1X doesn' t do anything useful.

 

[Panther505]

Two comments on the entire thread - from a test lead at an OEM that is responsible for testing Video Cards and Drivers.....


1. 8x is marketing hype to a degree. Intel and the Video vendors are pushing this. Why? Got me but G3IO (3rd Generation I/O) or better known as PCI Express will be out by next year this time (I think). Once PCI Express comes out then I think that AGP will go the way of the ghost (it is supposed to anyway)

2. Rember that PCI vs AGP reflects in the Busing on a board. PCI is seperate from the AGP so that the AGP can be clocked seperately.... Therefore comparisons of AGP vs PCI can only be done on the 1x level (ie 33 MHz vs 33 MHz because the 4x implies 4 times 33 Mhz bus).

Finally the 8x is only going to be useful to some people at launch- the ones that are rendering huge amounts of data on the AGP pipeline and need all of the bandwidth that they can get. CAD and Rendering are where this is in great demand and those are the areas that will be chomping at the bit to have it... The gamers will benefit to a degree but not like the professionals. As it has been stated at least once in the thread most of the games launching now will only be taking advantage of DX8 or 8.1 as that is how far behind the gamer creators are...

Later

Edit to correct PCI X to PCI Express

 

[RelaxTheMind]

My note on marketing.

Bigger numbers on computer stickers = Better performance. If u already know they dont improe performance. If ur not gonna buy it, dont worry about it.

My note AGP 8x

Just keep in mind that performance in itself is marketing. I am sure there are many unseen benefits of agp 3.0 as its slowly being layed out in front of us, I am sure they already have 16x waiting to come out in a couple years. For them to make more money and for us to save more money. I'd say wait til late summer-early fall next year at least to start coughing up money.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

LOL! What, the 1-2% gain?

1-2%? What benchmarks are you referring to? The only time it would be that low is if you had something ridiculously slow like a Pentium 60 or you were playing games that didn't even support basic fixed hardware T&L functions.

Ok AGP was finalized and released to coincide with the launch of the Pentium II, and was put on later generation Pentium 1 motherboards as well. It was out several years before fixed hardware T&L existed. At it's launch, AGP cards consisted of cards based on the Rage II series, with TNT cards coming awhile later. Then, the 3d front was fought on by the Voodoo3 and TNT2 for some time before the first Geforce card came out.

That review you linked to is helpful to show that indeed a difference exists between AGP and PCI (I never said otherwise), but *at launch*, with a P2 233 or 266 (the fastest you could get), there was no difference. AGP was promised to be faster than PCI, but it took until the V3/TNT2 series to show any difference at all.

 

[kylebisme]

exactly jiffylube, they get the stuff out on the market, then developers start to take advantage of the performace benifit. i imagine the geforce4s will show a definite difference between eachother in games two years from now, granted they will all be prety slow. also it takes time for hardware developers to figure out how to take advantage of things aswell. take my 9700pro and trun it down to agpx2 and it moans, well it works all right but it realy hurts preformance. so the specs are not all hype, but beliveing that every new spec is going to be an instant saviour is foolish.

 

[Shazam]

1-2%? What benchmarks are you referring to? The only time it would be that low is if you had something ridiculously slow like a Pentium 60 or you were playing games that didn't even support basic fixed hardware T&L functions.

I was referring to your statement about the Geforce 256 being materially faster in it's AGP form vs. PCI.

Are you honestly totally unaware of the performance delta between PCI and AGP cards? I thought it was common knowledge but I guess I was wrong. Here, I quickly found this for you to look at.

It's not that large. Really, it isn't.

And, like I mentioned before, AGP 1X was useless, other than the fact that it gave us a free PCI slot. Whee...

Let me put it another way: AGP is NOT the limiting factor in graphics card performance. Never was, is, and never will be.

Oh and for the article? The D3D benchmarks were useless, due to driver issues. Gawd knows what issues the OGL drivers had.

 

[BFG10K]

but *at launch*, with a P2 233 or 266 (the fastest you could get), there was no difference.

That's because back then:
(1) CPUs were far too slow.
(2) Memory bandwidth was too low.
(3) T&L didn't exist.
(4) Traffic from the CPU to the GPU was extremely tiny

Just because there was no difference at all at the time it does not mean that AGP is not faster than PCI

AGP was promised to be faster than PCI, but it took until the V3/TNT2 series to show any difference at all.

In otherwords AGP eventuallty delivered on its promise, just like AGP x8 will do in a few years.

I was referring to your statement about the Geforce 256 being materially faster in it's AGP form vs. PCI.

I still don't see any evidence to back your 1-2% comments.

It's not that large. Really, it isn't.

Of course it's not that large - old games on a slow CPU on a slow GPU.

But there is still a significant performance difference, even in such unfavourable test conditions. What do you think would happen on a P4 3.06 GHz with a 9700 Pro? The difference would be massive, probably in the vicinity of 50%.

BTW, nice backpedal - first there was no difference and now it's "not that large".

And, like I mentioned before, AGP 1X was useless, other than the fact that it gave us a free PCI slot. Whee...

It's clear to me now that you're not interested in the truth at all and you're just trolling. Why don't you run some tests for yourself, maybe that will convince you that you're wrong.

Oh and for the article? The D3D benchmarks were useless, due to driver issues. Gawd knows what issues the OGL drivers had.

I could find plenty more articles to back my claims in addition to using data from my own tests but it's clear to me that you're not interested in the truth at all.

 

[jiffylube1024]

BFG10K - Ah sorry, I misread one of your replies: I though you said that AGP 1X had a use since AGP cards were released, but you actually said since fixed-functional TnL was released. I agree with you there; even the Geforce 1 showed some speed improvement with AGP, and the DDR furthered that point. By the time the GF2 came out, AGP vs. PCI was a moot point, as AGP had clearly won, and evolved to 2X and 4X by then.

The point I'm trying to drive home here is not that AGP 8X, etc is worthless. Just that for almost all current video cards on all platforms (Radeon 9700 on a 3 GHz + P4 perhaps excepted), it will give you no noticeable benefit, and therefore you shouldn't shell out extra money on a feature you believe will be necessary, or significant right now.

 

[Bananadude]

We are all preaching to the converted! Virtually everyone who has the 'skill' and forethought to use forums such as this one will (for the most part) be more than wise to all the marketing ploys computer manufacturers use. It's the people who don't even know sites like this exist who form the majority of PC users who fall for all this crap. And it's those same people who walk into your average PC shop off the street and listen to some ignorant salesman who tells them a P4 will make the internet faster and that a Geforce is by far the best graphics card on the market, and AGPx8 is what you need etc. etc. I guarantee nearly everyone who reads this will know more people like this than people who know what's what. And as long as the number of 'ignorants' continue outnumber the 'wise' the marketing ploys will continue...

 

[Woodchuck2000]

AGP 3.0 is really just increasing the headroom available for graphics cards - the cost of implementation is pretty much negligeble, but it's pushing technology forward. We're still to make real use of other marketing gimmicks such as Serial ATA, USB 2.0, ATA133 et al.

The 'yet' in the thread title is the key word - in a few years time it may be handy to have.

As far as marketing goes, there's so much gimmickry going around, a little more won't hurt anyone.
Quantispeed Architecture anyone?

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Bananadude
We are all preaching to the converted!

I know it's fun to chime in with popular expressions like this, but this post wasn't created out of dire need to stroke my ego (or my post count ), nor were the responses made by others to make themseleves sound intellingent! The reason for this thread's creation is the sheer number of new AT forum members (plus most likely quite a few more lurkers) who were posting many 2-4 reply threads in Video with thread names similar to "Geforce 4 Ti4200 8X worth the money?" and "saving up for a Geforce 4 Ti4200 8X". For a very low post count member, Bananadude, you're among a minority: you seem to be substantially more knowledgable than most AT newbs! Congrats, and good luck here .

 

[cisco]

Well I've been looking to buy a Ti4200 8x simply because I have the new nforce2 8x MB, I've read tomshardware reviews and many posts , searching out cards and prices I'm come to the conclusion that if it only costs $10-$20 more why not have the latest technology that perhaps the next released game may take advantage of it and show a performance gain (I heard the new Doom release may be one)

my card buying decision is stunted more by the warranty issue , PNY gives a lifetime replacement warranty and the ti4200 4x 64mg is only $128 shipped but the card clocks at 225mhz & 500mhz
most other cards gainward , chaintech, abit, asus clock at 250mhz / 500+mhz but only give a 1-3 year warranty
since I have a toasted 3Dprophet DDR here and couldn't get warranty support my concerns are divided.
warranty or performance is the PNY a piece of crap or just as good with alittle overclocking.

any thoughts about :
warranty verses company/brand
of course if the company doesn't provide RMA/support what good is the warranty anyway.
just another thought about buying a 4x or 8x card (there are other things to consider)

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: cisco
Well I've been looking to buy a Ti4200 8x simply because I have the new nforce2 8x MB, I've read tomshardware reviews and many posts , searching out cards and prices I'm come to the conclusion that if it only costs $10-$20 more why not have the latest technology that perhaps the next released game may take advantage of it and show a performance gain (I heard the new Doom release may be one)

my card buying decision is stunted more by the warranty issue , PNY gives a lifetime replacement warranty and the ti4200 4x 64mg is only $128 shipped but the card clocks at 225mhz & 500mhz
most other cards gainward , chaintech, abit, asus clock at 250mhz / 500+mhz but only give a 1-3 year warranty
since I have a toasted 3Dprophet DDR here and couldn't get warranty support my concerns are divided.
warranty or performance is the PNY a piece of crap or just as good with alittle overclocking.

any thoughts about :
warranty verses company/brand
of course if the company doesn't provide RMA/support what good is the warranty anyway.
just another thought about buying a 4x or 8x card (there are other things to consider)

Hey there - a lifetime warranty is a very good policy to get, however 3 years is more than sufficient. If possible try to get more than a 1 year.

That 225 MHz core sounds fishy; usually they don't underclock the GPU, since virtually all of them can hit 300 MHz anyways. I wonder if that's a lower yield part? Personally, I'd try to get a 128MB card (for future-proofing), but I'm running along with a 64MB card just fine.

I've had GREAT sucess with MSI cards; this latest GF4 Ti4200 from MSI has me hooked on their brand - it's just such a solid card. I owned a Ti200 from MSI as well, and it was awesome, but I didn't realize that MSI actually improved on their bundle with their GF4's. This card comes with like 4 full version games! That said, I've heard great things from Leadtek and Asus as well; the ABIT OTES is one of the best also. Gainward used to be the king of the o/c block; they've faltered somewhat but still are very reputable.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Woodchuck2000
AGP 3.0 is really just increasing the headroom available for graphics cards - the cost of implementation is pretty much negligeble, but it's pushing technology forward. We're still to make real use of other marketing gimmicks such as Serial ATA, USB 2.0, ATA133 et al.

I hate to pick apart others' threads, but I must say that Serial ATA, USB 2.0 and ATA133 all have useful functions even right now. USB 2.0 allows portable high-speed burners, hard drives and many other peripherals. ATA/133 has helped our slower-than-usual transition to Serial ATA because ATA/133 is needed for larger drives (I believe >140GB needs ATA/133). And Serial ATA is just great because it helps keeping the inside of a case much tidier with its ridiculously thin cables, and therefore increases airflow in there as well. AGP 3.0 is, as you say, just increasing the headroom for graphics cards; it's a necessary transition, but so far it shouldn't "sell itself" so to speak.