WHY, OH WHY does NVIDIA offer a DX10 card for PCI and not AGP?!

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Paratus
Nvidia don't care about AGP people!

That is because people who still have AGP slots are cheapskates! j/k.... but really is the market large enough for a company to enginneer an AGP version of their cards?

 

[yh125d]

Why cant I use my old 1994 ford taurus with brand new tech like ethanol fuels???? F U Ford!





Same argument. Buy new stuff

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Paratus
Nvidia don't care about AGP people!

So get a nice 4650 or 4670 in AGP instead.

BTW I tried to run Crysis Warhead on my new monitor, 19x12 with the highest settings for WinXP on my P4 3.2 and AGP X1950PRO 512 machine. It took at least two minutes just to go from the advanced video tab back to the game. I ended up only seeing about three frames because they came about 20 seconds apart and half the NK army showed up in somewhere between the second and third frame and killed me.

The OP explained why. Also, if you had a 3.8GHz Prescott or P4 Dual Core you'd probably match my 2.4GHz C2Q Q6600, which does Crysis just fine and isn't bottlenecking the GTX 280 in most games.

Match it in what? even a 3.73ghz Pentium-D EE can't even come close to a stock Q6600 (unless you have the worlds slowest Q6600).

A P4@3.8GHZ is no match for a Q6600 in any application..remember ,the core 2 architecture is twice a fast clock for clock compared with netburst...so a P4 would have to be around 4.8ghz to match a single core of a Q6600.

Well, for starters, I am mentally comparing it in typically single-threaded gaming performance where it is still often GPU limited. My nephew plays everything on his Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OC'd) w/ 8800GT and got a healthy boost from his previous 7900GS. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (maximum settings), Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, Gears of War, Mass Effect, etc... all on a 2GB DDR1 system with a slow-ass CPU. Games have always been far less CPU-limited than people imagine.

well you might need to get your head checked then, last time I checked even a 3800+ X2 is faster than a P4@3.8ghz.

And as I said before clock for clock a C2 is twice as fast as a netburst processor in single threaded [CPU-limited] apps...

Fix'd

Originally posted by: Stumps
...so there is no way on earth a P4 can even come close to a C2 processor is single threaded apps

Sure there is... if the single-threaded app is a GPU-limited game, software performance will be very comparable. Comparable CPU performance? No, but software performance? Yes.

 

[Stumps]

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Stumps

Originally posted by: CZroe

Originally posted by: Paratus
Nvidia don't care about AGP people!

So get a nice 4650 or 4670 in AGP instead.

BTW I tried to run Crysis Warhead on my new monitor, 19x12 with the highest settings for WinXP on my P4 3.2 and AGP X1950PRO 512 machine. It took at least two minutes just to go from the advanced video tab back to the game. I ended up only seeing about three frames because they came about 20 seconds apart and half the NK army showed up in somewhere between the second and third frame and killed me.

The OP explained why. Also, if you had a 3.8GHz Prescott or P4 Dual Core you'd probably match my 2.4GHz C2Q Q6600, which does Crysis just fine and isn't bottlenecking the GTX 280 in most games.

Match it in what? even a 3.73ghz Pentium-D EE can't even come close to a stock Q6600 (unless you have the worlds slowest Q6600).

A P4@3.8GHZ is no match for a Q6600 in any application..remember ,the core 2 architecture is twice a fast clock for clock compared with netburst...so a P4 would have to be around 4.8ghz to match a single core of a Q6600.

Well, for starters, I am mentally comparing it in typically single-threaded gaming performance where it is still often GPU limited. My nephew plays everything on his Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (OC'd) w/ 8800GT and got a healthy boost from his previous 7900GS. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (maximum settings), Crysis, Crysis: Warhead, Gears of War, Mass Effect, etc... all on a 2GB DDR1 system with a slow-ass CPU. Games have always been far less CPU-limited than people imagine.

well you might need to get your head checked then, last time I checked even a 3800+ X2 is faster than a P4@3.8ghz.

And as I said before clock for clock a C2 is twice as fast as a netburst processor in single threaded [CPU-limited] apps...

Fix'd

Originally posted by: Stumps
...so there is no way on earth a P4 can even come close to a C2 processor is single threaded apps

Sure there is... if the single-threaded app is a GPU-limited game, software performance will be very comparable. Comparable CPU performance? No, but software performance? Yes.

what type of GPU would you be refering to?, a PCI S3 Virge maybe...not anything made in the last 5 years

Even Intel based IGP's show performance gains in benchmarks when a C2 replaces a P4 in the same system.

I feel that I may have to drag my P4 3.45Ghz out of retirement then (according to your logic) and replace my Quad core....all that money wasted when (according to your logic) my P4 would have been perfectly fine.