Difference in PCI and AGP ATI Radeon, anybody?

[HandOfDragon]

Hi,

I recently made a pretty bad (may be not) choice (with hurry to get a good graphic card for my poor desktop with no AGP) bought ATI Radeon PCI 32mb SDR. Few day laters, I decide to buy new MoBo and Athlon 1.2g since my poor desktop is too slow for 3D game at high res (Rune, Quake at 1024 x 768 32bit). The new MoBo have AGp so I am deciding whether to exchange the PCI for an AGP version.

Any idea of the difference between PCI and AGP performance on ATI Radeon?

The worst thing is I bought the card from CompUSA (with extremely rush to play the game) so I only get couple of choices if I decide to exchange for AGP. As far as I know, they (CompUSA) carry ATI Radeon 64mb DDR, and variants of GeForce2 MX for AGP and GeForce3. I don't know if I will get much higher performance gains from changing the card.

Another question, I tried searching for review on ATI Radeon PCI compare to other cards but cannot find one. I assume all of the review I read for ATI Radeon SDR is for AGP so I wonder anyone know the difference when compare ATI Radeon SDR (PCI ) with other cards?

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by HandOfDragon on 05/31/01 03:03 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Unolocogringo]

The PCI version will have much less performance in a full computer. It is sharing the PCI bus with everything else.Be careful of reviews if you find one.It will probably be test setup with nothing else on the PCI bus.

I aint signing nothing!!!

 

[Guest]

Changing the graphics card will give you the biggest performance gain on a fast computer. From about 700 MHZ on up, the high-res gaming perforformance is about 90% dependant on the graphics card. If money is no issue buy a geforce 3, or a Geforce 2 Ultra. Or if your cheap, buy a geforce 2 mx.
Side note: Make sure to update all your drivers, or you'll have problems.

Aklein

It's raining outside, and my lawn has grown a foot overnight!

 

[noko]

Yes, it is a good idea to exchange the pci for a AGP card. You will see a great performance increase. I Don't recommend a MX for performance, in the long run the MX will probably be a let down and a Kyro2 would be a much better buy, unless you want to do linux. I do recommend highly the Radeon 64 VIVO or GF3. You might want to look at the GF2 pros as well but the image quality in 2d and 3d won't be as good as the Radeon or the GF3. The Kyro2 is a very unique card which if you have a 1gh or greater cpu machine it performs outstandingly in a number of current games, has excellent FSAA and should do OK for awhile. Only problem with the Kyro2 is no T&L engine, meaning it may take a hit on some games in the future if designed around a T&L card.

 

[HandOfDragon]

Thanks everyone,

I exchange the Radeon 32 PCI to 64 VIVO AGP. All 3D game run at lighting speed now =) with my new MoBo and Athlon T-1.2g. I like ATI a lot since I feel that the graphics are better compared to GeForce2 MX that my roommate just bought and install in his machine and also I got good DVD decoder. I like GeForce3 and GeForce2 Ultra though but CompUSA sell them very expensive (GeForce3 at $400 and guess what Hercules II (Ultra) at $500! That's pretty insane so I got the Radeon instead.

Thanks guys.

 

[Crashman]

You could have got the Radeon LE TVO for less than half the price, done a few tweaks, and got visibly the same performance in most games (you would need a benchmark program to see the difference). I ran NSF-V on mine at 1600x1200 and it was smooth as silk.
And the answer to the original question, AGP 1x is 4 TIMES as fast as PCI. So AGP 4x is capable of being 16 times as fast as PCI.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine

 

[camieabz]

I thought PCI was 33MHz, AGP 1x 66MHz etc.

Twice as fast?

<b>
"Now drop your weapons or I'll kill him with this deadly jelly baby."
</b>

 

[HandOfDragon]

I understand the 2x 4x things but the real performance of the graphic card mostly affected by other factors (i.e., memory which make it is impossible to achieve even 2x AGP on old my poor computer =) so I wonder if the AGP version will indeed give me more than 20-30% higher performance on the old comp I have. Anyway, I am happy with Radeon 64 VIVO. Too bad, CompUSA doesn't have Radeon LE and beside flashing Radeon LE is kinda risky. Even with o/c to 180, Radeon LE will not achieve the 64 DDR performance, I think =) unless you got the same mem speed.

Thanks.

 

[Guest]

no LE will perform that of a 64mb radeon, There is also no need to flash the bios, you just need to change the registry.

 

[noko]

The Radeon 64 is a faster setup and will usually overclock much faster then an LE. Basically you have the same chip on both cards but better memory on the 64 and more of it. If you want the highest quality 3d game play (who doesn't) then the 64megger gives you the option of not using compress textures with very little speed drop. The LE on most games without texture compression would slow down to a crawl when accessing AGP texture memory. LE is a great bargain but the quality of the Radeon64 is much better plus it has VideoIn and Out. I use VideoIn everyday and I just love it. Make sure you check out <A HREF="http://Rage3d.com" target="_new">http://Rage3d.com</A>, probably the best graphic card resource on the planet luckily dedicated mostly to the Radeon. You need help, you will get it there fast with little BS. Enjoy and I think you made an excellent decission.

Well to eat your <b>C kie</b> and have it too, gotta get <b>Rade n II</b>

 

[Crashman]

Isn't AGP 64-bit, and PCI 32? 66x64=4(33x32).

Cast not thine pearls before the swine

 

[Crashman]

Let me put it this way-my LE supports the highest settings for my games (after tweaking to retail spec). Even though my GTS outscores it in benchmarks, I can't see thespeed diference in games because most games cannot even push the Radeon to it's limmits. You can overclock a 64 farther and it has more memory, but none of that matters in most games. You cannot see the difference between 58 FPS and 115 FPS.

Cast not thine pearls before the swine