AGP, PCI-E, PCI? Differences?

[lemonadesoda]

PCI-E wins. Just like Blu-ray wins.

Is it the better technology? No. Is it the cheaper technology and is it good enough? Yes. It is a more flexible protocol? Yes.

Why did we move from parallel to serial transfer of data? Is serial transfer better? NO. But is it cheaper and also suffers less from poor interface/interlink design? Serial transfer can survive over "long distances" where parallel cannot. Parallel suffers much more from crosstalk and interference.

We know that parallel data transfer is the PREFERRED approach in unltra-high bandwidth situations. Just look at memory and CPU interconnects. Could you imagine a CPU, DDR or GPU with 1-bit memory bus? LOL. But that is sort of what PCI-E is.

AGP is expensive on motherboard space (all those parallel links) and northbridge design.

PCI-E has removed that. And it has consolidated PCI, PCI-X and AGP. Consolidation is a good thing.

It's like asking is USB better than COM and LPT1. Well, it is a newer technology. And there are better interfacing protocols. But, actually, as a physical transport layer, is it better? Nope.

Did you know that every benchmark of an identical GPU, one on AGP, one on PCI-E, there is no performance difference, or, if there is one, the AGP wins?

 

[KBD]

Did you know that every benchmark of an identical GPU, one on AGP, one on PCI-E, there is no performance difference, or, if there is one, the AGP wins?

Yes, but why? care to explain?

 

[lemonadesoda]

Not an expert on the issue, but I believe it is due to:

1. sideband addressing.
2. GART
3. DMA
4. Lower latency
5. Less command/ECC overhead

Of course, with a modern GPU and PCI-E v2.0 the bandwidth is so much greater than AGP that the AGP would bottleneck. However, there was a design for 64-bit AGP and also AGP x12. A 64bit AGP or AGP x16 could keep up with a modern PCI-E card, and, arguably, might be faster. But the cost of such a design would be prohibative.

Did you know there are (rare) computers with multiple AGP ports? Some with 4, some with more! They were extremely expensive to build. PCI-E wins on design and manufactur costs.

 

[RadeonProVega]

To get back on topic, PCI-E rules.

That may be true, but IMO pci cards are good too.

 

[KBD]

Did you know there are (rare) computers with multiple AGP ports? Some with 4, some with more! They were extremely expensive to build. PCI-E wins on design and manufactur costs.

Never seen one of those before, all the AGP boards i had/worked on had only 1 slot. But i can understand the manufacturing cost of AGP vs PCI-e.

 

[crazy pyro]

What's the point of a multi-AGP system since you couldn't crossfire/ SLI on it?

 

[KBD]

That may be true, but IMO pci cards are good too.

They are only good if all you have are PCI slots, if you have AGP or PCI-e on the board sticking with PCI makes little sense unless the machine is not used for gaming.

 

[Kursah]

What's the point of a multi-AGP system since you couldn't crossfire/ SLI on it?

That begs for an AGP-E or AGPX interface that can allow up to 4 AGP X32 slots to operate in SLI or CFX for superior results! Hell it sounded good before I typed it out lol.

Personally I have no need or requirement for SLI or CF, I like 1 GPU, 1 card personally, less hassle, less heat, less trouble, more gaming! If a new AGP interface came out for future cards I would be interested.

 

[kiriakost]

What's the point of a multi-AGP system since you couldn't crossfire/ SLI on it?

Whats the point of SLI , if only 6 people of the 100 using it ... Die SLI die ...

 

[lemonadesoda]

What's the point of a multi-AGP system since you couldn't crossfire/ SLI on it?

Remember that multi-monitor GPU's are quite new. Go back a few years and to run 2 monitors you needed two graphics card. Want to run 4 screens, then 4 graphics cards.

If you are happy with slow PCI cards, then you were ok. If you needed more ooompf, then you needed a specialist multi-AGP board.

I think there were also some (non consumer) hi-res displays that requires more than one GPU to drive it. LIke 3600x2400 or some other crazy resolution.

 

[KBD]

What's the point of a multi-AGP system since you couldn't crossfire/ SLI on it?

I would think that the point is that are used in pricey workstation boards where multiple graphic cards are required fore whatever reason. Also, its my understanding that dual GPU tech is exclusive to PCI-e, correct me if i'm wrong

 

[lemonadesoda]

I would think that the point is that are used in pricey workstation boards where multiple graphic cards are required fore whatever reason. Also, its my understanding that dual GPU tech is exclusive to PCI-e, correct me if i'm wrong

Wrong. Matrox used 4 GPUs on one AGP card, for driving 4 monitors through proprietary DVU breakouts. nVidia has something similar

 

[KBD]

Wrong. Matrox used 4 GPUs on one AGP card, for driving 4 monitors through proprietary DVU breakouts. nVidia has something similar

didnt know that. thnx!

 

[lemonadesoda]

Volari XGI Duo

http://img.tomshardware.com/uk/2003/11/07/a_new_graphics_kid_on_the_block/front-stripped.jpg

 

[kiriakost]

I strongly believe that the many had fall victims of the misleading marketing , that some had plan it and agree under the table .

It was the time that Intel did the transit , from PIII to P4 , and the P4 at 2G was equally slow with the PIII .

The SDRAM to DDR , gave nothing other than Sandra scores, specially at the Dual Chanel configurations .

The market was dry from ideas that will promote sales , as there was nothing innovative to lead the pack .

The biggest illusion of all , was the myth that " Just a socket by it self " will win the war .
In simple words , low end VGA cards and new VGA slot = the future = gain .

In all my life only fast GPUs did the trick , and very few had the cash to get them .
When the AGP was leading , all the people had as even today , low mid cards .
I had to stay until the end to see one performer as the 6800GT to really move my boat fast enough.
At the cost of 350 EUR .... thats a crazy amount of money ... with that money today you buy a large high quality television .

Lesson learned well , as consumer i will never let to be cared away of hypes & fairy tales .

PCIE 1 or 2 or 3 or 13 ...

I am the leader of my choices , i control the game , i control my life .

 

[KainXS]

I strongly believe that the many had fall victims of the misleading marketing , that some had plan it and agree under the table .

It was the time that Intel did the transit , from PIII to P4 , and the P4 at 2G was equally slow with the PIII .

The SDRAM to DDR , gave nothing other than Sandra scores, specially at the Dual Chanel configurations .

The market was dry from ideas that will promote sales , as there was nothing innovative to lead the pack .

The biggest illusion of all , was the myth that " Just a socket by it self " will win the war .
In simple words , low end VGA cards and new VGA slot = the future = gain .

In all my life only fast GPUs did the trick , and very few had the cash to get them .
When the AGP was leading , all the people had as even today , low mid cards .
I had to stay until the end to see one performer as the 6800GT to really move my boat fast enough.
At the cost of 350 EUR .... thats a crazy amount of money ... with that money today you buy a large high quality television .

Lesson learned well , as consumer i will never let to be cared away of hypes & fairy tales .

PCIE 1 or 2 or 3 or 13 ...

I am the leader of my choices , i control the game , i control my life .

and

 

[Reventon]

Basically, AGP is for lower-end/older computers. PCI is second best, exists on lower-end/somewhat older computer. PCI-E is best, low-to-high-end/newer computers have PCI-E. PCI-E allows for a better transfer of information, as well as more efficient. That's why PCI-E cards always perform better.

 

[Technofuzz]

i had a couple of old mx4000, and the PCI ones were faster than the AGP were, well in my experience they were, PCI cards are fast enough, it depends what you are doing, PCI cards are more expensive however, and in theory the AGP are much faster than PCI. Get which ever is easiest to aqcuire, and depends on if you have the money to drop for a new mobo if you need one...




EDIT: things to consider: brand of the gfx cards, memory quality and speed, and what you need the gfx card for....

 

[Technofuzz]

I strongly believe that the many had fall victims of the misleading marketing , that some had plan it and agree under the table .

It was the time that Intel did the transit , from PIII to P4 , and the P4 at 2G was equally slow with the PIII .

The SDRAM to DDR , gave nothing other than Sandra scores, specially at the Dual Chanel configurations .

The market was dry from ideas that will promote sales , as there was nothing innovative to lead the pack .

The biggest illusion of all , was the myth that " Just a socket by it self " will win the war .
In simple words , low end VGA cards and new VGA slot = the future = gain .

In all my life only fast GPUs did the trick , and very few had the cash to get them .
When the AGP was leading , all the people had as even today , low mid cards .
I had to stay until the end to see one performer as the 6800GT to really move my boat fast enough.
At the cost of 350 EUR .... thats a crazy amount of money ... with that money today you buy a large high quality television .

Lesson learned well , as consumer i will never let to be cared away of hypes & fairy tales .

PCIE 1 or 2 or 3 or 13 ...

I am the leader of my choices , i control the game , i control my life .

The only reason the P4's were slow is because most of them had crippling cache, the newer P3 (1.0GHz w/ 512KB L2), could whoop some of the celerons, which were shit CPU's on the 478 socket. 128KB L2 cache isn't enough to run 98 properly...LOL

 

[kiriakost]

Its not that simple , the story about the CPU cache .

I had study allot about how CPU works , and its all about bandwidth .

The CPU core even with 1kB of ram L1 , its still fastest than any other CPU subsystem as L2 .


I had never see the power of the large cache in anything so far ..
The only justification about it , are that if you run something heavy you will see the benefit.

This tale now looks like the fairy tale about the three pigs and the wolf , many people pay their money for the book , but the story is fake , and the book seller rich .

 

[DrPepper]

Its not that simple , the story about the CPU cache .

I had study allot about how CPU works , and its all about bandwidth .

The CPU core even with 1kB of ram L1 , its still fastest than any other CPU subsystem as L2 .


I had never see the power of the large cache in anything so far ..
The only justification about it , are that if you run something heavy you will see the benefit.

This tale now looks like the fairy tale about the three pigs and the wolf , many people pay their money for the book , but the story is fake , and the book seller rich .

True L1 Cache is incredibly faster than L2. More L2 is good though because the cpu will take a performance hit in the event of a cache miss where the instructions its looking for aren't there. That is purely chance though and the larger L2 cache reduces the probability that the instructions won't be there.

The reason for L2 cache is that it is cheaper to implement that L1 Cache and the disadvantage is it is slower although it can be larger to hold more instructions which makes up for its low bandwidth.

 

[KainXS]

in reality, AGP at the same bandwidth is better than PCI-E but AGP interface cards cost more to manufacture than PCI-E cards which is why AGP died, AGP 8X is comparable to PCI-E 8X not 4X, but the result was Crossfire and SLI, so good riddance AGP died\

The Pentium 4's were failures in my opinion though, if Intel had the technology to keep producing the Pentium 3 at the time whose architecture evolved into the current Core 2 design, AMD's athlons would not have dominated so badly at the time, and HT technology for the P4's sometimes reduced performance to boot.

 

[lemonadesoda]

At last, two gentlemen who know what they are talking about!

 

[DrPepper]

At last, two gentlemen who know what they are talking about!

Oh he's talking about me I actually learned that from you.

 

[CDdude55]

That may be true, but IMO pci cards are good too.

It's still good for those that don't have a PCI-E slot, but if ya gots on you should go PCI-E.