AGP, PCI-E, PCI? Differences?

[mrhuggles]

8400gs just absolutely smokes the crap out of the 2400 both pro and XT, you really should just look up stuff befor buying randomly....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar..._processing_units#GeForce_8_.288xxx.29_series

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...s#Radeon_R600_.28HD_2xxx.2C_HD_3xxx.29_series

also the 8400gs is on a whole different level power efficiency wise. altho its expensive, for about the same price somebody could get something around the level of whats in my box... probably around 75-90 dollars or so, i havnt been seeing an 8400gs for all that far off from that. or if your really hard up for cash a 7900gs or x1950pro would be good, 8400gs isnt bad tho since you already have it...

so long as your not playing anything with requirements far above doom3 you will be fine. plus it all depends on the user too, some people feel bad below 60fps, some people are fine with 30fps and ugh, some people are actually comfortable with being in the 15fps range. plus resolutions, im fine with 1360x768, alot of ppl find that to be painfully low, and alot of people are ok with 640x480

i see the list of things you intend on testing, i wouldnt really feel too bad if it doesnt perform well, its not going to, atleast not in the crysis demo, altho you might have some luck with like cod4 crysis is coded poorly and flops at max settings on my beast hey! that reminds me

i might be in the market for a good deal on a used 8400gs so long as its pci express [agp is useless to me] looking for a linux card... you really might do yourself some good upgradeing to like oh i dont know, something in the 75-100 dollar range, if you need some advice on what to buy, the 9600gs performs pretty good for its price, up with the high end 8800 series cards you can see how they all stack up on that site i pasted earlier in this post. heh some things you wanna look for is the texture fill rate, and the memory bandwidth, probably the texture fill rate more than anything else.

 

[KBD]

Anyways, The first 6 games which i plan to install to play at better settings and with better performance are

Jericho
Crysis Demo
Lost Planet Demo( Finally , i have been waiting to play this game for ages now )
COD4 Demo
Crysis Warhead
Alarm Cobra Crash Time.

Cheers.

You can forget about Crysis and Crysis Warhead with that setup. Even the best modern hardware has trouble exploring the full graphics potential of these games. With a PCI card and Celeron D it will be really unplayble.

 

[mrhuggles]

lmfao i wouldn't mind seeing pci vs pci express benchmarks on the 8400, i wouldnt be surpized if they were not really all that far off. especially not in programs that are not counting load time into it. fps wise should be more or less similar i bet

was thinking 3dmark06

 

[RadeonProVega]

You can forget about Crysis and Crysis Warhead with that setup. Even the best modern hardware has trouble exploring the full graphics potential of these games. With a PCI card and Celeron D it will be really unplayble.

Well i have no plans to play Crysis at full settings, thats crazy. I plan to play at 1280x1024 medium to high, i should get around a solid 17-30.

8400gs just absolutely smokes the crap out of the 2400 both pro and XT, you really should just look up stuff befor buying randomly

yea the 8400gs vs the 2400HD pci , which i have tested, the 2400HD is way faster.

so long as your not playing anything with requirements far above doom3 you will be fine. plus it all depends on the user too, some people feel bad below 60fps, some people are fine with 30fps and ugh, some people are actually comfortable with being in the 15fps range. plus resolutions, im fine with 1360x768, alot of ppl find that to be painfully low, and alot of people are ok with 640x480

Very true. 20-40 is perfect with me.

 

[Saakki]

"Well i have no plans to play Crysis at full settings, thats crazy. I plan to play at 1280x1024 medium to high, i should get around a solid 17-30."

with p3 and gf8400 gs..med-high..dude..i like mushrooms too

 

[Mussels]

"Well i have no plans to play Crysis at full settings, thats crazy. I plan to play at 1280x1024 medium to high, i should get around a solid 17-30."

with p3 and gf8400 gs..med-high..dude..i like mushrooms too

17-30 frames a minute is totally possible!

Hell as much as i dont beleive its possible, i at least give him props for trying.

 

[Saakki]

17-30 frames a minute is totally possible!

Hell as much as i dont beleive its possible, i at least give him props for trying.

haha yeah a minute .. seriously someday his pentium3rig will set on fire cause he doing these MaD ScienTist ExpeRimenTz with it

 

[kiriakost]

Lady s you are all out of topic here ... this thread had be converted to become a technological arena , from a simple " what i will do with my system ... thread "


Stay on topic or let it die .

The " power - performance " , of any "slot technology" , cames from a damn expensive VGA .

The pentium III 1000 to 1400 is comparable with P4 at 2G .

Now that you know all the facts , do the math by your selfs .

 

[RadeonProVega]

The Pentium III 1ghz to 1.4ghz is comparable with P4 at 2G .

I don't believe that. Unless something is wrong with the Pentium 4's or Celeron's D.

haha yeah a minute .. seriously someday his pentium3rig will set on fire cause he doing these MaD ScienTist ExpeRimenTz with it

17-30 frames a minute is totally possible!
Hell as much as i dont beleive its possible, i at least give him props for trying.

"
with p3 and gf8400 gs..med-high..dude..i like mushrooms too

I am not talking about with my p3 and the 8400gs. I am talking about with my Dell 2.8ghz with 2GB of memory and a 8400gs or 2400HD. I should get 17-30 at 1280x1024 medium to high settings.

 

[Saakki]

ah ok sry my mistake..but still i highly doubt that u will get that many fps..im using my secondary rig, AMD Athlon 64 san diego 4000+ , 2 gig ddr400 and overclocked 2600 XT AGP ..no way i can play high-med..you wont get 17-30 fps with med high..crysis laughs at my computer and i will pretty much laugh at yours too ..set it low-med and maybe u will have luck

 

[CDdude55]

My 8600 GTS is crap at Crysis( and this is with a QX6700), a 8400 GS wouldnt be so good.

I would say at Medium with nothing else on, you can pull 17-20 FPS.

 

[KBD]

ah ok sry my mistake..but still i highly doubt that u will get that many fps..im using my secondary rig, AMD Athlon 64 san diego 4000+ , 2 gig ddr400 and overclocked 2600 XT AGP ..no way i can play high-med..you wont get 17-30 fps with med high..crysis laughs at my computer and i will pretty much laugh at yours too ..set it low-med and maybe u will have luck

Yea, i agree with that assesment. Also, this will prolly mean no eye candy or very little of it even at those settings.

 

[CDdude55]

ah ok sry my mistake..but still i highly doubt that u will get that many fps..im using my secondary rig, AMD Athlon 64 san diego 4000+ , 2 gig ddr400 and overclocked 2600 XT AGP ..no way i can play high-med..you wont get 17-30 fps with med high..crysis laughs at my computer and i will pretty much laugh at yours too ..set it low-med and maybe u will have luck

He could probably pull Medium with absolutely nothing else on and get about 17 or so FPS as i said.

 

[Saakki]

He could probably pull Medium with absolutely nothing else on and get about 17 or so FPS as i said.

yeah he could..but whats the point..crysis is good / nice game because it has godly graphics..if u tear off the graphics, u get pretty avarage FPS game..yeah yeah i know he just wants to show that he can play ybernew games with ye olde computers..props for him..

BTW on topic..i recently changed from AGP to PCI-e 16x 2.0..what an tremendous leap ..unlucky my new PCIe mobo died so im back to AGP untill that mobo comes back from RMA..

 

[hat]

I don't believe that. Unless something is wrong with the Pentium 4's or Celeron's D.

There is... it's called netburst. A 1.4ghz PIII IS comparable to a 2GHz P4

 

[kiriakost]

There is... it's called netburst. A 1.4ghz PIII IS comparable to a 2GHz P4

Thanks Hat ... the young ones .... looking for something to believe , than study the past .

 

[Saakki]

There is... it's called netburst. A 1.4ghz PIII IS comparable to a 2GHz P4

yes..ive heard about this, sometimes old ones beat teh new ones

 

[KBD]

There is... it's called netburst. A 1.4ghz PIII IS comparable to a 2GHz P4

Yep, thats a well-known fact whether u2k wants to believe it or not. Not surprising really, considering that the Core architecture has its roots in the arch which Pentium 3 is based on.

 

[DrPepper]

@ KBD

I believe the core architecture is similar to the p3 arch but p3 had low clock speeds because the technology to get past that barrier wasn't there at the time.

 

[KBD]

@ KBD

I believe the core architecture is similar to the p3 arch but p3 had low clock speeds because the technology to get past that barrier wasn't there at the time.

its not just similar to it, its a predecessor of the Core architecture. But you are right about clock speeds, P6 architecture (Pentium Pro, P2, P3) couldnt achive high speeds at the time. Instead of continuing to develop it Intel came up with Netburst which delivered high clock speeds but was inefficent thats why a P3 at 1.4Ghz beat a P4 at 2.0Ghz. So it took higher clocked P4s to beat P3 which was quite ironic and showed that Netburts wasnt all that. Intel eventually realized that and assigned a team to start developing Core based on Pentium M which was in turn based on P6.

 

[crazy pyro]

So are pentium Ds netburst architecture then?
WOW, this is way off course, oh well.

 

[DrPepper]

So are pentium Ds netburst architecture then?
WOW, this is way off course, oh well.

Yes they are simply two p4's stuck together.

 

[crazy pyro]

I thought they were two P4s strapped together, thanks.

 

[DrPepper]

I thought they were two P4s strapped together, thanks.

Same with core 2 quads and Athlon X2's.

 

[CDdude55]

To get back on topic, PCI-E rules.