What's better, a vid card with 32mb AGP or 64mb PCI?

[Marker0077 0]

What's better, a vid card with 32mb AGP or 64mb PCI?

[tsonta101 0]

Have you got something specific in your hands? For example, an AGP TNT2 Ultra w/64MB would be slower to a PCI GeForce MX2 w/32MB.

 

As a rule, an AGP card *should* be faster (only because it is newer), but then again there are exceptions (like the one above)

[Marker0077 0]

The AGP is an nVidia TNT2 32mb & the PCI is a ATI Radeon 7000 series.

 

What I am going for here is the ability to do larger maps as best as possible. I play JK2 & JK3 & I am constantly playing Duel because I can not handle the larger maps. I have yet to test this vid card on these larger maps yet but I do plan on doing so today,

[Brian Frank 0]

The Radeon will be much better.

[tsonta101 0]

agreed, the radeon would be far faster

[Marker0077 0]

Well I tried it & I have to say I much prefer the nVidia. Not only do they go at about the same speed, the nVidia has much better graphic detail than the ATI. I appreciate the feedback though fellas, thanks.

[arkonmx 0]

Once it comes to AGP and PCI, you can tell the difference, by a lot.

 

You should always stick with AGP slots, just because they outperform PCI cards dramatically. In fact, you will have a harder time running 3D applications with PCI VGA's with more memory than you would with an AGP VGA with less memory.

 

You will notice little difference with 64mb PCI VGA's and 32mb PCI VGA's. The PCI slot puts a bottleneck on the transfer of graphics information. AGP slots are always preferred, unless ofcourse your motherboard does not support an AGP expansion.

 

Stick the the nVidia AGP card instead.

 

If you don't believe me, test both cards on various 3D applications, then figure out the math.

[janfebmar 0]

well.. the amount of ram on a graphic card only tells how many pixels you can have on the screen on the same time..

so lets just say a 128 works fine.. if you dont wanna turn all your settings to max and then run doom/hl2 in 1600x1200.. then it would be better with a card just as fast but with 256 ram..

 

and lets not forget that agp is now not the fastest choice anymore..

PCIe is here to stay.

this generation of graphic cards are the last generation of GFX cards made for AGP.

so all the manufacturers say.

because PCIe is faster and will be there for the next few years.

thank god they changed the slow 8x agp out

it took too long..

just as it took to remove the ISA slot.

[janfebmar 0]

well.. the amount of ram on a graphic card only tells how many pixels you can have on the screen on the same time..

so lets just say a 128 works fine.. if you dont wanna turn all your settings to max and then run doom/hl2 in 1600x1200.. then it would be better with a card just as fast but with 256 ram..

 

and lets not forget that agp is now not the fastest choice anymore..

PCIe is here to stay.

this generation of graphic cards are the last generation of GFX cards made for AGP.

so all the manufacturers say.

because PCIe is faster and will be there for the next few years.

thank god they changed the slow 8x agp out

it took too long..

just as it took to remove the ISA slot.

 

best regards

ES

[ScinteX 0]

I think that u r all wrong and you should go with a greased pig and wafers