AGP Platform Analysis, Part 1: New Cards, Old System

[TucsonPi]

I can see where you're coming from. I didn't know there was a way to utilize the 2 cores in FS-X. There aren't THAT many games that can utilize the 2 cores yet, give it a year or two though... I guess what I was trying to point out is that an X2-3800+ (pick any number, this is an example) is not equivalent speed wise to a single core 3800+ in most games. The X2 3800+ actually benchmarks in real world games (D3, HL2, BF2, FEAR, I admit I haven't seen benches comparing these two at FS) at the level of an Athlon64 3200+. I generally try to turn off most things in the background when running my games too. I'm sure that helps some. But if you've got the FS experience, I'll defer to your greater knowledge. I do agree with your agreement with me however, that the new video card will net him the biggest bang for the buck.

Also in reply to the OP about FS-X, definitely get the best single card solution you can afford right now rather than getting dual cards (SLI) right away, that way you leave yourself an upgrade path for the future (like when FS-XI comes out). That's another reason to buy a PCI-e mobo, that and the fact that the AGP cards are so expensive, usually about $50-70 more than their pci-e counterpart, and new pci-e 939 or 754 motherboards are only about $48 for single slot, or $77 for SLI (prices from newegg). Oh, and keep in mind the 8600 series should be out first or second week of March. That can mean either more performance for the same amount of money or maybe big discounts on something like a 7900GS. Five more weeks, ugh..

Lots of good info in this thread. Can't wait to see the next article with the 3400+, maybe he'll have FS-X as one of the benchmarks.

 

[sojrner]

oh man, I dont have any greater knowledge... kinda retarded in fact.

seriously though, I don't have much for fsX exp... worked w/ it on other systems (not mine) and just going off of what that thread I posted had. Seemed to be working for alot of peeps.

As for the benchies of the 3800 being closer to the 3200, ya... I'll give ya that on much older games. In any new games, dual core is where everyone is going. Valve has multi-threading on deck for source. (demos have been showing up in reviews with big gains) Quake4/prey have had patches enable it. Even bf2 if I remember correctly has something for dual core. (will have to check later as I'm not sure) The xbox360 has a tri-core proc that will really influence games for multithreading. Cell (ps3) doesn't count the same as it is asymmetrical and all goes through the central (read: single) thread processor that then divides it up so coding is much different.

Regarding the older games, if you set the affinity on background apps (that are not dual core aware) to one of the cores and set the game on the other core then you can leave them running. More importantly your game will be on a core all to itself and can see slight gains. (I have done this... not much but it is a gain) After testing if you see better performance you can write a small .bat file that will launch it that way each time.

Regardless... I am really not an expert on this. I just read different blogs/forums/etc and pick things up on tweaking and gaining alot out of my second core. M$ even has some stuff on their support site if you look hard enough. As you pointed out, most FS games are hard on cpu's and this would make me want a beefy proc. IMO I would oc the crap out of that 3500 or get dual core and oc the crap out of it. :twisted: the low-end x2/opty's oc very well, but if you are getting a new proc go with the core2's as they oc like mad. Even that 3500 might see good gains if oc'd enough.

It would be nice to see fsX as a benchmark, but b/c we have not seen it yet here on toms I doubt it will make it in the next part of this series.

Game on. 8)

 

[shady28]

An excellent article. Finally something that really gets into what most people have, rather than testing in top of the line systems that only a few percent of folks have at the time. That's a good way to test the max capabilities of a gfx card, but not much use to the majority of build-it-yourself types who tend to upgrade peicemeal.

Too many on these tech boards are wrapped up in pci-e, and yet 3/4 of the people I know still have AGP.

The only thing I think might've been needed would have been to show some scaling info - ie maybe run a couple of the tests with an XP 3000+ or 3200+ on the same mobo. That seems to be where the bulk of the pre-existing systems are at right now.

 

[TucsonPi]

Found a link quick, as you can see the regular 4000+ beats the X2 4400+ in all the benchmarks.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2484&p=10

Granted, there are no FS.

I hadn't added any actual support for what I was saying yet, so I did want to provide some objective support for my opinion. That's it, there are plenty of other benchmarks like this out there, look for reviews of the X2 chips when they came out and they still actually compared them to single cores, nowadays, they just seem to compare them to other dual-cores. But just looking at the model numbers, someone might be led to believe that a X2 4400+ would be a big upgrade over a Athlon 64 3800+ for gaming when in fact, performance would be disappointingly similar.

 

[TucsonPi]

Oh yeah, if you're building a new system, I would definitely go dual-core, core-duo at the moment, to be precise . But if you have a system like the OP, and have maybe $300 to spend, the video card is where you want to put it. We're on the same page. I just have a 3400+/6600GT, and it makes me laugh (sad?) when I see people say they had a system similar to mine, and they spent $600 to upgrade to a coreduo and a 7600GT, when they could have gotten better performance for $200-250 by just doing the upgrade to a 7900GS, or a X1950PRO. Money spent on video cards currently trumps money spent on CPU as long as you're at a certain minimum level (about a A64 3000+ or so based on the original feature this thread is about). Of course a whole system upgrade will run better. Not everyone has the money for that though, me included. I just want to stop folks from making the mistake I cited in my example above.

Cheers,

P.S. I really just have to stop posting on this till Part 2 comes out... Then I'll have some answers for my specific situation. C'mon Cleeve. You da man!

 

[sojrner]

agreed. and to your above post of the benchies, those are pretty old. I agree that at that point there was little reason to buy dual core, but now...? I think in the last year there have been so many strides in that direction that there is little reason NOT to buy dual core now (or even at any point in 2006 really). You have pretty much said that to be sure, so we are not disagreeing. 8)

also agree, to really reiterate what we have been saying (and what this article is proving) that $ is best spend on the video first.

The only fly in the ointment is dx10 and vista as I doubt they will put dx10 cards on agp. They want everyone to upgrade.

I wonder what fsX looks like on dx10? m$ did put out pics of what it looks like (supposedly) and that would be cool with a patch for it.

...but I digress... I still have a few agp systems so am looking forward to the next page of this.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Just some more benchies to consider from [H].

Graphics card differences;
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI1OCw1LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI1OCw1LCw0MA==

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI1Miw2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI1MiwxMSwsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=

CPU differences (Using SLi'd GTXs to remove as much VPU influence as possible);
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI2Miw0LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

[H] has almost always included FlightSim in it's Benchies.

PS, IIRC Cleeve is an Flight Sim fan, but at this point too late to add to part 2, and it does pretty become a pretty CPU limited game when on older systems.

Maybe Part 3 if there is one.

 

[sojrner]

ya, [H] is a good review site. I remember reading those and they are good fsX benchies... noticed that basically the game is still heavy on any system right now. But as we were mentioning earlier, it hammers a cpu.

good post though grape, I should have been there on that one. Glad someone around here is thinking.

Of course... with the poster that started this segue having a 9800pro on a 3500+ anything is an improvement for that game. 8O When a beefy core2/8800gtx can barely get over 33fps at 16x12 res you know you are hammering the system. :twisted:

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Yeah, I wonder what would happen if truely this game/system were optimized, would a third card acting as a GPGPU give any boost of is it a branching and resultant dependant calculation issue where more raw speed would help past a certain point. There's so much going on in the game that 8 Bazillion things could influence what is clumping up the CPUs.

It'd be interesting comparing single core at 5GHZ, versus dual core @ 2.5+, versus quad core @ 2ghz, then GPGPU-assisted.

I think testing like that would expose the weak points best.

But first you gotta code the game to take full advantage of everything offered to it.

 

[sojrner]

lol, THAT would be a test! I can just picture the sound of all teh fans for that much hardware... mmmm...



...sorry, lost in dream land.

Seriously though, that game does do alot and you are probably right in that there are way to many variables as it stands now which make it difficult to be sure where the bottleneck is. A GPgpu would be interesting on that, just providing all the TFLOPS of calculating power for the math in that game would be an interesting test. (assuming like you said that game was coded for it)

For now though I would imagine that while the GPgpu would yield better results (just a guess), multi threading on current GPcpus will happen faster (code-wise). I can see a patch fixing some of that as ppl are already gaining simply by manually setting thread awareness on the game.

My guess will be that patching for multi threading (not just dual-threading mind you) will come sooner than later, and I am really curious to see what gains that brings. Based on the tests on [H] and looking at how little the vid card gains my guess (not too much of a stretch really) is that we could see a big increase w/ threading. Of course, 10-20% of 30fps is still not much... but that is a big increase proportionally, I would like to see that increase or more per thread (say, for 3 more threads) and that could bring us near double performance... but that could be wishful thinking.

But that GPgpu idea is really cool. Wonder when ati and nv are gonna get their physics/GP initiatives off the ground and away from the "wow, look what I can do (next year)" booth at the electronics shows? I see the mobos for it, the cards are there w/ the performance... where are the drivers/apps?

 

[anthonybuchanan]

|
|

Anyone hear any news regarding a Direct X10 AGP card ?

With Direct X10 looming, I wouldnt spend to much on a fast Direct X9 AGP card and wait and see if a DX10 AGP card is coming.

A slower Direct X10 card is a better buy then a faster Direct X9 card.

|
|

 

[TucsonPi]

|
|
A slower Direct X10 card is a better buy then a faster Direct X9 card.
|
|

?????????????????????????

What are you on crack? Buy a slower DX10 card, so you have less enjoyment in today's games, and by the time DX10 games come out in another year or two it will be too slow to play those too? Plus the $100-$250 extra for the otherwise unnecessary upgrade to Vista?

Besides, if history is any guide, don't expect to see any DX10 parts in AGP for at least 6 months, if ever.

And, there aren't any slower DX10 cards even available. If you've seen the pricing (and if history is any guide once again) the 8600 series will be more powerful in DX9 then the DX9 cards that are that price level currently.

You are just wrong on every level.
Troll.

 

[Dade_0182]

|
|
A slower Direct X10 card is a better buy then a faster Direct X9 card.
|
|

?????????????????????????

What are you on crack? Buy a slower DX10 card, so you have less enjoyment in today's games, and by the time DX10 games come out in another year or two it will be too slow to play those too? Plus the $100-$250 extra for the otherwise unnecessary upgrade to Vista?

Besides, if history is any guide, don't expect to see any DX10 parts in AGP for at least 6 months, if ever.

And, there aren't any slower DX10 cards even available. If you've seen the pricing (and if history is any guide once again) the 8600 series will be more powerful in DX9 then the DX9 cards that are that price level currently.

You are just wrong on every level.
Troll.This should be good: battle of the noobs. (gets some popcorn and a soda, gets comfy)

OK, let the games begin... :twisted:

 

[cleeve]

My money's on noob TusconPi.

He's bang on, and said it so I didn't have to. 5 stars!

 

[Dade_0182]

I agree but looking at the date joined for anthonybuchanan I would have expected a good comeback or something. But then again he only posts like once a year and he joined the same time as you...

 

[anthonybuchanan]

Thanks for getting me straight on this.
I have learned a lot especially with Part 2 being posted today.

 

[anthonybuchanan]

Oh oh.

I know you dident just ask me if um on crack.

I know you dident do dat.

 

[anthonybuchanan]

Did chu ax me if um own crack ?

 

[anthonybuchanan]

Told you all it was coming.

Instead of beleiving in my powerful ability to predict the market, I was instead called a "crack head".

All is forgiven though.

I'll be first to buy this card.

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Told you all it was coming.

First of all we knew it was coming, and like we said it'll be a crap gamer card, primarily directed at being more of an HTPC / MS Office card.

I'll be first to buy this card.

Well, that'll give you the chance to be the first to return it after you get smoked by people with 2 year of GF7800GS and X1950Pros.

Heck the X800XT may still beat it in most games.

Of course if all you're looking for is shiny demos it'll be great, just like the X1300 and GF7300 were for last generation.

To think that a crippled GF8600 will be playable in any truly DX10 games is funny.

 

[mc2104dave]

Good Review.

I've got a bit of an 'older' system:
AMD 3200+ 939
1 GB RAM
9800 Pro AGP Graphics card
GB-K8NS-ultra-939
550W power supply

Update:

So originally I purchased this card 1-5-07 a sapphire 1950 pro AGP 512MB.. to make a long story unfortunately short, I've had to return the card, take a bit of a loss, and I'm going to wait for the dust to settle as far as the reliability of these cards.

In anticipation, i also upgraded my PSU for this card, and although not on their list (didn't consult it at the time) I put in a 550 Watt power supply with dual 12v rails, at 20A + 22A (max, i don't know continuous output levels)

Anyhow, as with a number of other purchasers of 1950's , there are 2 issues that are affecting this card, PSU requirements (30A continuous) and problems with the 'stock' heatsink... (I purchased the 'Sapphire' product which so far in the community seems to be prone to heat problems.

Sure you can buy the aftermarket Accelro /2 BUT then you also have to customize it a bit and put heatsinks on the ram chips, as my understanding is the Accelro /2 doesn't cover the AGP chips (fully? at all?).

Anyhow after 3 weeks, I experienced reboot problems, and while inside games the video would distort and freeze.

Looking at the options, i decided to return this card and not go with an RMA (which could have the same problem), as to 'return' it to the vendor, I risk loosing even more money, as to return it, it's pro-rated from the purchase date.

it is an excellent card visually, as it does what we all want, upgrade graphics to make todays games more enjoyable, but the headaches this card has brought on, I decided was not worth it (plus the fact that I'd be constantly wondering "is it going to still work tomorrow").

Back to a 9800 pro for me until i hear a quality 1950 pro working with no problems, or i renew my whole system.

Good luck everyone

I hope you don't experience what I had to go through.

 

[mjmcmahon]

Many thanks for this article, Cleeve. Very useful as a friend just asked me whether an upgrade from a 6800 to "something newer" would be worthwhile for his P4 3.4 Prescott 4G DDR system.

Special thanks go out to PotoRoo and anthonybuchanan for proving once again that a little knowledge combined with the anonymity of the internet can be a very bad thing.