Slashdot Mirror
NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GS For AGP Launched
Spinnerbait writes "Although new system sales with AGP slots are almost non-existent these days
in the consumer desktop space, there is a still a fair aftermarket demand for
upgrades in the retail area where AGP enabled motherboards abound. Although PCI
Express is the mainstay interface for most new cards from graphics giants like
NVIDIA and ATI,
NVIDIA unwrapped a fairly high end card dubbed the
GeForce 7800 GS, in an AGP variant. 16 pixel shaders engines and DX9
SM3.0 graphics compliant hardware in the latest GPU architecture from NVIDIA now
available in AGP."
When will they be releasing drivers for Linux, BSD and Solaris that support this card?
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Most of the systems at work and at home (even my friends) are mainly AGP. Besides the so-called "performance increase". Isn't it just a big ploy to get people to spend $$ on a new system? High end AGP cards were almost impossible to find except on ebay, and those were going for exorbitant prices (higher than the equivalent PCI-E card, sometimes by a LOT).
One interesting thing that I noted in those two reviews is that both of them use AMD processors... it looks like AMD has replaced Intel as the highend gaming CPU. A more complete benchmark will include a test with two similar systems with different processors (equivalent).
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Well my 18 month old Asus A8V board supports the the latest AMD Dual Core processors (AMD64 4800+), does Dual Channel DDR RAM and has a AGP port. Does this mean it's not as powerful as the latest PCIe system? I think more likely, PCIe was introduced to make the fools with more money than sense go and buy new Mobos and graphics cards....
Basically this is a ho-hum card at a high price. You can get a PCIe 7800GT + Motherboard bundle from vendors like EVGA for around $350. The 7800GT is a 20 pipeline / 16 ROP card, while the 7800 GS is a 16/8. Its no contest which is faster. You can use your old DDR and CPU with the new MB making it a no brainer to avoid the 7800GS.
On the other side though, what about the remainder of us who already have (I'm not one of them) decent systems, but don't have PCI-E expansion slots. Consider the entire group of pre-64 bit users with beefy systems that have been left without an upgrade path for their video card.
I agree that newer GPU will continue to require larger and beefier systems to push the data to them (after all gameplay is still handled by the CPU), but you should not discredit them for providing a product that is quite viable.
What I would like to see, is more motherboard manufacturer's offering modern CPU systems, but still with support for the AGP video cards. Ideally, I'd like to see a system with both an AGP and a PCI-E expansion port. Video is not the only card we'll ever get that could take advantage of the PCI-E slot, or atleast I hope its not. I'd really like to see drive controllers and other potential devices take advantage of the port, and I really hope that this port doesn't turn into just another video slot, like the AGP was.
just my 2cents
harryk
think before you write, it'll save me moderator points.
I originally switched to ATI products because their overlay controls were more intuitive and had a more vibrant overlay.
I hear that nVidias overlay IQ is much better these days, but it'd be nice to know whether their overlay controls had been redesigned.
I thought the increase was in bus bandwidth, and that was only used when tranferring large textures that are too big for the graphics card's onboard memory, so the main memory can be used. Seing as most GPU's of this calibre are 256MB, I think a 25% performance increase is only likely if your handling large (>256MB textures). Again, I may be totally wrong, but does anyone know? I suppose the question is. Given 2 cards, 1xAGP implementation, 1xPCIe implmentation, with the same GPU, and asusming that they are handling textures less than the maximum amount of onboard memory, will they perform the same? Does PCIe increases bandwidth only benefit when larger textures are used?? Anyone know for sure?
Welcome to 2 years ago. The Athlon 64 is the best desktop chip available.
But these days desktops are only about 50% of the market, and AMD really has nothing to compete with in the portable market. It's starting to shape up as AMD = desktops and servers; Intel = compact desktops (iMac) and laptops.
The only reason Intel has a presence in the desktop market is Dell. Just wait until Dell gives in; AMD is currently building their new corporate HQ in Austin about 10 miles down the freeway from Dell's in Round Rock (RR is a suburb of Austin.) It's only a matter of time.
Its frustrating to see a 350$ card with only one DVI connector on it. (Please ship cards with two and an analog adapter.)
People wanting to run two flat panels on their (AGP) system are going to have one less-than-crisp display, or run a 6600GT.
I'd really like to upgrade off my Ti4800SE, but I want dual DVI.
The last time I went to get a new video card though, about two months ago, I had a rough time getting a GeForce 6800 for AGP. The store I usually deal with had had several AGP cards in their stock when I had started thinking about getting a new card, but by the time I got around to actually going to get one, they didn't have one single AGP card in stock, regardless of manufacturer or model. I had to get them to order me one, and was told that I was lucky too because the source they ordered my BFG-made 6800 (sweet card, I love it) had the last one and weren't producing them anymore. I felt like my poor system (which is actually pretty decent for being almost 4 years old - I had a bunch of 'free money' fall on me back then and got the best money could but for home use at the time) was being left behind in the dust. Well thanks to being able to at least get ahold of one good recent-tech AGP card I now feel I won't have that upgrade urge for a few more years again. AGP still works fine.
To not have an older, usable, nVidia card as a comparison makes the review worthless.
A couple years back I invested quite a bit of money in a high-end gaming rig. At the time, I bought a GF4ti4600, which was about the top end (4800 was not announced yet). Since then, I've not had much need to upgrade. The processor is a 2.26Ghz P4 on the 533FSB, 1GB DDR RAM (I forget the RAM speed off the top of my head). Even now, with the system 3ish years old, most of the upgrades for it would be incrimental. Yes, I could move to a faster FSB and faster RAM, but it wouldn't be enough of a performance gain to justify the cost. I'm also willing to play at less than maximum resolution.
Recently, I wanted to try BF2, but could not because it requires a full DX9 card, which the GF4 line is not. My problem was, that I only have an AGP slot. And I'm not willing to do the whole mobo/proc upgrade for one game. It's nice to see that Nvidia is still willing to support those of use who don't want to replace everything constantly. When I build myself a new machine, I always try to build-in an upgrade path, so that I can streach my investment out over a longer period.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
How is a 7800 an overkill for a AMD +3200, nForce2 MB, and 2GB of ram? Currently I have a FX 5600 which just can't hack the new games at the res's I've become acustomed to. The APG 7800 is a god send, even if I don't end up buying it, the cost of the 6800 Ultra is significatly reduced.
Some people have such a narrow mind set.
GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?