Navigate:

Advice
Beginners
BIOS Guide
CPUs
Links
Mainboards
Memory
Network
Storage
Video/Sound Cards

Contact
Forum
SiteMap
Sponsors
WebNews
Home
. .

Prices:

Mainboards

ABIT
ASUS
Chaintech
Shuttle
Soyo
Tyan

CPU
Intel
P4 2.4C-800
P4 2.6C-800
P4 2.8C-800
P4 3.0-800
P4 3.2-800

AMD
AthlonXP
XP 1700+
XP 2000+
XP 2400+
XP 2500+
XP 2700+
XP 3000+
XP 3200+

Athlon64
Athlon64 3200+
Athlon64 FX-51

Opteron
Opteron 240
Opteron 242
Opteron 244
Opteron 246

Memory

Corsair
Crucial
Kingston
Mushkin
OCZ

What are you
shopping for?



































































































































































LOSTCIRCUITS

SHORTCUTS:
AGP 8X revisited
Textures and Triangles
At One Glance
Test Configuration
Granite Bay
nForce-2 and SPEC
More SPEC, Caligari
Results Summary, Conclusions
Comments on the review?

Hot Offers for ASUS Graphics Cards

 nVidia Quadro4 980 XGL
Take 2 on AGP 8X
(Review by MS, Jan 16, 2003)

nForce2 and AGP 8X

Both the Granite Bay and the nForce2 chipset are using what falls under the general umbrella of Dual Channel DDR, however, as we explained in our Granite Bay article, aside from the name and a total of 128 bit memory bus width, the two technologies have very little in common. The nForce2 SPP uses two independent memory controllers in crossbar configuration whereas the Granite Bay combines two banks of memory to one 128 bit wide "Überbank". The net effect is higher granularity on the nForce2 chipset vs. higher total bandwidth on the Granite Bay. In terms of functionality, the difference is that the Granite Bay can only address one bank at the time whereas the two independent controllers of the nForce2 chipset can set up independent DMA engines or else serve the CPU. For AGP that needs to contrive transfer of both geometry data from the CPU and texture data from the graphics aperture, this higher granularity could be a prerequisite for utilizing the increased bandwidth of the 8X protocol.


To make things a bit easier to look at, we are splitting the individual benchmarks up and show them separately using the AGP 2.0 and the AGP 3.0 protocol (the former by taping over the AGP 3.0 pins) while setting the BIOS to AGP 4X and 8X (which results in AGP 2X and 4X in AGP 2.0). In some applications, running in AGP 2X mode caused the highest results. It is not exactly clear what happens here but keep in mind that we are running the card with taped-over pins, so there is some margin for the unexpected.

3DS-MAX

Aside from the "runaway" result for AGP 2X, there is a small but noticeable gain of AGP 8X over AGP4X

Drv-08

Drv-08 once again gives us the data that we would have liked to see throughout all benches with more than 3.6 % performance increase of AGP 8X compared to AGP 4X.

DX-07

In DX-07 we have once again a performance lead of the AGP 2X setting that is against the trend we see otherwise.

Light-05

And again .......

Next Page:    => Performance Continued =>

Click here! If you enjoyed reading this article and found it useful, please consider making a small donation to LostCircuits.
Thank you!

General disclaimer: This page only reflects the author's personal opinion and assumes no responsibility whatsoever regarding any of the contents or any damages that may occur explicitly or implicitly from reading the contents of this site. All names and trademarks mentioned in this review are the exclusive property of the respective parent companies.
All contents of this site are protected by international copyright laws. Reproduction of the contents even in parts is not allowed except after written permission by the author and referral to this site.
Copyright 1998 - 2008 LostCircuits