DescentBB

I have this problem.
I'm not sure what is better between this 2 cards:

PCI GeForce 128MB

or

AGP Radeon 64MB

The PCI one have more memory, but i heard AGP is better. So i would like your advice.

Please Help me!

AGP since it's speed is faster it can move more than the PCI can.

...although it would help to know exactly which version of GeForce and Radeon we're looking at.

64mb on AGP, and 128mb on PCI? ouch. I wouldn't get either.

If you were to go w/ the radeon you can snag a 9600 128mb for about 100 bucks.

I'm sure you can snag a middle of the road geforce 128mb for about the same price.

You need to research the difference between the following:

1) AGP
2) PCI
3) PCI Express (PCI-X)

Then you need to do some research to find out about motherboards, and what yours supports.

Frankly, your questions have very little actual meaning, because you provide almost zero information about your system. Suffice it to say, true PCI graphics would be the most diabolically bad choice - not even worth paying $10 for a card if you ask me!

Well, the GeForce is a EVGA e-Geforce MX 4000 PCI 128MB DDR.

But problem is i don't know the exact model of the Radeon nor the Motherboard, since i don't have it here right now. This is all because i'll change my mobo but the only thing they say me is to choose to stay with my PCI card or the other AGP card.
(BTW, i think this mobo change comes with a Pentium 3 or Celeron and have 4 PCI slots and one AGP slot)

So i don't know what to do.

If you're talking PCI Express, that's an upgrade to a 64-bit system, which would require a new motherboard and processor. Regular PCI might, I repeat MIGHT, have been good 10 years ago, but it's no longer current--if you have the option between regular PCI and AGP of ANY sort, even AGP2x, get the AGP.

The PCI card might be faster then the AGP one since it has more onboard RAM, and if the GPU in the ATI card is weaker then the MX4000 then the Radeon would be slower no matter what it was plugged into. For low end cards like those the slot is pretty irrelevant.

That PCI MX4000 would actually be plenty faster then an AGP Voodoo5 or even an AGP Geforce 2 GTS, don't automatically assume AGP = faster.

The performance benefits of AGP only really come into play when you fill the texture buffer on the card and it has to spill over into main memory. With few modern games even able to do that there's nothing that'll run acceptably on the PC specs he's talking about that'll have any chance of being able to either.

Also, a 64 bit upgrade isn't a requirement for PCI-E. It made its debut on Intel chipsets for Intel CPUs which are still primarily 32 bit (afaik EM64T sorry, x86-64, hasn't trickled down into Intels regular product line yet, it's still only available on Xeons and the Xeon-derived P4EE chips). You'll still probably need a new mobo and CPU since the PCI-E Intel boards are all socket 775 meaning an AMD64 solution is still the better buy but it's not a requirement.

The main reason people think PCI-E requires 64 bit is because nobody ever made a chipset for the Athlon XP that supports it. The CPU could do it, but nobody ever felt the need to replace the Nforce 2.

Mobius wrote:3) PCI Express (PCI-X)

You mean PCI-E

PCI-X is the old stuff used in G5's and severs.

[/anal]

Matrix wrote:You mean PCI-E

PCI-X is the old stuff used in G5's and severs.

[/anal]

You mean PCIe

[/meticulous]

have a look for a inno mx440/64 (limited dx9 support)golden sample they tested out as fast as the agp version also look out for some of the hercules cards (no dx9 support)a couple of thier models supported both agp/pci on the same pcb. but for about £25 you can get new mb with onboard graphics which outperform these cards.

Thanks to all for the answers.
However, for some problems the mobo change planned was not succesful but i will do more research to get a new mobo and i'm very happy to know that the PCI MX4000 can be faster than some AGP.

Thanks anyway!