NVIDIA’s PCI-Express Graphics Family

Just curious, what is less optimal about doing the bridge chip ?

That is, if we assume that DemoCoder is right about this:

 

To greatly simplify things:

All the bridge chip allows you to do is basically plug an AGP board into a PCI-E slot. The board itself is still operating as if it was in an AGP slot, and can't take advantage of any performance / bandwidth increase that a native PCIe implementation would allow.

What DemoCoder is saying (again, simplified), is that AGP bandwidth is not a limitation (right now), so there would be no "benefit" to having the higher bandwidth available.

 

Either you are an idiot or missing his point. Everyone seems to be worried about two different solutions and saying one will be faster and the other slower.

What is ironic is this.

1. Nothing on the market requires, needs, or can use, the proposed maximum bandwidth gain.

2. You or I do not have a system up and running with either vendors solution - so we can not say - for a fact - which is faster or slower or no difference.

3. By the time PCI-Express is mainstream - Nvidia will have a card with out a bridge.

Which was his point all along. The bridge is a short term solution to be complaint today.

Sheesh - give it a rest already.

 

So, lemme see... You're arguing in favor of the retrograde solution...

 

http://www.tweakers.net/reviews/456?

Reckon there's any truth to that? What if they can "pinout" before the AGP functional layer in existing ASICs?

MuFu.

 

Or so you, nVidia, and DC insist...

True...though I would bet my house that the NAtive PCI solution would not be slower than a bridged solution.

 

Uh huh. Which digitcal HD camcorder do you own and what do you use it for?

 

It seems obvious that ATI have decided to sell next-gen chips to people with next-gen PCI-E systems. Nvidia is going to use a bridge chip in order to sell people with next-gen PCI-E systems the same underperforming graphics chips that are present in their current AGP offerings.

 

A few other things seem obvious, but they're only tangentially related to AGP and PCIe.

 

Did I say I owned a HD camcorder? Right now I have a DV cam-corder.

I would certainly consider getting one if I could perform real-time editing of HD content. Since I'll likely be upgrading my graphics card this spring (assuming the 2-3x performance gains in shader heavy apps pans out), and considering I'll likely hold on to that graphics card for a 18-24 months, the ability for the card to ALSO handle HD editing would be a purchase consideration for me.

 

the problem with the bridge chip isn't going to be the bandwidth limitation. the problem with the bridge chip is that it means that you are still limited by the relatively unidirectional nature of AGP. the MAIN benefit of PCI-Express is that you can transfer data both to and from the video card. will this be a problem in the life of the bridge chip? for the vast majority of applications, not in the least. however, there will be specialized applications (the software that uses the GPU for non-graphical computations come to mind) that will be limited by this. that's the problem with the bridge chip, not the lack of even more bandwidth.

 

No problem. Show me the money or we end the thread. Even the highly vaunted D3 and HL2 are not out - even then, will they push it? How about EQ2?

Again, I do not think anyone is saying it is faster. I know I never read DC saying it was. I think people are starting to judge performance before anyone has something to play with. Which is ironic.

As far as betting your house - I wouldn't. Right, wrong, indifferent. It does not matter.

I guess it does matter if you like to say I told you so... /boggle

 

Fine. Where's yours.

Who says or claims that any of those games would specifically specifically push the graphics card bus interface?

And I never claimed that you or DC were saying that NV products or their bridge solution would be faster. Thanks for clarifying that though.

Um, where did I judge performance, other than the obvious?

Or do you really think that the bridge solution, in terms of Graphics Card Bus performance, will be faster than Native support?

 

Shit, nice house Joe.

 

I'm curious which one you own.

 

Cute site, nice house/family. Joe's hairline degression and my own have a lot in common, I'm sad to say.

 

One of these days, I'm gonna update that site...my daughter is a year and a half already! My hairline isn't degressing, btw...my forehead is just "progressing." 8)

 

It's a Sony PC-100...bought it almost 4 years ago just before Jack was born...for obvious reasons. The only real complaints I have are lack of a built in flash for still shots (had to buy a separate flash), and lack of DV-Passthrough...all the later Sony's (including Digital8 models), have DV pass-through.

 

Like I said - PENIS ENVY.

Show me the money in regards to the need for bandwidth. Not your house silly. I do not need to know what car you drive, or where you live, or what your waste size is.

All I said, from post one, is that everyone is judging a book by its cover. Read the book first, then make your judgements.

Maybe you will be right, maybe wrong.

But honestly - it does not matter until the first time you need that bandwidth and it is not there...then it becomes an issue.

 

??

Tip: Next time someone offers you a "bet", and you say "show me the money", assume the other person will believe they are asking to show they can cover the bet.

You asked.

No shit?

You mean, there are people on this board that speculate on performance impacts due to to architectural differences?!

SAY IT AIN'T SO!

No one has made definitive judgements on anything, so I don't know what you're complaining about.