P4C800-E Deluxe and PCI Express

Discussion in 'Asus' started by Slow Lazy Dog, Jan 18, 2005.

  1. I have a P4C800-E Deluxe that's just about 4 or 5 months old. I built
    a new sys with a P4 2.4ghz, 512MGB of PC3200 and twi SATA 120GB hdd's.

    The only thing I didn't upgrade was my video card, an ATI 9000 Pro
    128. After installing The Simpsons-Hit and Run. I found out my
    vidcard isn't supported even with all the latest driver updates.
    So... time to put the 9000 Pro on the shelf and move on. Which leads
    me to PCI Express. This MB doesn't support it... does Asus make a MB
    comparable to the P4C800-E Deluxe in terms of features with PCI
    Express support? Any recommendations if they don't?

    Thanks for any input.

    SLD
     
    Slow Lazy Dog, Jan 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Slow Lazy Dog

    Paul Guest

    DirectX 8.1 hardware support and T&L.
    http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9000/radeon9000pro/index.html

    http://www.vugames.com/product.do?gamePlatformId=424
    System Requirements
    Minimum Requirements:
    Windows 98/ME/2000/XP
    PIII 700 MHZ or equivalent
    192 MB of ram
    4X speed CD or DVD drive
    32 MB DirectX 8.1 hardware T&L video card (Geforce 2+)
    1.2 GB HD space
    DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card
    Keyboard and Mouse

    That means it should work.

    Did you install:

    1) Chipset drivers ? Something like INFINST.exe or the like.
    In Device Manager, (system section?) you'll see

    Intel(R) 82875P Processor to AGP Controller - 2579

    That means the chipset driver got installed for the AGP
    interface.

    2) Catalyst driver. Get the latest from ATI.
    It consists of a video card driver, and a control panel.
    If, in your Display control, you see a "SmartGART" tab,
    that means both the driver and control panel component
    installed OK.

    3) Microsoft DirectX. It is hard to say what minimum version
    the game you want to play requires. While Microsoft thinks
    people should always upgrade, my experience is, older games
    will malfunction on you, if you use more modern versions,
    so which version you upgrade to, is a personal decision. I
    would think 8.1, as listed in the above requirements, would
    be the minimum to take advantage of all hardware features.
    The Catalyst installer may have something to say about this
    as well.

    Now, once all this stuff is installed, get a copy of Powerstrip:
    http://www.entechtaiwan.com/util/ps.shtm

    The options menu item, from the Powerstrip taskbar popup, shows
    what options are enabled or disabled. And, that will help tell
    you whether everything really is enabled on your combined
    hardware and software.

    In my case, I have a system disk that started as win98, upgraded
    to win98se, upgraded to win2k, moved through three hardware
    upgrades, and no matter how much installing and uninstalling I
    did, I could not get the AGP texture transfer working on my
    ATI 9800Pro. A clean install of the OS fixed everything up fine.

    *******

    Your plan to upgrade to PCI Express will not change the mundane
    realities above. There will still be drivers to install, and
    software to fight with.

    The P4GD1 will be the least cost upgrade for you, as you
    get to reuse most of your hardware. It doesn't seem to be
    a North American product, and may appear in other markets.
    There is little mention of it that I can find, in Google.

    http://www.asus.com.tw/products/mb/socket478/p4gd1/overview.htm
    http://www.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/sock478/p4gd1/e1675_p4gd1.pdf

    The P5AD2 family would be the most expensive way to go.
    LGA775 processor socket (so your S478 processor won't fit).
    DDR2 memory. See the top items on the list on this page:

    http://usa.asus.com/products/mb/mbindex.htm

    Have a look through the other P5xxx products, and you may
    find the right compromise set of technologies for your budget
    and plans.

    Stuffing a fat-ass AGP card in your current computer will
    also fix this problem (i.e. the need to upgrade could be
    satisfied quite well, using the P4C800-E, so at least for
    the moment, you have quite a good base to build on. You
    can stuff a 3.4GHz socket 478 Prescott processor in there
    if you want.) There are AGP cards with very similar core
    and memory clocks at the moment, to the PCI Express cards,
    and the AGP cards tend to be more available to buy, as
    compared to high end PCI Express cards.

    Some AGP cards (newegg approximated pricing):
    ATI X800 Pro core=475MHz memory=900MHz ~$400
    ATI X800 XT core=520MHz memory=1120MHz ~$500
    Nvidia 6800 Ultra core=400Mhz memory=1100MHz ~$500

    These will add a fair load to your power supply, so you may
    need to upgrade that too.

    In case you were thinking PCI Express has something to do
    with increased performance, it doesn't. It just introduces
    one more incompatible interface. The PCI Express standard
    was created, to make hub interfaces for expansion cards
    possible. The AGP slot didn't need this "improvement",
    as AGP 3.0 is already a point-to-point parallel terminated
    hardware interface, and changing it to PCI Express does
    nothing for the end user. (And SLI is a crock... In that
    it doesn't accelerate all game titles. A computer with
    SLI dumps ~300W of heat into the room.)

    Have fun,
    Paul
     
    Paul, Jan 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Slow Lazy Dog

    Silvertip Guest

    With such a mobo, why would you want to go out and buy a new mobo, new
    memory (possible requirement of new mobo), and new graphics card, when all
    you really need to do is upgrade the graphics card. This board is one of
    the more o/c friendly boards out there. The system you have should have no
    probs with a gfx upgrade.
    Silvertip
     
    Silvertip, Jan 19, 2005
    #3
  4. Slow Lazy Dog

    Jody Sleath Guest

    Good info Paul. So PCI is a waste?
     
    Jody Sleath, Jan 19, 2005
    #4
  5. Slow Lazy Dog

    Paul Guest

    PCI Express allows a point to point connection between
    the chipset, and the PCI Express plugin card slots.
    This gives an improvement in the electrical connection
    between a plugin card and the rest of a computer. So,
    the x1 PCI Express slots have some justification, from a
    theoretical perspective. Now, the fact that most ordinary
    PCI cards work without issue, is a testiment to the fact that
    this improvement, to me at least, seems to be an unnecessary
    optimization.

    The additional bandwidth offered by PCI Express might be
    the next argument someone would present. But the PCI
    standard already has options for giving users more bandwidth,
    (like 64bit/66MHz clock etc). And yet, it never seemed to
    make sense, for anyone to offer those enhanced standards,
    in the form of desktop chipsets. Server motherboards have
    the slots, but not desktops.

    The AGP slot is a point to point connection to begin
    with. The Northbridge is on one end, and the AGP card
    is on the other end. There is nothing to improve on there,
    as far as the electrical connection.

    The additional bandwidth of the PCI Express bus is a
    waste, and if you check some of the review sites, they
    demonstrate how much of the bandwidth is needed. For
    the current generation of GPU (video card chips), PCI
    Express isn't helping. And, as GPU chips are pretty
    near the limits of their performance anyway, it remains
    to be seen whether PCI Express bandwidth will ever be
    saturated at the x16 level.

    PCI Express means that a whole bunch of addin cards and
    chips, will have to be redesigned. The cost of that
    redesign will be passed on to the customers. So, don't
    be surprised if a PCI Express LAN card or sound card
    is a lot more expensive than the vanilla PCI one it
    replaces. And the price of these cards will be higher
    than it needs to be, even though the functionality of
    the cards, to the end user, will be exactly the same
    as the old PCI ones.

    I am all for superior technology replacing inferior
    technology. The problem in this case, is so many years
    have passed, that the inferior technologies we have been
    using, have been tweaked to perform without problems. For
    example, smaller geometry CMOS circuitry has made it
    possible for virtually all Northbridge chips, to have
    AGP 8X slots that work without a problem, whereas a
    few years ago, there was a huge pile of duff boards
    with bad AGP. If this superior technology had been
    introduced years ago, when AGP sucked, I could
    understand the need for the introduction of PCI Express.
    The introduction at this point in time is unnecessary,
    and is only intended to separate customers from their
    money.

    They could easily have kept AGP and the current Northbridge
    intact, and introduced PCI Express bridging in the
    Southbridge. They could have offered a single x4 PCI Express
    slot, for use with high bandwidth controller designs. That
    would have caused virtually no additional cost to consumers,
    and offered a slot with enhanced bandwidth, for use with SATA2
    RAID or other exotic controllers. If the North-South bus
    needed to be enhanced, to support such a change, the
    change would be transparent to the end user.

    A PCI Express serial interface runs at 2GHz. This is a
    barrier to entry, for the "lesser" CMOS technologies. It
    means the fab which is located 2 miles from me, cannot
    make PCI Express parts. A lot more fabs could make
    ordinary PCI chips, and as a result, this is why we can
    find barrels of PCI Ethernet cards at the computer store
    for $10 a piece.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Jan 20, 2005
    #5
  6. Slow Lazy Dog

    daytripper Guest

    No offense, you likely meant well somehow, but the above myopic diatribe has
    so many technical half-truths, "couldda beens", "shouldda beens", and errors
    of omission as to render it a mere senseless slaughter of bytes.

    The future is here, now...

    /daytripper (one PCI Express platform design engineer who is grateful to see
    Parallel PCI and AGP go the way of ISA and VLB...)
     
    daytripper, Jan 20, 2005
    #6
  7. Slow Lazy Dog

    Paul Guest

    Well, at least you aren't a PCI Express evangalist :)
    I'll go away now, and wallow in my ignorance.

    Have fun,
    Paul
     
    Paul, Jan 20, 2005
    #7

  8. I seem to recall IBM saying that MicroChannel Architecture was the best
    thing to ever happen to PCs. Where is it now? Just because something
    is "better" does not mean that the general public will accept it. Look
    at Betamax vs VHS. Betamax was supposedly the better product but the
    people bought the VHS standard and Betamax died.
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jan 20, 2005
    #8
  9. Slow Lazy Dog

    daytripper Guest

    A classic example of mis-applied logic. Nice work.

    Since you went and waded in above your head, here's the clue you lack:

    - MCA was a PROPRIETARY interconnect architecture.
    - BetaMax was a PROPRIETARY technology package.
    - PCI Express is NOT PROPRIETARY, it's an OPEN STANDARD.

    hth ;-)

    /daytripper
     
    daytripper, Jan 20, 2005
    #9
  10. And what does proprietary (i.e. Microsoft) versus open (Linux, BSD,
    etc.) have to do with what the people will buy, or even need. Just
    because there are cars out there that can do 200 mph does not mean that
    everyone is going to buy them. There will always be those who buy the
    "newest and greatest" just because it is or because they bought the line
    fed them by the marketers.
    Since you are so stuck on open standards how come SCSI-320 is not the
    current goal of everyone? It is far better than IDE, it is open, it is
    available from multiple vendors. So why is SATA (an inferior product)
    now being offered to everyone but not SCSI?
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jan 20, 2005
    #10
  11. Slow Lazy Dog

    daytripper Guest

    Geeze, you can lead a guy to History but he just won't think for himself.
    Fine.

    Since the clarion call of Open Standards = Cheaper TCO hit with a vengeance in
    the '90s, proprietary solutions were doomed and "industry standard" took over.

    If the effect isn't crystal clear to you, spend a few moments contemplating
    the train-wreck that was the Apple Computers of the world (and the Primes, the
    DECs, the Wangs, the Data Generals, etc, etc...)
    What killed them? Open standards and the resulting commoditization of
    computing platforms.
    Lousy analogy, once again.
    The issue is not what you buy. The issue is what is for sale. Take a look
    around at what's left of proprietary solutions in the desktop computer
    business and the low-end server business. See much? No?
    And? Pray tell, WTF does that have to do with viability of proprietary
    solutions in cost-sensitive applications today?
    In *your* space, U320 has nothing to offer. Do you have the first clue why?
    In a single-user desktop environment, no it doesn't.
    And that is yet another popular misconception you fell for. Nice.
    But importantly, so are its competitors.
    But importantly, at a severe price/capacity premium vs competing technologies
    which offer dramatically higher price/performance on your desktop.

    You getting this yet?
    Um....OK, let's play: what makes SATA an "inferior product" in your mind?
    Fair warning: if you blow chunks about specific SATA drives I'll be happy to
    kick you square in the nuts for your trouble. Don't bore me.
    See above. And know this: SATA will not only own the desktop for awhile, it
    owns the low-end server space already, and is making major gains in the
    mid-range space.

    Why? Simple: TCO and price/performance of SATA drives are better than the
    closest comparable SCSI lines, and you can raid-up whatever bandwidth you
    desire, cheaply. Game over, bub.

    Listen, you Luddites can rail against the wind all you want, but you won't
    change the fact The Future Happens, old technology is replaced with new.
    PCI Express is the irresistible force that will wipe the future clean of AGP.

    So you took a wrong turn in Albuquerque. fyi, the path you should have
    followed is labeled "The Commoditization of Computing".

    hth ;-)

    /daytripper
     
    daytripper, Jan 20, 2005
    #11
  12. Slow Lazy Dog

    LeeBos Guest

    Subject: Re: P4C800-E Deluxe and PCI Express
    Because it's cheaper!
     
    LeeBos, Jan 21, 2005
    #12
  13. Take a look at Dell, HP, Compaq, .... Try upgrading any of them. They
    are not truly open. I owned a PC1 and had no problems upgrading it. I
    can't say the same for the Dells, E-machines, etc. that I have been
    asked to fix. Proprietary is still out there. Also if you look at the
    RS-6000 line of IBM it is doing very well even at the low end of the market.

    How many copies of Microsoft XP, Office, etc. get sold every day even
    though there are "open" replacements available. People will buy what
    they know. Just like at one time the saying was "No one got fired for
    buying IBM".

    SCSI has many advantages over IDE and SATA. I have had SCSI setups for
    the desktop and preferred them but try and buy a replacement for the
    P2B-S today without buying a server. The only disadvantage of SCSI is
    that the cost was not brought down because the volume was never that of
    IDE. Much like your precious PCI-E, it is an expensive alternative to a
    commodity solution. Why should anyone spend double to replace a working
    card just because it is not the "newest and greatest. I just replaced
    my motherboard and made sure that I did NOT get a PCI-E board. I did not
    want to have to buy another $400 video card, etc. PCI-E has nothing
    right now that is of benefit to most users.
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jan 21, 2005
    #13
  14. And PCI/AGP is cheaper and more available than PCI-E! So why is
    everyone so enamored with PCI-E? Just because Intel says that PCI-E is
    the directions du jour does not mean we all have to jump off a cliff.
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jan 21, 2005
    #14
  15. Slow Lazy Dog

    LeeBos Guest

    Subject: Re: P4C800-E Deluxe and PCI Express
    What I ment was that SATA is cheaper than SCSI.

    I have both a P4C800E and a P5AD2E and can't see the diff between AGP and
    PCI-E, except that the PCI-E was more expensive.
     
    LeeBos, Jan 21, 2005
    #15
  16. My point was that SCSI is superior to IDE and SATA but no one is moving
    all their new models to SCSI. SATA and IDE are more popular because
    they do what people want them to do and are cheaper than the
    alternatives. If only the best solution was sold we would all be using
    Fibre Channel SCSI.
    I just don't see why anyone should have to pay way too much to replace
    working equipment for a new slot that offers NO benefit to the user.
     
    Michael W. Ryder, Jan 21, 2005
    #16
  17. The reason being it is too expensive. Increasing the clock rate or
    adding more wires onto the bus makes the board design more difficult,
    which makes it more expensive to design, plus making it more likely that
    more layers will be needed in the PCB, etc.
    One problem being, AGP has no provisions for more than one slot, making
    such applications as SLI impossible or impractical.
    Bandwidth saturation isn't the only issue, there are other things such
    as latency and guaranteed bandwidth allocation that PCI Express also
    addresses.
    Sound cards aren't going to be a prime market for PCI Express cards for
    a while, since they don't need the bandwidth. LAN cards likely will be,
    since it's not possible to get full performance on a Gigabit Ethernet
    card on a 32-bit PCI card, as well as SCSI and RAID cards.
    The problems with some motherboards and AGP weren't due to lack of
    technology, they were due to shoddy design (VIA being a big offender).
    Intel's chipsets generally had no problems with any version of AGP.
    What would have been the point of this? If you're not going to use the
    faster bus for the most performance-demanding component - the video card
    - what is the use?
    Of course some manufacturers will have to retool, the same would have
    been true when moving from ISA to PCI but few would say that wasn't
    worthwhile..
     
    Robert Hancock, Jan 23, 2005
    #17
  18. Slow Lazy Dog

    Paul Guest

    FYI:

    Oh my... Shocked I am. I guess it really is hard
    to make those suckers.

    http://theinquirer.net/?article=18758

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 1, 2005
    #18
  19. Slow Lazy Dog

    airbonetwo

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2021
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    The 4670 should be as fast as the 3850, but with better power/thermal numbers. If you have a slower clocked P4 or a single core (anything other then the P4D) then I'd get the 4650. Not a bad card, shouldn't cost to much, and probably won't need a new PSU either.
     
    airbonetwo, Apr 26, 2021
    #19
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.