1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

What kind of card should I get?

Discussion in 'Nvidia' started by Terry, Apr 17, 2006.

  1. Terry

    Terry Guest

    I have a old asus P2b mobo and I think it needs a new video card. It
    works but there are shaded areas on the screen. They kind of line up
    with vertical lines on any open windows. I took a screen shot but they
    don't show up.

    Anyway.......the mobo has an old AGP slot. It doesn't even support AGP
    2X. My current card is a TNT2.

    What would be a good replacement? (Another TNT2) Or could I get more
    performance from a PCI card?
    Terry, Apr 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Terry

    deimos Guest

    Your motherboard is more likely only AGP 1.0 spec compliant and does in
    fact support 1x and 2x transfer rates. 440LX boards from the same era
    fit this description. Your best bet is a cheap FX5500 or GF6 6200 AGP.
    Don't spend too much money, it seriously won't be worth your while.
    In fact, an old GF4MX would seem a quantum leap from your TNT2. So any
    card made in the past 2-3 years will probably do. As a side note, many
    cards are backwards compatible all the way to AGP 2x, so you should be safe.
    deimos, Apr 17, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. As a rough guide you could use this table which I used to get an idea of
    the relative power of various cards with a game I played at the time of
    my upgrade:
    When I upgraded a few years ago from a RIVA TNT 2 to a Geforce 2 MX 400
    I found the difference noticeable (without changing anything else at
    that time). My own rule of thumb had been to aim for an increase of *at
    least* 50% to even notice a difference.
    Michael Romes, Apr 17, 2006
  4. Terry

    Terry Guest

    I am not too bios savvy but I looked for a place to set it to 2X and
    didn't find one. Does this mean that it will work with a 2X card but
    only run at 1X?

    I did find this in the manual but have no idea what it means.

    My manual is here in case you are interested.

    The cards you recommend are 8X. I have been told that they will not
    work in the old AGP slot.
    Terry, Apr 17, 2006
  5. Terry

    deimos Guest

    This is a common point of confusion, but all the original AGP
    motherboards (most of them) had to be AGP 1.0 specification compliant.
    The 1.0 spec called for 1x and 2x transfer rates - so your motherboard
    would have to be either 1.0 or 2.0 specifcation compliant and depending
    on what spec it is, you'll get the available transfer rates. AGP 2.0
    spec allows 1x to 8x (adding 4x to 8x). Most AGP motherboards
    manufactured after 2000/2001 were AGP 2.0.

    Now the card should be backwards compatible all the way to 1x transfer
    rates if need be. I've seen a few that require 2x or 4x at a minimum
    but these are the exception as other people have reported modern Geforce
    FX and GF6 cards running on old low end AGP 1.0 systems using only 1x
    and 2x tranfer rates.

    For reference, I'm running a Geforce FX 5700 on a Celeron 433 system
    using an old AGP 1.0 Intel 440LX motherboard. It has a maximum 2x
    transfer rate and has no problem with the modern 8x graphics card.
    deimos, Apr 18, 2006
  6. Terry

    Terry Guest

    You obviously know much more about cards than I do. I am really
    surprised that you have an 8X card in a 2X slot. Unless you get the
    cards for free that seems like a waste of money to me.

    One other question would be that if you get an 8X PCI card if that
    would run better than the same card in the AGP 2X slot.
    Terry, Apr 19, 2006
  7. Terry

    DaveL Guest

    No. PCI will be slower. One other thing. You said the problem does not
    show up when you do a screen shot. I find that odd. Could the problem be
    monitor related?

    About using newer agp cards, the general rule of thumb is that if the card
    will successfully plug into a slot then it should work. The keys in the
    slot dictate that. But one caveat, the LX chipset boards were notorious for
    not supplying enough current to run some agp cards, even though they would
    plug in.

    DaveL, Apr 19, 2006
  8. Terry

    deimos Guest

    If the problem isn't in the framebuffer, but an output component of some
    sort, then it won't show up as you would expect.

    Like Dave said however, PCI isn't like AGP, it's only one speed (33mhz)
    whereas AGP has two types of slots regular and Pro. Pro was a short
    lived form factor with an extra tab on it and running at 3.3v. Normal
    AGP cards, like most of the ones made up until today, use regular AGP
    that runs at 1.5v. If it don't fit, then it's probably a pro card.
    Fairly rare (i.e. Radeon 9600's, some GF2's maybe).

    A lot of third party LX boards had AGP problems, but I guess I got
    lucky, at least Gateway's A440LX revision had none and works with all
    1.5v AGP cards.
    deimos, Apr 19, 2006
  9. Terry

    Terry Guest

    I viewed the screen shot on a different computer and it looked fine. I
    never tried to open the screenshot on the trouble machine. I guess it
    would have showed up there.

    Also, while I was trying to decide on what new card I should buy I
    remembered I had a Gforce in my second machine. Because I don't use my
    second machine for any games I put the Gforce in my niece's machine and
    I took the TNT. I access my second machine using VNC anyway so the
    screen looks fine for me.
    Terry, Apr 19, 2006
  10. So far correct...
    This not. While the FX5500 is a native AGP GPU which should work w/o
    problems the 6200 is native PCIe and uses a HSI bridge for connection
    with AGP. These bridges don't support 3.3v (which is used by the OPs
    board) any more and also won't fit physically in the slot.

    So the best solution would indeed be some Geforce FX card (5200, 5500).

    Benjamin Gawert, Apr 20, 2006
  11. which is wrong. In fact, AGP _is_ like PCI because AGP is nothing more
    than an enhanced PCI bus with just two connections.
    Nope. PCI is not 33MHz only. There are several versions of PCI in 32bit
    and 64bit and with 33MHz and 66MHz. Then there is PCI-X which runs at
    100MHz and 133MHz...
    That's complete BS, sorry. First, there are more than two AGP sockets
    (AGP 3.3v, AGP 1.5v, AGP universal, AGP Pro 3.3v, AGP Pro 1.5v). The
    difference between the AGP sockets is the keying which corresponds to
    the signalling voltage the mainboard (3.3v with AGP 1x and 2x, 1.5v with
    AGP 4x and 8x) uses. AGP Pro was _not_ shortlived and is _not_ found on
    any Radeon or Geforce cards. AGP Pro exists in several flavours (AGP Pro
    50, AGP Pro 100 etc.) and does _not_ work with 3.3v. AGP Pro is an
    extension to the regular AGP slot for the purpose of providing
    additional power lines (which are not 3.3v but 5V and 12V) for gfx cards
    with high power corrent. AGP Pro is _not_ found with consumer gfx cards
    but with professional cards like the ATI FireGL X1-256p, FireGL 2/3/4,
    the 3DLabs Wildcat III and IV series etc, and also present in every
    AGP-based workstation of the big vendors (HP, IBM, Dell). Interestingly,
    no Nvidia card (Quadro) ever used AGP Pro but instead relied on
    connectors for 5.25" power cables.
    _No_ i440LX board works with 1.5v cards. They only work with cards that
    still support 3.3v...

    Benjamin Gawert, Apr 20, 2006
  12. Terry

    DaveL Guest

    WRONG. The 6200 AGP's gpu comes in two varieties, NV44 which is native
    PCI-e and needs a HSI bridge chip. The other is the NV44a which is native
    AGP. Here is one.
    You'll also note this card is keyed as universal, so it will work in a 3.3
    volt slot.
    So get your facts straight before you start throwing stones.

    DaveL, Apr 20, 2006
  13. You're right with the 6200.
    You never made a mistake, right? Maybe you'd better address this to
    other people. The amount of *real* BS in this thread is tremendious.

    Benjamin Gawert, Apr 21, 2006
  14. Terry

    DaveL Guest

    Oh yes. I have been wrong many times. But I thought you were being overly
    stern with Deimos and thought you could use some humbling. It's guys like
    me and him who only want to help people and don't need to be brow-beaten for
    it. Maybe if you were a little more subtle with your corrections.

    DaveL, Apr 21, 2006
  15. For what? Just because I said that what he wrote was wrong? It's not my
    problem that _everything_ he wrote in this posting was just plain wrong.
    But it's better to be corrected than that some technical nonsense which
    only causes more confusion gets spread around.
    I see no statement that was either offending or "brow-beatening", so
    there certainly is no need for you to "defend" someone. My posting style
    is usually very neutral. If someone feels embarrased because he posted
    false statements and got corrected, well then it's his personal problem
    and he has to live with it. Don't aproximate the fire if you can't stand
    the heat.

    Benjamin Gawert, Apr 21, 2006
    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.