I know the last AGP native Nvideo graphics cards that do not use a bridge chip seem to be the 6800 OC and 6800 Ultra but I'm having a little trouble finding the last native AGP Radeon cards. anyone know?
X800 IIRC
Yes, even X850 had AGP variants.
I have an ATI Radeon X1950 Pro AGP version.
Don't know if that counts.
Why do you value native AGP? I never have had any problems with the bridge based cards.
Last native AGP is R481 or X850 XT.
Platinum Edition (PE), is an overclocked version of XT model (harder to get, little faster - XT can be OC'ed to PE levels tho).
Also : U should know that X800 series from ATI does not support DirectX 9c (or Shader Model 3.0).
wrote:Why do you value native AGP? I never have had any problems with the bridge based cards.
Because cards like the 6600GT can cause issues when trying to run them on 440BX for example. Most common issue is that they won't POST. I've seen it a couple of times.
wrote:wrote:Why do you value native AGP? I never have had any problems with the bridge based cards.
Because cards like the 6600GT can cause issues when trying to run them on 440BX for example. Most common issue is that they won't POST. I've seen it a couple of times.
How is this even an issue? Isn't the early boards 3.3v only, while the bridged cards are AGP 1.5/0.8? I can see it may cause issues on some of the universal slot boards, but they are not that common.
From my experience, the AGP 6600GT is a particularly difficult card to get going. I have 4 and only the non reference Palit works.
However the X1950 Pro works fine.
Much easier is getting a 6800 GT, that cards is native AGP and works great in all the motherboards I tried (Socket A, 478 and 754, 939)
All ATi GPUs after R300 are AGP 4/8x only - so not compatible with 440BX. And even if they were, any PIII CPU would seriously bottleneck it.
HW museum.cz - my collection of PC hardware
wrote:How is this even an issue? Isn't the early boards 3.3v only, while the bridged cards are AGP 1.5/0.8? I can see it may cause issues on some of the universal slot boards, but they are not that common.
wrote:All ATi GPUs after R300 are AGP 4/8x only - so not compatible with 440BX. And even if they were, any PIII CPU would seriously bottleneck it.
Don't underestimate the power of universal AGP slots and the need for insane levels of AA and AF 🤣 .
Some VIA boards also have issues with bridged cards AFAIK, but I've mostly seen it on 440BX. Either way, it's pretty niche stuff.
It's just for a fun project I'm working on. Running a dual tualatin setup with a universal agp slot and a via chipset. It locks up and outputs garbage if I use anything with a bridge chip. Just wanting to see the fastest card that will run in it. Running a 6800 OC now but stuff like crysis still isn't maxing cpu usage, at least according to msi afterburner.
wrote:All ATi GPUs after R300 are AGP 4/8x only - so not compatible with 440BX. And even if they were, any PIII CPU would seriously bottleneck it.
Actually you can go up to R350 on BX.
wrote:It's just for a fun project I'm working on. Running a dual tualatin setup with a universal agp slot and a via chipset. It locks up and outputs garbage if I use anything with a bridge chip. Just wanting to see the fastest card that will run in it. Running a 6800 OC now but stuff like crysis still isn't maxing cpu usage, at least according to msi afterburner.
Well get a 6800 Ultra fastest card for Crysis which I think requires SM 3.0 so using any native ATI solution is out of the question.
wrote:wrote:It's just for a fun project I'm working on. Running a dual tualatin setup with a universal agp slot and a via chipset. It locks up and outputs garbage if I use anything with a bridge chip. Just wanting to see the fastest card that will run in it. Running a 6800 OC now but stuff like crysis still isn't maxing cpu usage, at least according to msi afterburner.
Well get a 6800 Ultra fastest card for Crysis which I think requires SM 3.0 so using any native ATI solution is out of the question.
thanks, I'll keep an eye out for any at a reasonable price. I considered a 6800 ultra but I wasn't sure if those were all that much more powerful then a 6800 OC to bother.
I hope the 6800 is just for testing in Crysis, you wont get playable framerates
wrote:I hope the 6800 is just for testing in Crysis, you wont get playable framerates
oh no, its just a project. not intending to seriously play the game on this rig.
wrote:wrote:wrote:It's just for a fun project I'm working on. Running a dual tualatin setup with a universal agp slot and a via chipset. It locks up and outputs garbage if I use anything with a bridge chip. Just wanting to see the fastest card that will run in it. Running a 6800 OC now but stuff like crysis still isn't maxing cpu usage, at least according to msi afterburner.
Well get a 6800 Ultra fastest card for Crysis which I think requires SM 3.0 so using any native ATI solution is out of the question.
thanks, I'll keep an eye out for any at a reasonable price. I considered a 6800 ultra but I wasn't sure if those were all that much more powerful then a 6800 OC to bother.
Well a 6800 Ultra can usually OC to 500/1200 while a 6800 can usually hit 425/800
The GT and Ultra have GDDR3 while the 6800 Vanilla has DDR
Also 128mb vs 256mb Ram
Also there is the 6800 Ultra Extreme 512mb cards
The HD 4770 was the last/fastest agp card to be released from ATi
When I had an old 2001 gateway it had an x1650 in it which was a bridged card and it worked fine.
