Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Topweasel
Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Originally posted by: Matt2
Besides, not creating any AGP products is the ONLY way for PCI-E to overtake AGP. If there were AGP equivalents to the PCI-E cards would you AGP users EVER make the move? Probably not.
Yes, but I think you are missing the point. There was nothing wrong with AGP slot to begin with (perhaps you couldn't do SLI with 2x 8X AGP slots?). All other things aside, any videocard on AGP slot and PCIe will give equal performance if it is the same videocard. Thus, does switching to PCIe warrant spending $100 on a new motherboard? (and for some users a new cpu that is barely faster than their older system?). From return on investment, switching to PCIe never made sense. However, like you mentioned, the industry is heading there so we have to follow since there is no choice on the high-end for AGP users. I just think it's a matter of principle -- why spend more for no difference in performance just because everyone else is willing to? At least with SATA, the switching costs were low and the cables less bulky.
Yet, for the consumer switching to PCIe (besides SLI) provides 0 tangible benefit all things being equal in a test system. For the manufacturer it solves a lot of problems - produce and budget for 1 standard only and relieve any worries associated with estimating demand for 2 standards; and alleviate issues with power mgmt since AGP slot provides what? 48W and PCIe 75W or something along those lines? Thus the circuitry and 2 power headers on the card would have increased costs for Nvidia and ATI perhaps. Since both can sell motherboards, and resolve the videocard issues, migration to PCIe was the next logical step from the supply side.
And the swith to PCIe was made for 3 reasons. A.) the Whole 8x is garbage. AGP was developed as a shorterm solution to the need to use a faster connection to PCI. Then Intel in all of its glory found shortcut after short cut (which they brought to us one at a time) to improve the Theoretical bandwidth, in actuallity they brobably are unable to transfer something around the numbers of the AGP 4x spec. AGP 8x was more for changing the power then anything else. B.) Power, This doesn't matter to us 7800GTX users or 6800 or X800 users. This matters to 6600, X600, X1600, 6200, X300, and X1300 users. Buy supplying more power to he slots they don't have to grab power from an under powered rail on the that being used by you hard drives and optical drives. This lowers Costs for everyone. C.) Flexibility, remember PCIe is here to replace AGP, PCI, and PCIX. Never will we see again the kind of diversions in mobo designs as we are going to see once mobos start having 50+ lanes and everyone starts making PCIe cards for everything. Selling any of the older slots is just going to slow down its adoption rate by card manufacturers which will lower the amount of lanes manufacturers put on their boards. D.) Legacy is so 90s, we need to stop slowing down progress just for the sake of legacy support for products that only have a years more life in them anyways.
I'm going to take a stab here :
You either have enough money to buy all the parts needed for a PCIe system or you already own one.
Next stab: Can I borrow some money?
Nah... I do Have a PCIe system, but that besides the point. Every type of system in the last 2 years (outside the AXP) has a PCIe motherboard available for it. Most have them for 50-100 while not the cheapest thing in the world should be affordable to almost everyone. If you happen to be one of the sorry people who owns a AXP, I feel for you but you will probably be served better by a CPU upgrade then going from a 6800GT(or GS) to a 7800 or X1800(1900).