Agp4x vs Agp2x

[acot]

Most of you guys are correct asumming that
their is no difference in Q3 and Q2 on the speed of the Agp bus.

Besides the most of us don't have AGP4x motherboard, but I do and someothers too. The specifications between the 2x port and the 4x, are clearly visible if you were to look them up.

What makes it so hard in my case, is that we use here at work high end CAD sytems. There is a difference when it comes to speed. Remember that the VIA Apollo Pro chip sets supports 4x, and that chipset has been out for a while now. The simple fact that Intel Camino chips is just hitting the market doesn't justify Matrox's behaviour in saying that they did't test the boards to Agp4x standards.

Agp4x technology existed early in 1999, I was not available to the public cause of some testing involved to get the product certified. Engineers always had specifications and testing riggs for the sole purpose of designing a chip that will run at the higher bandwidths of the AGP4x specs.

Otherwise how would they say its capable or in compliance? If they didn't have AGp4x generating equipment? Food for thought.....

Pardon my English...

[This message has been edited by acot (edited 22 December 1999).]

[Bixler]

Acot:

At last! A user with a real need, and the equipment to handle 4x. Don't be too intimidated by all of the flaming (some of it mine, ok? ) on this issue.

What makes it so hard in my case, is that we use here at work high end CAD sytems. There is a difference when it comes to speed.

You've got the need, but VERY few of these spec. chasers do. I can sympathise, but sorry, nothing more than a shoulder to cry on.

[acot]

Livius:

We use Nt workstations. One of the programs we have is pro-engineering. It uses the NT opengl to generate polygons. Polygons are the ensential components used when we render a chassis (example) in real time so that the customer can see the clearence of components, airflow thru heatsinks, Etc.

Since this is done in real time, we can adjust texture, lighting and surface to give the rendered object a sense of realism as we rotate it, zoom it, pan it, Etc , all done in real time on a large projection Tv as a presentation.

We have systems $1000.00 dollars video hardware Opengl cards with Z chips etc, that pump out polygons like hell, but none of them give the ability of the Video out option that the g400 has plus the dual mode capability.

I can't compare a software Opengl card with a Hardware opengl (glint), Thats why it is important for me that my g400 cards runs at 4x AGP, instead of 2x.

[The PIT]

Can't see why so many poeple got up tight about it really. Everyone knows that not many games make much use of agp x2. So what was wrong with enquiring if anyone has got one of the agp x4 boards. At least they're future proofed a little bit.
Acot would have been delighted if he had one of those boards. However with my past experiance of Via boards I wonder how good there agp x4 implementation would be.