G400 & Via 133a & Agp4x

[Ashley]

Paul, 1600x1200x32bpp with triple buffering would exhaust all local memory (or at least 30MB of it).

But 4x vs. 2x vs. 1x is also about optimized software. At 4x 16 bytes can be transferred in a single clock cycle. If only 8 bytes of data are transferred, 8 bytes of garbage are included. The bandwidth is there, but it is wasted.

For 4x to be measureably twice as fast as 2x, all AGP transfers would have to contain 16 bytes of meaningful data.

[Rags]

Compton,

I made a typo, that should have read "How come a Via@133 barely nudges a BX@100." The BX when clocked on a 133 FSB smokes the via at 133.

Rags

[Compton]

Rags, what I'm wondering is if the BX performance is so much higher at 133mhz because of of the 89mhz agp bus vs. the 66mhz agp bus of the Via chipset. How much of a difference do you think this makes? I accept the fact that the BX chipset is faster. The main reason why I bought Via is cost, I'll put my money down when the i815 hits the streets.

[Rags]

I understand your question, and yes...the AGP being clocked higher does affect performance, but in reality it is not anything that is worth mentioning. I suspect that better memory thoroughput is the main factor. AGP transfers rely heavily on how fast your memory can move data, and if your board has lower performing memory, then AGP transfers are compromised, even if you run it at 4X.

Rags

[Compton]

Thanks for the insight