Stupid question

In my honest opinion the 8400gs is 10x's as better as it has direct x 10 also AGP is slow out dated and expensive to have a high end GPU in AGP. also keep in mind the chances are the 512mb on the 8400gs is DDR2.

BUT.. XFX make of 6600 is DDR3 but only 128mb
 
I agree with Chrisitian on the fact that the PCIe will definitely beat the AGP card. However, I wouldn't judge a low end card on it's ability to run DX10. Unless you're not talking about gaming in DX10, I wasn't able to utilize the full features of DX10 in games until I got my 8800GT. Even the 8600GT had trouble playing games in DX10.
 
trouble or not the fact it can render DX10 is a stumbling block for most cards. personally mate the 8xxx series will certainly beat 6xxx

just out of curiosity why 6600gt, the 7 series is low in cost and a bit better then any 6xxx
 
Yeah I would agree DX10 cards are much better than DX9 cards. I'm just saying you can't release the full potential of DX10 until you get to higher end cards. And to psychobob, why are you comparing a PCIe to an AGP? Surely your mobo doesn't support both?
 
yea and i think its obvious which ones better PCIE 16x or AGP 8x seriously tho go for the 8600gt or if you can afford it theres a cheap PNY 8800gt with 512mb ddr 2 for about £120:00
 
You guys are guesing on the logic that because it is AGP rather than PCIe, it will be slower. Answer this then, which is faster HD3850 AGP, or a 8500 PCIe? Answer, HD3850AGP. Its the same in this case, the PCIe bandwidth is not even coming close to being saturated with the 8400GS, regardless of its 8 series status. This is why the 6600 can have a 40% larger memory bandwidth.

I think the 6600 would beat the 8400 in most games regardless of the bus interface but arguably the best way of looking at it, is this: If you compared the two cards, which are both available on the same bus (e.g. PCIe), the 6600 for example kills the 8400. Then factor in the fact that the 8400 is not even coming close to saturating the bandwidth of a PCIe interface. This is the reason why they can make a ATi HD3850 AGP which is a very fast card.

The 8400 is a media center card, rubbish at games, yet a 6600 will play a lot of more modern games at modest resolutions and settings. The 6600 is better but the HD3850 is the best. Providing you have a sufficient PSU, and are limited to an AGP slot, then get the 3850. The 6600 wont play DX10, but thats nothing to worry about at the moment.


Summary:

6600 can be overclocked to match clock speeds of the 8400 easily (probably even exceed it)
6600 has 40% higher memory bandwidth
6600 can play games - 8400 is shit.


edit: even better, if you must have the 6 series, get a BFG 6200 and unlock the pixel pipelines and it will then be exactly the same as a 6600GT.
 
Last edited:
kookooshortman55 said:
Well I guess it depends on which kind of a slot he has. Usually you don't compare AGP to PCIe.
Click to expand...

What are you saying? Its ok to guess if you haven't been asked the question before? I compare it all the time, PCI, AGP, PCIe etc. Didn't you look at your own link http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=529&card2=191 All the necessary data is there to make an informed decision.

I know you are only trying to help, so peace man. Either way, they are both rubbish. If you want to use an AGP mobo, get a HD 3850 like this: http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4979&Itemid=34

else

Get a PCIe card.
 
Last edited:
Oh no I was just saying that usually your mobo has PCIe or AGP. I don't know a mobo that has both so I was wondering why he was asking which was better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top