It looks like they're roughly equal.
A 6600GT has 8 pipes at 500 MHz, for a fill rate of 4000 Mpixels/s. A base
6800GS (AGP) has a 350 MHz clock, and 12 pipelines, for 4200 Mpixels/s.
Their memory clocks are about the same. Some manufacturers clock the AGP
6800GS at 400 MHz, so it would pull farther ahead, but it's a more expensive
card.
It's possible to get 128 MB versions of the 6600GT for less than $150
(
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=)
(link may wrap)
It's not clear to me that having 256 MB or more on a midrange card is
useful. The GPU may not have enough power to be useful at resolutions where
that much RAM is needed. Others may have experience there that I lack. (I
was very fond of my 256 MG 6800GT.)
If your brother wants the most powerful AGP card that's available as new
retail stock, a 7800GS looks like it, at least for nVidia cards (16
pipelines, up to 460 MHz GPU clock). It's a $300+ card, which is
ridiculously expensive, except when compared to a 6800 Ultra from 18 months
ago. (It looks like they'd have similar performance, although the best
7800GS cards ought to be better, in terms of raw performance.)
I'd suggest also looking at the ATI Radeon X8xx line, but if NewEgg is
typical, the AGP versions of those must be getting scarce. AGP seems to be
dying, though whether it's due to lack of customers or the vendors simply
not making products, I don't know.
UprightCitizen said:
So which would you say is the better card the 6600 GT (the 6800 GT seems
expensive) or the 6800 GS agp version? Thanks again
(snip)
