Well, speed and the number of ports are two different things, but anyway the performance comes out of the GFX card. It would be the absolutely technical overkill from a component requirement (and cost) to have more. Today's graphics cards do not use the AGP bus to move texture data to the graphics core. The textures are stored inside the graphics card RAM. The only data that is transferred to the card are the coordinates for the graphic core. For this task the current bus speed (AGPx1 = PCI66) is ok. This bus can transfer 266MB/s, that is about 40M coordinates for textured triangles. With a estimated size of 20 pixel per triangle you can draw 800M pixel/s on the screen. With a resolution of 1600x1200 this is about 400 frames per second. You will NOT find a monitor that is capable of doing this.
The initial idea of the AGP bus was using the main memory as graphics RAM to save some cost. As today's performance expectations are going much behind the limit of this approach, the cards are using their own local memory.
More fun news coming from IBM soon...;-)
R&B :-)
