PCI-E 3.0 to AMD

[kristian buckhoj]

hello

 

I would like to buy a new motherboard, amd cpu and it must have PCI-E 3.0 but I can not fin some. the CPU should preferably be in the top 2 of AMD CPUs (about 4 GHz)

 

Show in will help find one will it be nice

 

AMD website: http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/amdfx/Pages/amdfx.aspx#2

 

[Lays]

pci 2.0 is compatible with pci 3.0 and you lose literally 1-5% performance, you will notice no differences.

 

We're talking like 1-3 fps or so in games unless you're running 2-3+ graphics cards on very high resolutions there is no difference

[tristan1035]

Why do you need PCI-E 3.0? The newest sabertooth board has 3.0 and you can just get an 9370.

[MbV93]

AM3+ motherboards don't have PCI-E 3.0

[Scia]

FX 8350 + Crosshair Z.

FX 8350 + UD7

 

Not the cheapest options but good ones ^^

[needmorewood]

cause their chipset doesnt support it yet.
i dont think pci-e3.0 is that good yet.... no device really takes advantage of it unless u do xfire/sli. (as far as i know)

[kristian buckhoj]

in need PCI-E 3.0 for maximum performance when I run some big programs (black magic as vinc etc.) I have looked at a graphics card, msi geforce 770 4gb, and har PCI-E 3.0 and I would like to run its max perfomance.

http://dk.msi.com/product/vga/N770-TF-4GD5-OC.html#overview

[needmorewood]

in need PCI-E 3.0 for maximum performance when I run some big programs (black magic as vinc etc.) I have looked at a graphics card, msi geforce 770 4gb, and har PCI-E 3.0 and I would like to run its max perfomance.

http://dk.msi.com/product/vga/N770-TF-4GD5-OC.html#overview

nah u dont need pci-e3.0

but if ur obsessed with  that number then just go intel and spend more money for a number

[iSuzak]

The Sabertooth has PCI-E 3.0 http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/SABERTOOTH_990FXGEN3_R20/

but honestly pci-e 2.0 x16 is not gonna bottleneck you

[kristian buckhoj]

thanks for the help 

[Glenwing]

Intel only has half the number of PCIe lanes anyway, so even though they have PCIe 3.0 they don't have any more bandwidth than AMD anyway.

[Altecice]

Intel only has half the number of PCIe lanes anyway, so even though they have PCIe 3.0 they don't have any more bandwidth than AMD anyway.

really? ... huh

 

so in terms of AMD vs Intel PCI.. AMD outperforms Intel on 2.0?

[Glenwing]

really? ... huh

 

so in terms of AMD vs Intel PCI.. AMD outperforms Intel on 2.0?

 

They are equal.

 

PCIe 3.0 is double PCIe 2.0, so every x2 lanes of 2.0 is equivalent to x1 lane of 3.0.

 

When running single card, AMD runs 2.0 x16 vs Intel 3.0 x16, Intel wins on paper but no cards are even close to maxing out 2.0 x16 anyway.

 

When running SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x16/x16 and Intel runs 3.0 x8/x8 which are equal in bandwidth.

When running 3-way SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x16/x8/x8 and Intel runs 3.0 x8/x4/x4 which are equal in bandwidth.

When running 4-way SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x8/x/8/x8/x8 and Intel runs 3.0 x4/x4/x4/x4 which are equal in bandwidth.

 

Moving to PCIe 3.0 was basically marketing by Intel and it has worked wonderfully, everyone is convinced Intel has way more PCI express capability.

[TERAFLOP]

Only FM2+ AMD chipsets natively support PCI-E 3.0.

AMD's 990FX Chipset supports 2 16x Crossfire or SLI, Intel's Z87 chipset only supports 2 8x Crossfire or SLI, so you're getting exactly the same amount of bandwidth as PCIe 3.0 with an AMD motherboard because it has twice as many bandwidth lanes.

[D3MON]

They are equal.

 

PCIe 3.0 is double PCIe 2.0, so every x2 lanes of 2.0 is equivalent to x1 lane of 3.0.

 

When running single card, AMD runs 2.0 x16 vs Intel 3.0 x16, Intel wins on paper but no cards are even close to maxing out 2.0 x16 anyway.

 

When running SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x16/x16 and Intel runs 3.0 x8/x8 which are equal in bandwidth.

When running 3-way SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x16/x8/x8 and Intel runs 3.0 x8/x4/x4 which are equal in bandwidth.

When running 4-way SLI/CFX, AMD runs 2.0 x8/x/8/x8/x8 and Intel runs 3.0 x4/x4/x4/x4 which are equal in bandwidth.

 

Moving to PCIe 3.0 was basically marketing by Intel and it has worked wonderfully, everyone is convinced Intel has way more PCI express capability.

yeah try telling that to the intel sheep.

8320 and 990fxa ud3 for the win...

8320 and ch5f-z if you want a little extra tweaking

[TheMissxu]

I'd just get a 8320 and hope you win the lotto.

[Guest]

really? ... huh

 

so in terms of AMD vs Intel PCI.. AMD outperforms Intel on 2.0?

Even a Titan wouldn't saturate 2.0

[Wolfur]

yeah try telling that to the intel sheep.

8320 and 990fxa ud3 for the win...

8320 and ch5f-z if you want a little extra tweaking

 

The problem is 83xx will bottleneck multi-GPU so there's no point.

[TERAFLOP]

The problem is 83xx will bottleneck multi-GPU so there's no point.

Not true, unless you're talking about older games, in which you wouldn't need much GPU horsepower anyway.

In the most demanding games I could think of, including Crysis 3 , Far Cry 3 and BF4, the 83xx CPUs outperform their equivalently priced intels.

[D3MON]

The problem is 83xx will bottleneck multi-GPU so there's no point.

sorry what was that?

a processor doesnt just bottleneck a gpu fi theyre unmatched. it doesnt work like that, it depends on what game, resolution and settings your playing at, at 2560x1600 in crysis 3 with 2 gtx titans all decent cpu's will performa about the same, at that point the graphics card makes all the difference.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page6.html

an 8350 at 2.5ghz gets 90% of the framerate of a 4.5ghz 4770k, ergo by the time a 8350 bottlenecks you, anything below a i7-2011 will