Crossfire 16x+ 4x

[antisphere]

hello, i was wondering if there would be a dramatic performance loss by crossfiring in a16x physical 4x electrical.

my motherboard is a ta870u3+ and my graphics card is a 5850.

 

[4745454b]

For PCIe 1.0 yes, there is a dramatic performance loss. (P35 chipset and others.) For PCIe 2.0, not so much. Its less then 8x/8x or 16x/16x, but its not as bad as PCIe 1.0

 

[antisphere]

kk so i'm set? i'd hope the 870 chipset doesn't run pcie 1.0

 

[browsingtheworld]

For PCIe 1.0 yes, there is a dramatic performance loss. (P35 chipset and others.) For PCIe 2.0, not so much. Its less then 8x/8x or 16x/16x, but its not as bad as PCIe 1.0

I wouldn't say dramatic but noticeable:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/pci-express-scaling-p67-chipset-gaming-performance,review-32164-10.html

 

[antisphere]

Best answer selected by antisphere.

 

[mrhercules]

For PCIe 1.0 yes, there is a dramatic performance loss. (P35 chipset and others.) For PCIe 2.0, not so much. Its less then 8x/8x or 16x/16x, but its not as bad as PCIe 1.0

i got confused by this post, kindly help me out. i thought when a second graphic card is installed in crossfire or sli the system automatically configures them in 8x/8x configuration. Isn't this the case?

 

[4745454b]

I wouldn't say dramatic but noticeable:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/pci- [...] 64-10.html

Re-read what I wrote. I said the PCIe 1.0 was dramatic. PCIe 2.0 is "not so much". PCIe 1.0 is very bad, PCIe 2.0 isn't.

i got confused by this post, kindly help me out. i thought when a second graphic card is installed in crossfire or sli the system automatically configures them in 8x/8x configuration. Isn't this the case?

Not in all systems. Many go to 8x/8x, others switch to 16x/4x. 8x/8x is better for CF/SLI setups while 16x/4x is more for a card with a physX card also installed.

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey