Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

PCIe 2.0/3.0 and dual 670s question

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Sandy Bridge
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 30, 2012 9:41:17 PM

My question is: Would Sandy Bridge be able to get the most out of 2 670s, or should I go with the 3570K?


I am building a gaming rig with 2 GTX 670s and an i5, but I'm not sure whether to buy Sandy or Ivy Bridge.
I've been planning on the 3570K because Ivy has 2 lanes of x8 PCIe3.0 for dual GPUs, where Sandy has only 2 x 8 lanes of PCIe2.0.
It is my understanding that 3.0 is twice as fast as 2.0. So, the Ivy Bridge can have 2 GPUs each on PCIe2.0x16 instead of x8.


I'm considering the 2500K because it is $30 cheaper, and I hear that it overclocks way better (unless you void your warranty and replace the thermal paste on the Ivys).
*I am aware that, clock for clock, Ivy is faster.

Please help me decide.

More about : pcie dual 670s question

a b U Graphics card
September 30, 2012 11:32:06 PM

Cheepnis said:
Would Sandy i5 be able to get the most out of two GTX 670s, or should I go with the Ivy i5?


I think I'll just quote myself from another absolutely same thread that was made recently:
Quote:

It would be more than enough. Ivy i5 (and Sandy i5 too) won't bottleneck even two GTX 690s/HD 7990s, so you really shouldn't worry about it.
The only real difference between Sandy/Ivy i5 and i7, is in that i7s has higher stock frequencies and has "Hyper Threading" enabled (which i5s don't have).
Other than just that, there is not that much of a difference, and i5s will easily run monsters like GTX 690/HD 7990 without any problems at all.



Also:
Cheepnis said:
It is my understanding that "PCI-e 3.0" is twice as fast as "PCI-e 2.0".


No it's not. Either you are being heavily misinformed, or...

Cheepnis said:
Sandy i5 2500K OverClocks way better than Ivy i5 3570K.

True. You can quite easily OverClock Sandy i5 up to stable 4.8GHz just on air, and even higher with water.
While Ivy i5 can go only up to 4.5GHz on air, and even then it already will be hot as hell (at 95~100c marks), and even water won't help much, even with the best modern coolers.

Cheepnis said:
Replace the thermal paste on the Ivy.

In Ivy's case, just replacing thermal paste won't help at all - you'll need a much MUCH better cooler to cool that beast at 4.2+GHz points.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 30, 2012 11:41:36 PM

master_chen said:

No it's not. Either you are being heavily misinformed, or...


PCIe 3.0 has almost exactly double the bandwidth of PCIe 2.0 and 2.1. This does not translate into doubling real-world performance except maybe in a PCIe x1 comparison, but the PCIe bus itself is twice as fast if by fast, we refer to bandwidth.

OP, Sandy Bridge overclocks marginally better than Ivy, not significantly.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 30, 2012 11:46:44 PM

Cheepnis said:

It is my understanding that 3.0 is twice as fast as 2.0. So, the Ivy Bridge can have 2 GPUs each on PCIe2.0x16 instead of x8.


If you are refering to the bandwidth, yes PCI-Express 3.0 is faster than PCI-E 2.0, BUT the cards today that are the 3.0 "standard" cannot even fully utilize the bandwidth of PCI-E 2.0.

So, as of right now, it doesn't matter if your GPU is 3.0 or 2.0, it will work and have the same performance.
m
0
l
September 30, 2012 11:47:15 PM

That is great news for me because I would love to save $30 on the CPU and put it into a better heatsink if the Ivy isn't going to be noticeably better than the 2500K for gaming (with dual 670s) or most other tasks.

May I ask which you would buy?
Does the overclocking potential of the 2500K actually make it better suited for my needs than the 3570K, not even taking into account the $30 price difference?

I plan on getting a Gigabyte Z77X UD5H btw.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 30, 2012 11:51:05 PM

I would get a 3570K for the reduced power consumption and nearly identical performance (Sandy, when overclocked, only has a minor lead). Some would argue against that, especially if that $30 can be better used somewhere else, but that's the choice that I'd make.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
September 30, 2012 11:56:08 PM

luciferano said:
Sandy Bridge overclocks marginally better than Ivy, not significantly.


You are being delusional.

echondo said:
The cards today that are the "PCI-e 3.0 standard" cannot even fully utilize the bandwidth of "PCI-e 2.0".

So, as of right now, it doesn't matter if your GPU is "PCI-e 3.0" or "PCI-e 2.0/2.1", it will work and have almost completely the same performance on any lane (except for "PCI-e 1.0").


My point exactly.

Cheepnis said:
May I ask which you would buy?
Does the OverClocking potential of the i5 2500K actually make it better suited for my needs than the i5 3570K, not even taking into account the $30 price difference.


I would actually buy i7 2600K, but only if it's affordable (looks like not your case?), otherwise - i5 2500K.
It goes like that: if you need a desktop Ivy that much - get i7 3770K and no other, there's really no point in 3570K in my personal opinion.
But if you need a powerful Sandy - both i5 2500K and i7 2600K would do great, it only depends on your personal need in HT, because both Sandy i5 and i7 OverClock exactly the same.
Putting it simply: if you can afford Sandy i7 and need "Hyper Threading" - definitely get it. If you don't care about HT or/and can't afford a Sandy i7 - get Sandy i5.
If you need Ivy badly - get Ivy i7, even if you can't afford it, just save up the money and then get it later, but don't get Ivy i5. That's my personal opinion on it.

Also:
Cheepnis said:
GA-Z77X-UD5H

Personally, I wouldn't recommend that board. If you need a recommendation from a person that tests tons of different hardware and software on a daily basis (which I do), my personal recommendation would be at least this, but only if you're getting Ivy. Otherwise, get this. Those are much better motherboards than the one that you've selected.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 12:53:43 AM

luciferano said:

Tom's says otherwise.
Ivy is hotter, but it can handle more heat, so you can still get pretty similar performance.
You can beat Sandy considerably.

>Giving me absolutely useless benchmarks, while pretty much ignoring temps and the fact that today there's no cooler out there that would be able to allow to harmlessly OverClock Ivy to the points of higher TjMax than that of Sandy's 98c, and even considering that Ivy has higher TjMax no one would like to have an oven in their case, even if it would perform slightly better (today it's all about temps and noise levels, not about "1 extra parrot in a benchmark").
Highly biased people like you would never get it. I pity you.

I don't like to talk or argue with biased noobs, so...please, don't quote/address me anymore. I'll be ignoring you from now on.
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 12:55:39 AM

luciferano said:
Tom's says otherwise.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-benchmar...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-overcloc...

Ivy is hotter, but it can handle more heat, so you can still get pretty similar performance. If you're more adventurous and switch out Intels' crap CPU die paste with some AS5 or better, then you can beat Sandy considerably.

Instantly void your warranty and kill your processor!

Seriously, not a good idea...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 1:11:18 AM

amuffin said:
Instantly void your warranty and kill your processor!

Seriously, not a good idea...


Why would you kill the CPU? It's not difficult to do this without damaging the CPU. Yes, the warranty is voided, hence I said that it's for the more adventurous (not that popping the IHS wasn't enough of a hint on its own). Overclocking also technically voids the warranty unless you buy the additional overclocking warranty tooo, so anyone who overclocks already voided their warranty, granted a lot of people tend to not outright tell the companies who they RMA to that they overclocked.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 1:17:43 AM

master_chen said:
>Giving me absolutely useless benchmarks, while pretty much ignoring temps and the fact that today there's no cooler out there that would be able to allow to harmlessly OverClock Ivy to the points of higher TjMax than that of Sandy's 98c, and even considering that Ivy has higher TjMax no one would like to have an oven in their case, even if it would perform slightly better (today it's all about temps and noise levels, not about "1 extra parrot in a benchmark").
Highly biased people like you would never get it. I pity you.

I don't like to talk or argue with noobs, so...please, don't quote/address me anymore. I'll be ignoring you from now on.





So... You're post is ridiculously offensive and blatantly stupid. Don't bother responding back, I don't like arguing with noobs.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 3:18:10 AM

master_chen said:



I would actually buy i7 2600K, but only if it's affordable (looks like not your case?), otherwise - i5 2500K.
It goes like that: if you need a desktop Ivy that much - get i7 3770K and no other, there's really no point in 3570K in my personal opinion.
But if you need a powerful Sandy - both i5 2500K and i7 2600K would do great, it only depends on your personal need in HT, because both Sandy i5 and i7 OverClock exactly the same.
Putting it simply: if you can afford Sandy i7 and need "Hyper Threading" - definitely get it. If you don't care about HT or/and can't afford a Sandy i7 - get Sandy i5.
If you need Ivy badly - get Ivy i7, even if you can't afford it, just save up the money and then get it later, but don't get Ivy i5. That's my personal opinion on it.

Also:

Personally, I wouldn't recommend that board. If you need a recommendation from a person that tests tons of different hardware and software on a daily basis (which I do), my personal recommendation would be at least this, but only if you're getting Ivy. Otherwise, get this. Those are much better motherboards than the one that you've selected.


I am willing to spend the extra hundred dollars to get an i7 over an i5, but I have been led to believe that the i7 would not be significantly better for my needs because
1. games do not, and will not in the near future, take advantage of the HT tech
2. the i5s reach roughly the same overclock as the i7s
3. either i5 (2500k or 3570k) would run two GTX 670s without the slightest hint of a bottleneck

If any of that is not completely accurate then I would again consider shelling out the extra money for the i7.
*I also might want to record gameplay while playing video games. Might that be an area where the i7 has an edge?



As for the motherboard:

I'm getting a microcenter deal on the CPU + mobo that will save me $70 (before shipping).
The price difference at MC is $30. I would pay for the ASUS, but I feel like I'd be getting more bang for my buck from the Gigabyte since I don't need WiFi.
I have done a good amount of research of these mobos, and for the most part, review sites (including Tom's) find these boards to be, at the very least, in the same ballpark.
The UD5H is packed with more USB 3.0 and SATAIII ports than I could ever need and has a good audio chipset.

Could you give a few examples/reasons why the V-Pro is worth the extra $30?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 3:42:13 AM

Cheepnis said:
I am willing to spend the extra hundred dollars to get an i7 over an i5, but I have been led to believe that the i7 would not be significantly better for my needs because
1. games do not, and will not in the near future, take advantage of the HT tech
2. the i5s reach roughly the same overclock as the i7s
3. either i5 (2500k or 3570k) would run two GTX 670s without the slightest hint of a bottleneck

If any of that is not completely accurate then I would again consider shelling out the extra money for the i7.
*I also might want to record gameplay while playing video games. Might that be an area where the i7 has an edge?



As for the motherboard:

I'm getting a microcenter deal on the CPU + mobo that will save me $70 (before shipping).
The price difference at MC is $30. I would pay for the ASUS, but I feel like I'd be getting more bang for my buck from the Gigabyte since I don't need WiFi.
I have done a good amount of research of these mobos, and for the most part, review sites (including Tom's) find these boards to be, at the very least, in the same ballpark.
The UD5H is packed with more USB 3.0 and SATAIII ports than I could ever need and has a good audio chipset.

Could you give a few examples/reasons why the V-Pro is worth the extra $30?


Many games do use Hyper-Threading. Most games simply don't use eight threads effectively, so having Hyper-Threading on a quad-core CPU doesn't make much of a difference except in games such as BF3 MP. Basically, Hyper-Threading is a lot more important in gaming for the i3s (and mobile i5s and mobile i7s that aren't quad-core models) that don't have four cores than it is for the i7s that do have four cores.

i7s tend to overclock a little better than i5s, but a few percent for a lot more than a few percent of the budget is generally not worth the money IMO.

An i5 K edition most certainly can run two GTX 670s in probably any game with excellent FPS, although some might need some overclocking to get truly incredible FPS.

EDIT: I just noticed the * part of your post (well, I didn't until echondo said something about it, but still) and yes, an i7 would be better for that.

I don't know if the V-Pro is the better board (I don't have experience with it), so I wouldn't be able to give much help in that comparison. Honestly, I prefer ASRock, but that's just a personal preference.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 3:44:36 AM

Cheepnis said:

*I also might want to record gameplay while playing video games. Might that be an area where the i7 has an edge?


Most likely not BUT it will have an advantage over the i5's because Sony Vegas and other rendering programs benefit greatly from hyperthreading.

If you plan on rendering videos and editing then by all means get a i7. I edit and render videos on a i5 and even though it is good at it, the i7 will do it faster no matter what.

If you'd rather wait longer each time to render videos but save ~$100 then go for it, it is your money!
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 3:59:58 AM

Depending on what software you use to record with, if you use MSI Afterburner and record you can use all 8 threads while you record.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 4:14:23 AM

Is there any reason I shouldn't get the i7 2700k from MicroCenter for $244 ($46 lower than next best price). http://www.microcenter.com/product/376491/Core_i7_2700K...
Is there something wrong with the 2700ks? Do they not overclock as well as the 2600s? Is MC just unloading a bad batch of them for cheap? Or is this a great deal?

Seems like the best of both worlds. Hyper Threading, faster than the 3750k, overclocks better, only $40 more.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:18:27 AM

Cheepnis said:
Is there any reason I shouldn't get the i7 2700k from MicroCenter for $244 ($46 lower than next best price). http://www.microcenter.com/product/376491/Core_i7_2700K...
Is there something wrong with the 2700ks? Do they not overclock as well as the 2600s? Is MC just unloading a bad batch of them for cheap? Or is this a great deal?

Seems like the best of both worlds. Hyper Threading, faster than the 3750k, overclocks better, only $40 more.


The i7-2700K overclocks generally better than the i7-2600K, but not significantly so. That's a good deal at Microcenter.
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:35:43 AM

luciferano said:
The i7-2700K overclocks generally better than the i7-2600K, but not significantly so. That's a good deal at Microcenter.

What? :heink: 
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 4:37:38 AM

amuffin said:
What? :heink: 

what?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:37:43 AM

amuffin said:
What? :heink: 

generally overclocks, not overclocks generally, whatever. Point is that the 2700K has a decent but not huge advantage over the 2600K in overclocking because it is better-binned. At under $250, that's a good deal.
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:38:19 AM

luciferano said:
generally overclocks, not overclocks generally, whatever. Point is that the 2700K has a decent but not huge advantage over the 2600K in overclocking because it is better-binned.

100mhz! :sarcastic: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:39:18 AM

amuffin said:
100mhz! :sarcastic: 


... That's just at stock... It can generally overclock a few hundred MHz higher, at least in my experience.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 4:39:23 AM

If I get a Sandy Bridge, will my Z77 mobo work with it right out of the box?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:39:42 AM

Cheepnis said:
If I get a Sandy Bridge, will my Z77 mobo work with it right out of the box?


It should.
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 4:41:14 AM

luciferano said:
... That's just at stock... It can generally overclock a few hundred MHz higher, at least in my experience.

Show me! :whistle: 
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 5:26:19 AM

luciferano said:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/zardon/intel-core...
Supposedly 200MHz higher than average for the 2600K. Like I said, it's not a big gain, but it's generally at least a little more than 100MHz and can be up to few hundred MHz.

I thought we were talking about your experience.... :heink: 
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 5:31:28 AM

Cheepnis said:
Could you give a few reasons why the V-Pro is worth the extra $30?

It's a much better OverClocker than that Gigabyte board, and it has overall better quality, because of a much better components which were used during it's build (much better capacitors and lanes, sturdier ferrite chokes and etc., meaning longer life and higher stress threshold - it would not blow up or catch on fire if you do something wrong during OverClocking of CPU, Memory or GPU...unlike that Gigabyte one...). You pay more, but it's reasonable, because you get a much better product for that money.
If you don't care about durability, longevity and stability, then, of course, you can get that Gigabyte instead...but you might regret it later (and you probably would).
Also - quality of motherboard isn't defined by how much anything-ports you have on it: some single-GPU (or single-SLI/CFX) boards can beat even 4-way boards.
If a motherboard has 10+ "USB 3.0" ports and 100500 "SATA III"s, this doesn't mean jack *** as long as the entire board is made of bison's anal fecal matter, remember that.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 5:32:28 AM

amuffin said:
I thought we were talking about your experience.... :heink: 


I don't have a lot of models to compare like they do. Would you like a list of frequencies? I don't really remember voltages for all of them, but I could give you a list of frequencies that I'd see with a few i7-2600Ks and i7-2700Ks in my builds for clients. I've had four i7-2600Ks and two i7-2700Ks, and the 2700Ks consistently had 200-300MHz higher overclocks with the same motherboard, cooler, and PSU.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 6:35:53 AM

Quick Question

What kind of power savings does IVY offer over Sandy? Is it something that would have a significant impact on my electric bill? How much per year approximately?
m
0
l
a c 109 U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 6:45:15 AM

10-15W at most.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 7:43:58 AM

Cheepnis said:
If my math is right then that is AT MOST an extra $10 a year if running 15W higher 24/7 for 365 days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rhQc666Sg

Now consider notebooks and ultrabooks. Because Ivy aren't really meant to be used in desktop, it's mainly for laptops - this is where it shines the most.
15W doesn't seem that much when it's the case of desktop builds, but in mobile segment that's quite a lot, especially when we're talking about using laptop without a charge adapter.
m
0
l
October 1, 2012 6:23:18 PM

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/07/18/pci_express_2...
Here is an article that compares the performance of a 2600k to a 3770K by hooking up single, dual, and triple 680s and 7970s and running games at their highest playable settings.

It seems to conclude that even dual 680s would not be noticeably hampered by pcie2.0 if both CPUs are OCed to their maximums (Sandy can reach a higher OC, negating the better IPC of the Ivy when both are at the same clock speed).

I am feeling pretty confident now that the 2700k would be a fine choice, considering it is only $40 more than the 3570k.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 6:34:08 PM

Cheepnis said:
Sandy can reach a higher OC, negating the better IPC of the Ivy when both are at the same clock speed.


Uh-huh... :\
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
October 1, 2012 7:39:34 PM

Cheepnis said:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2012/07/18/pci_express_2...
Here is an article that compares the performance of a 2600k to a 3770K by hooking up single, dual, and triple 680s and 7970s and running games at their highest playable settings.

It seems to conclude that even dual 680s would not be noticeably hampered by pcie2.0 if both CPUs are OCed to their maximums (Sandy can reach a higher OC, negating the better IPC of the Ivy when both are at the same clock speed).

I am feeling pretty confident now that the 2700k would be a fine choice, considering it is only $40 more than the 3570k.


If both were at the same clock speed, then Sandy wouldn't be overclocked to a greater frequency and Ivy would win (albeit not by a significant margin). Sandy can hit higher frequencies than Ivy to a greater degree than Ivy's performance per Hz advantage (which is not the same thing as IPC) and that is Sandy's advantage. It's not a large advantage by any means, but sure, like Ivy's win at the same frequency, it's still a win.
m
0
l
!