Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

PCI-Express 3.0 and Gigabyte GTX 650 Ti?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 28, 2012 10:41:42 PM

Hey all,

I just built a budget gaming setup, but ran into some trouble. The motherboard is the ASRock H77 Pro4-MVP, CPU is Intel Core i5 3470, RAM Kingston HyperX DDR3 1600 8GB, graphics card is GIGABYTE GTX 650 Ti 2 GB GV-N65TOC-2GI.

For some reason, my graphics card, despite being PCI-E 3.0 compatible, won't work in the PCI-E 3.0 slot on my motherboard. I plug it in the slot and power it on, but no display output. I tried switching between outputs, but nothing. The onboard video is disabled when you have the card in, so there's no video unless I don't power on the card. It works fine in the 2.0 slot underneath, but not the 3.0. I tried installing the drivers and then trying it, but that didn't work either.

I'm kind of at a loss. I got the card and mobo combo because it was 3.0, but now I only get 2.0.

Any suggestions? Is there something in the BIOS that can be switched?

Thanks in advance!
December 28, 2012 10:56:46 PM

Thanks for the fast reply. You are saying no difference between the 3.0 and 2.0? I wasn't aware of that, so if that's true then i won't worry about it. I thought that 3.0 was better. I'm new to the "new" gaming scene (last gaming I did was on AGP 8x and PCI GeForce FX5200, 3DFX, think Star Wars Tie Fighter and what not).

Thanks!
Score
0
a c 114 U Graphics card
December 29, 2012 2:07:46 AM

With the 650 ti being a mid end card. I will fully second BigMack70 on this. It will not even loose anything.

You would need a beast of a card to feel the loss of 3.0.

I run a GTX 650 ti on 2.0 and it works fine. fairly power efficient little card.
Score
0
Related resources
December 29, 2012 3:16:27 AM

Awesome.

Thanks for the help guys. I am not sure why they even have 3.0 then if it doesn't make much of a difference. What's the difference anyways?

Thanks!
Score
0
a c 114 U Graphics card
December 29, 2012 3:43:12 AM

It has a massive amount of bandwidth, but you need some real fast cards to take advantage of it.

It is like a low rpm hard drive with a SATA 6 interface. Sure you can do it, but it does not actually help(using the interface does not cost any more, so they use it.).
Score
0
December 29, 2012 3:52:20 AM

I see what you mean. So basically the technology is in place and mainstream, but you still need to spend a lot of money in order to (fully) utilize it. I can assume that pretty soon there will be graphics cards that can use it to its full potential that don't cost $450.
Score
0
a c 114 U Graphics card
December 29, 2012 2:43:53 PM

each new card gets faster.

For instance, the 5770 was a mid end card and has as fast(for the most part) as the last generations 4870(a rather high end card). It may take a few generations, but all the fast stuff makes its way into the mainstream at some point.
Score
0
December 29, 2012 7:09:04 PM

I had a 5750 at one point. It was I think $200 when it was new in 2010 or 2009, I can't remember which. Nowadays a used one is $50-$60. Now a much better HD 7850 and NVIDIA GTX 560 Ti goes for that. What a difference 2 years makes! I like to joke with friends that if car technology advanced that fast a Rolls-Royce would cost $2,000, get 9000 miles to the gallon, but break down and explode after 2 years.
Score
0
a c 114 U Graphics card
December 29, 2012 7:11:16 PM

Its all great until the exploding part :) 
Score
0
December 29, 2012 7:22:26 PM

:heink:  Yep. I just reconditioned and sold a Pentium 3 700 MHz with the fastest bus at the time that was custom built and completely decked-out, USB 2.0 expansion card, v90 dual-port modem, 16 MB Galaxy PCI video card, high-end sound card, 10/100 NIC, 1.5 GB RAM, 40 GB hard drive. It cost the customer about $2,200 in 2001. I sold it for $25. A server with dual Xeons that was $6500 in 2004, sell for around $250. It's crazy. The degree that technology has advanced is staggering.
Score
0
January 5, 2013 8:45:22 PM

Best answer selected by sirstinky.
Score
0
!