1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

PCI Express x4 vs. x16

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by Haven, Jan 27, 2009.

  1. Haven New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    25 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    How big of a performance hit will I take with say.... a gtx260.
  2. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,212 (4.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,405
    ok the 16x slot has 4x the bandwidth that 4x does, but apparently the story behind 4x is the 4x slot has the samebandwidth as the AGP 8x Slot.
  3. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,513 (3.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,142
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Overall, if you made a card fit in a 4x slot, it would not be that big of a performance decrease.
  4. JC316

    JC316 Knows what makes you tick

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Messages:
    9,362 (2.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    903
    You might lose at most, 20% of your performance and that is at the most. It would be better in a 16X for sure.
  5. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,541 (2.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,331
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
  6. Black Panther

    Black Panther Senior Moderator™ Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,562 (3.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,916
    And if you can't fit it in.... you know what you can do.....
    [​IMG]
    :D
    3dsage says thanks.
  7. DanTheBanjoman Señor Moderator

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Messages:
    10,553 (2.82/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,383
  8. PVTCaboose1337

    PVTCaboose1337 Graphical Hacker

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,513 (3.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,142
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    A while back, someone on TPU cut down a PCI-E16x card and fit it into a 1x slot. It worked. It was just slower.

    EDIT: O BTW, that photo is shopped so bad.
  9. spearman914

    spearman914 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,339 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York 11223
    GTX260 is a pretty high end card, at 4x u'll be bottlenecked a little, like JC316 saids only 20% performance loss no more.
  10. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    ive used a 9600GT in a 4x slot and it seemed quite a bit worse for it, maybe just my personal experiences...
  11. DarkMatter New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Guys you are answering too fast, IMO.

    First of all we need to know which mobo? PCIe 1.0? 1.1? 2.0?
    Which CPU?

    IT MATTERS. Because, first and foremost a mobo/chipset that only has x4 PCIe (that's what I supose) will probably be a bottleneck by itself and usually the CPU that goes with a mobo like that is slowish too. (Just assuming, take no offense.) Both can be a bottleneck.

    If it's not 2.0, PCIe x4 will cripple performance A LOT, I dare to say that you would lose 75% of the performance of a GTX 260. PCIe 2 is twice as fast as PCIe 1. PCIe 1 is actually a little bit slower than equivalent AGP. i.e PCIe 1.0 8x vs AGP 8x.

    If it is PCIe 2.0 you will still see a good amount of bottleneck in a GTX 260 in modern games (for older ones a GTX260 is way too much). Look at Tom's Hardware review posted above, COD4 and Crysis (and FSX but it's not the best example) are bottlenecked a lot*. Things will get worse in future games. Probably way more than 20%, though even 20% is a lot actually. If you are going to run a GTX260 at 80% all the time, just get a HD4850 or 9800gtx or even 9800 gt/hd4830, you will get same performance for less. NOW if you are going to upgrade the mobo soon it won't matter if the card is bottlenecked, as it will play games smooth until then, no problem, but it's not worth to pay more if you won't get anything in return.

    *And yet, IMO those benchmarks are not well done, specially on Crysis: it's obvious they ran the test on Medium settings and without AF or AA (in an attempt to avoid GPU bottleneck) and that's a tremendous error to test what they want, actually. Lesser quality means that less memory is used and thus less data needs to be moved from system to GPU and forth, completely faking the results in Crysis and some other games (i.e. 8x AF instead of x16 in COD4).
  12. LittleLizard

    LittleLizard New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,775 (1.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    575
    Location:
    Latin America, Uruguay
    if it 2.0 version there will be liitle performance hit but if the first version, then, 15 - 20% hit
  13. DarkMatter New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    184
    On a GTX260? More, much much more.
  14. KainXS

    KainXS

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,600 (2.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    501
    I ran a 8800GS @854/2000/2010, spec wise at that overclock it was near 9800GTX performance on pci-e 4x and it got hit by about 30% on a old 945GZM board, so i can only imagine that a new GTX would get a massive hit, its gotta be at least 50%
  15. spearman914

    spearman914 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,339 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York 11223
    PCI-E 1.0/1.1/2.0 have VERY close performance hits. 2% at it's maximum and about 500 more marks in 3dmark 06. Something like GTX295 will have a little bigger hit like >10%. In crossfire and sli configuartions pci-e 1.0/1.1/2.0 has a pretty large impact on performance however.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crossfire-meets-pci-express,1761-5.html
  16. DarkMatter New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Not at all and that review doesn't help at all, the faster the cards more bottlenecked you will be. The GTX is twice as fast and will be bottlenecked at around the same performance as those in the review and that review talks about 8x and 16x, not 4x, a very big difference.
  17. Joe Public

    Joe Public

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    133 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    I have as well. I tried it in both a x4 (AsRock mobo) and a mobo an x16 slot and the performance difference was quite noticeable. I can't imagine the performance hit that a GTX260 would take. I wouldn't really bother.
  18. KainXS

    KainXS

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,600 (2.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    501
  19. eidairaman1

    eidairaman1

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Messages:
    12,212 (4.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,405
    cards only utilize bandwidth needed, not the full bandwidth, that way it has expansion so to speak, just like HDs.
  20. Jarrstin New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Messages:
    39 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    So if I added another 4870 512 MB to my rig to make it at 3x 4870, I should see an increase in performance?
  21. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,173 (2.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
  22. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    your right, usually i dont get in depth enough and really explain my point of view, ill try harder bud.

    the 9600GT in a pci-e 4x slot @ 1.1 vs 16x @ 1.1 seemed quite a bit worse off, later on i have had it in a pci-e 8x @ 2.0 slot and it seemed perfectly fine, which seems reasonable given it should equate to pci-e 16x @ 1.1

    so now a question :) i use my GTX 295 in a pci-e 16x @ 1.1 slot and it seems fine, i know that those 2 GPU's together could probably benefit from more bandwidth.... but my vantage score is still P22k with a Q6600 @ 3.2, which seems right in line with benchmarks... (given the card is overclocked too)

    thoughts?
  23. DarkMatter New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,714 (0.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Probably you could see a benefit, but not as high as a comparable performing single GPU card IMO. My own theory about that is that dual-GPU cards don't need as much transfers because they can share a lot of the required data through the SLI bridge, when a tranfer occurs it does in a twice long burst, reducing the requests and overhead compared to a single GPU card doing the same fps. Maybe the micro-stuttering happppened because of this same thing.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page