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

GeForce GTX 480 PCI-Express Scaling

Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
856 (0.14/day)
Location
Eastern Tennessee
System Name Firebird
Processor Ryzen 7 1700X
Motherboard MSI X370 Titanium
Cooling Tt Water2.0 PRO (They use the same bracket as 3.0)
Memory G.Skill TridentZ 2x8GB 3200 15-15-15-35 B-Die (@3333 ATM)
Video Card(s) ASUS STRIX R9 390 8GB
Storage Too many. Samsung 750GB, 120GB 850 EVO, Seagate 1TB, Toshiba 1TB, OCZ 32GB Cache Drive
Display(s) Samsung 46" UN46D6050 1080P HDTV
Case Home-made tech bench.
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar Essence STX (I use HDMI though *cry*)
Power Supply CWT PUC1000V-S 1000W, Abee Supremer (import) 1200W currently used as primary.
Mouse Razer Copperhead (circa 2005)
Keyboard Tt Challenger Pro (AVOID! Keys wear super fast)
Software Win 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores Meh.
Correct. You are not wrong. Minimum framerates are directly impacted by this, not just complexity of the scene being rendered.
.
This review is very interesting, but what it misses in the discussion is the interaction of PCI-E bandwidth, memory bandwidth, and chipset. The reason is that x16 2.0 is getting very close to memory bandwidths, give or take all the overhead and data marshalling

W1z is getting some difference in performance on his highly OC rig where memory bandwidth >> PCI-E bandwidth, so that it is the PCI lane that is causing a potential bottleneck.

BUT for a regular DDR2 or DDR3 non-OC extreme edition, the difference would be much smaller still. So while it is nice to see OC figures to the max, it may also misrepresent the true behaviour for the regular user.

Furthermore, if you have SLI crossfire system, the results WILL NOT scale in the same way. Why? Because the bandwidth needed to fill 2x PCI-x16 2.0 lanes simultaneously is getting pretty close to memory bandwidth, esp. with all the data-marshalling going on in the chipset.

I would like to encourage w1z to do a follow-up to his otherwise most excellent review:

1./ I would really like to see the results at stock.
2./ Do a test with SLI/crossfire. The whole x8 x16 discussion is moot without putting into real context. The results will not scale in the same way as the single card set up... so therefore the results of the single card setup are irrelevant to the discussion about SLI/Crossfire performance under x4, x8 or x16
3./ By all means, do a sensitivity analysis on how OC'ing improves the results, or indeed worsens them from a relative perspective
4./ But also see how the results change by increasing/decreasing memory bandwidth by dropping a memory channel or two
5./ As 1 but do the test on a similarly clocked dual xeon system with memory channel bandwidth to the max, and see how much the results pull away compared with 1.

I think the results 5 vs. 1 vs. the original would be a very interesting comparative and help enthusiasts see the value of dual xeons vs single CPU vs x4 x8 x16 vs. SLI/Crossfire.

Man, thank you for saving me the time of typing out all that! Exactly my feelings on the matter! To do scaling you need to literally scale it, not theoretically. Yes, you are scaling it to a degree when it comes to limiting the lanes, but you are only doing it on one card. Which as Lemonadesoda said is a moot point when you don't actually run the setup in SLi/CF! Might as well take your car to a dyno and remove spark plug wires and see how fast it can go. Sure, you can get going 150mph on only 4 of 8 cylinders, but you're not factoring in the biggest thing: WIND RESISTANCE!

I applaud your work though W1zz :toast:
 
Top