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

PCI lantency timer help!!!!

imperialreign

New Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,043 (1.15/day)
Location
Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
System Name УльтраФиолет
Processor Intel Kentsfield Q9650 @ 3.8GHz (4.2GHz highest achieved)
Motherboard ASUS P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi; X38 NSB, ICH9R SSB
Cooling Delta V3 block, XPSC res, 120x3 rad, ST 1/2" pump - 10 fans, SYSTRIN HDD cooler, Antec HDD cooler
Memory Dual channel 8GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 @ 1800MHz @ 7-7-7-20 1T
Video Card(s) Quadfire: (2) Sapphire HD5970
Storage (2) WD VelociRaptor 300GB SATA-300; WD 320GB SATA-300; WD 200GB UATA + WD 160GB UATA
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster T240 24" (16:10)
Case Cooler Master Stacker 830
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCI-E x1
Power Supply Kingwin Mach1 1200W modular
Software Windows XP Home SP3; Vista Ultimate x64 SP2
Benchmark Scores 3m06: 20270 here: http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=12313
changing PCI latency won't make any difference with two 8800GTS cards - as I assume they're PCI-Express.

PCI latency timings only affect PCI cards. PCIE operates at it's own BUS speeds and latency seperate from the PCI BUS.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,209 (1.71/day)
Location
Austin Texas
Processor 13700KF Undervolted @ 5.6/ 5.5, 4.8Ghz Ring 200W PL1
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 w/ Arctic P12 Fans
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2x 2TB WDC SN850, 1TB Samsung 960 prr
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case SLIGER S620
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard RoyalAxe
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
latency anything means lower is better...
 

fbmbirds

New Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
46 (0.01/day)
i think he ment lantency any thing as of lantency being lower is always better is some cases that is true memory lantency ect
 

imperialreign

New Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,043 (1.15/day)
Location
Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
System Name УльтраФиолет
Processor Intel Kentsfield Q9650 @ 3.8GHz (4.2GHz highest achieved)
Motherboard ASUS P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi; X38 NSB, ICH9R SSB
Cooling Delta V3 block, XPSC res, 120x3 rad, ST 1/2" pump - 10 fans, SYSTRIN HDD cooler, Antec HDD cooler
Memory Dual channel 8GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 @ 1800MHz @ 7-7-7-20 1T
Video Card(s) Quadfire: (2) Sapphire HD5970
Storage (2) WD VelociRaptor 300GB SATA-300; WD 320GB SATA-300; WD 200GB UATA + WD 160GB UATA
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster T240 24" (16:10)
Case Cooler Master Stacker 830
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCI-E x1
Power Supply Kingwin Mach1 1200W modular
Software Windows XP Home SP3; Vista Ultimate x64 SP2
Benchmark Scores 3m06: 20270 here: http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=12313
not necessarily.

Going too low causes problems...

I agree - usually going low with the PCI BUS causes problems in general as a lower latency lowers tha mount of time a device has access to the BUS. Typically, going a little bit higher is better, as you're giving a device more time to hold BUS access.
 

imperialreign

New Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,043 (1.15/day)
Location
Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
System Name УльтраФиолет
Processor Intel Kentsfield Q9650 @ 3.8GHz (4.2GHz highest achieved)
Motherboard ASUS P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi; X38 NSB, ICH9R SSB
Cooling Delta V3 block, XPSC res, 120x3 rad, ST 1/2" pump - 10 fans, SYSTRIN HDD cooler, Antec HDD cooler
Memory Dual channel 8GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 @ 1800MHz @ 7-7-7-20 1T
Video Card(s) Quadfire: (2) Sapphire HD5970
Storage (2) WD VelociRaptor 300GB SATA-300; WD 320GB SATA-300; WD 200GB UATA + WD 160GB UATA
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster T240 24" (16:10)
Case Cooler Master Stacker 830
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCI-E x1
Power Supply Kingwin Mach1 1200W modular
Software Windows XP Home SP3; Vista Ultimate x64 SP2
Benchmark Scores 3m06: 20270 here: http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=12313
well . . . if BIOS is automatically set to 32, I tend to bump it to 64 and leave it from there . . . but, again, note that PCI latency won't affect how your PCI-E video cards will run. It will only affect PCI devices (like a sound card or network adapter, or an older PCI video card).
 

ex_reven

New Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
5,217 (0.81/day)
the lower the latency, the faster data is being stored and wiped from memory.

having the latency too low therefore means that you could reach a point where data is being stored and then wiped before it can even be processed. This is where data corruption and errors occur.
 

imperialreign

New Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,043 (1.15/day)
Location
Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
System Name УльтраФиолет
Processor Intel Kentsfield Q9650 @ 3.8GHz (4.2GHz highest achieved)
Motherboard ASUS P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi; X38 NSB, ICH9R SSB
Cooling Delta V3 block, XPSC res, 120x3 rad, ST 1/2" pump - 10 fans, SYSTRIN HDD cooler, Antec HDD cooler
Memory Dual channel 8GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 @ 1800MHz @ 7-7-7-20 1T
Video Card(s) Quadfire: (2) Sapphire HD5970
Storage (2) WD VelociRaptor 300GB SATA-300; WD 320GB SATA-300; WD 200GB UATA + WD 160GB UATA
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster T240 24" (16:10)
Case Cooler Master Stacker 830
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCI-E x1
Power Supply Kingwin Mach1 1200W modular
Software Windows XP Home SP3; Vista Ultimate x64 SP2
Benchmark Scores 3m06: 20270 here: http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=12313
the lower the latency, the faster data is being stored and wiped from memory.

having the latency too low therefore means that you could reach a point where data is being stored and then wiped before it can even be processed. This is where data corruption and errors occur.

If we were talking about DRAM timings, you'd be absolutely correct - but PCI BUS latency is a measurement of how many clock cycles a PCI device has access to the BUS after its interupt request has been serviced. Too low of a PCI latency setting, and a device might not have enough time to transfer it's alloted amount of information back and forth across the BUS, whereas a higher setting allows a device more access time to the BUS before it's cut off.

Setting PCI latency too high leads to an unstable system, as a device will have a longer access time, and until that alloted time is up, or the system reachs the master PCI cycle, all other device interupt requests are ignored.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
2,573 (0.40/day)
Location
N.Ireland
Processor Core I5 4440 / 4430
Motherboard Asus z87-k / Gigabyte ga h97- d3h
Cooling Arctic freezer / Generic
Memory 8 gb Mushkin / Various
Video Card(s) Radeon 7850 cf / Gtx 690
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 gb / 2x1 terabyte hdds Wd 256 gb nvme
Display(s) Technika 32" / Asus 24` ips
Case Corsair
Audio Device(s) X-fi Titanium
Power Supply Corsair 850 w
Software Windows 10
256 / no. of devices = latency or maximum value that is wise
 

imperialreign

New Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
7,043 (1.15/day)
Location
Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
System Name УльтраФиолет
Processor Intel Kentsfield Q9650 @ 3.8GHz (4.2GHz highest achieved)
Motherboard ASUS P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi; X38 NSB, ICH9R SSB
Cooling Delta V3 block, XPSC res, 120x3 rad, ST 1/2" pump - 10 fans, SYSTRIN HDD cooler, Antec HDD cooler
Memory Dual channel 8GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 @ 1800MHz @ 7-7-7-20 1T
Video Card(s) Quadfire: (2) Sapphire HD5970
Storage (2) WD VelociRaptor 300GB SATA-300; WD 320GB SATA-300; WD 200GB UATA + WD 160GB UATA
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster T240 24" (16:10)
Case Cooler Master Stacker 830
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro PCI-E x1
Power Supply Kingwin Mach1 1200W modular
Software Windows XP Home SP3; Vista Ultimate x64 SP2
Benchmark Scores 3m06: 20270 here: http://hwbot.org/user.do?userId=12313
you have 1 device, then - the sound card.


But don't go setting your PCI latency to 256!

64 will be just fine.


I again re-iterate - increasing the PCI latency will not affect your video card performance.
 
Top