• Www.nvidia.com › Best-card-for-pci-express-x16-10-Best Card For PCI Express X16 --> 1 NVIDIA GeForce Forums
• View Product 9.5
• Can A PCI-Express 3.0 X16 Video Card NVIDIA GeForce Forums
• Mini PCI, Mini PCI-E, Mini PCI-E Half Height - Guide To ...

GIGABYTE Eagle GeForce RTX 3070 Graphics Card Rev2.0 8GB GDDR6 PCI Express 4.0 x16, LHR, WINDFORCE 3X Cooling RGB Fusion 2.0 3D Active Fan 2X HDMI 2.1 2X DisplayPort 1.4a w/ Mytrix HDMI Cable. Best Pci Express 2.0 X16 Graphics Cards 2020 – Top 10 Rated. 2,903 Reviews Scanned. ZOTAC GeForce GT 730 Zone Edition 4GB DDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 (x8 lanes) Graphics Card (ZT-71115-20L) 9.8.

One of the features found on the most recent CPUs, chipsets, motherboards, and video cards is the PCI Express 3.0 connection. Nevertheless, does it offer an actual performance improvement over the PCI Express 2.0 standard?

PCI Express 3.0 connection was specified in 2010, with a maximum theoretical transfer rate per lane of almost 1 GiB/s (actually, 984.6 MiB/s), twice the rate of the PCI Express 2.0 standard that offers 500 GiB/s per lane. Thus, a PCI Express 2.0 x16 slot offers a maximum theoretical bandwidth of 8 GiB/s, while a PCI Express 3.0 x16 slot reaches 16 GiB/s.

Base Clock Speed: PCIe 3.0 = 8.0GHz, PCIe 2.0 = 5.0GHz, PCIe 1.1 = 2.5GHz
Data Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 1000MB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 500MB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 250MB/s
Total Bandwidth: (x16 link): PCIe 3.0 = 32GB/s, PCIe 2.0 = 16GB/s, PCIe 1.1 = 8GB/s
Data Transfer Rate: PCIe 3.0 = 8.0GT/s, PCIe 2.0= 5.0GT/s, PCIe 1.1 = 2.5GT/s

PCIe 3.0 features a number of interface architecture improvements, but communicates at the same interface speeds used in PCIe 2.0. PCIe 3.0 achieves twice the communication speeds of PCIe 2.0 through various architecture and protocol management improvements.

Regarding to video cards, all current models are compatible with PCI Express 3.0; the first NVIDIA chips compatible with this standard were from GeForce GT/GTX 6xx generation, while the AMD models use it since Radeon HD 7xxx models.

On the other side, in most cases, is the CPU that supports PCI Express 3.0, not the chipset. However, it is necessary the motherboard also to be compatible with the standard. Intel CPUs support PCI Express 3.0 since the third generation Core i (“Ivy Bridge”) processors. AMD A-series CPUs (aka APUs) support the standard on all FM2+ models. FX processors, on the other hand, do not support PCI Express 3.0, because on this platform, the PCI Express lanes are generated by the chipset, and even the most high-end model, 990FX, supports only PCI Express 2.0.

The X following a PCI Express card refers to the number of lanes the card has. A PCI Express X1 has one lane, while an X16 has 16 lanes. A graphics card, which must push through tremendous amounts of data at high speeds will usually have 16 lanes, while a sound card may only have one lane. You can easily tell the difference between the two by looking at the length of the gold connectors that fit into the motherboard's slot.

As long as a motherboard PCI Express slot is long enough to physically connect a PCI Express card, the card will work. Consequently, a PCI Express X1 will fit in an X16 slot, as will any size between, such as an X4 or X8 card. Each slot can accommodate only a single card. It's not possible to insert two X1 cards in a single slot.

There are a number of devices that connect to the single-lane PCIe slots on a motherboard, including network cards, audio cards and debug cards. The reason PCIe x1 is favored for these devices is because they do not require the massive bandwidth brought about by slots with extra lanes. As a result, 250 MB/s was enough for these devices, and they were created to be connected to PCIe x1 interfaces. Some higher-performing versions of these devices, like 1-Gbit network cards and very high performing audio cards for studio use, probably need an extra lane.

Like most technologies, PCI Express standards have evolved over the years. The original PCI Express 1.0 and 1.1 could transmit up to 2.5 GigaTransfers per second in each lane in both directions simultaneously. This was followed by the PCI Express 2.0 standard, which increased the theoretical limit to 5 GT/s for each lane. The subsequent PCIe 3.0 standard allowed for up to 8 GT/s per lane. Therefore a PCI Express 3.0 X16 with 16 lanes has a theoretical transfer limit of 128 GT/s.

Most motherboards come with extra PCI Express slots so you can add additional components as needed, which are usually X16 in size. However, the physical size of the slot and the number of lanes doesn't always indicate it offers the full transfer rate. To keep costs down, some X16 slots may have lower speeds. For example, an X16 slot may only have a speed of X4. You should check the motherboard to see what its slot's speed is before installing a new card. This is usually listed with two numbers, the size followed by the speed in the format 'xsize @xspeed'. So a X16 slot with an X8 speed is written as 'X16 @X8'.

Finally, regarding general video card scope, the improvement of PCIe 3.0 x16 is usually between 5% and 9%. On the other hand, when we used the PCI Express 3.0 x4 slot, there is, in general, a loss of performance on most of the games.

So, if you are looking for a video card, CPU or motherboard to buy, the presence or absence of the PCI Express 3.0 connection should not be a crucial factor do decide what to buy, at least on a single-GPU system.

PCI Express Theoretical Max Bandwidth

The theoretical maximum bandwidth of PCI-e 3.0 is 8GT/s, or nearly 1GB/s per lane:

For our test, we're looking at PCI-e Gen3 x8 vs. PCI-e Gen3 x16 performance. That means there's a 66.7% difference in bandwidth available between the two, or a 100% increase from x8 to x16. But there's a lot more to it than interface bandwidth: The device itself must exceed the saturation point of x8 (7880MB/s, before overhead is removed) in order to show any meaningful advantage in x16 (15760MB/s, before overhead is removed).

Use Cases, Future Tests, & Test Setup

The use cases here are not that large. Maybe you've got a thermal concern or a card that butts-up against the CPU cooler, or some sort of liquid routing challenge. HSIO lanes are assigned to ancillary devices – like PCIe SSDs – and won't eat into the CPU lanes available to the GPU. We're also not testing multiple GPUs, which is where we'd like to go next once we've got two of the same GTX 1080 in the lab. Ideally, we test in x16/x16, x16/x8, and x8/x8 – but that's not possible right now. We're also hoping to test dual-GPU, single-card configurations between an x8 and an x16 slot, as those may put more load on the interface.

For the time being, this test strictly looks at a single-GPU, single-card GTX 1080 Gaming X as it passes between x8 and x16 slots. If, for whatever reason, you're debating the performance reduction from moving to an x8 PCI-e slot with a single card, that's what this test looks into.

We used our normal test bench (detailed below) for this research. The EVGA X99 Classified motherboard is picky with its PCI-e slot utilization, and uses UEFI to clearly inform whether the connected device is receiving 1, 4, 8, or 16 lanes. We switched between the first x16 slot and the first x8 slot for these numbers, then validated in BIOS and software.

PCI-e generations can also be forced in the EVGA UEFI, but we did not explore the impact of PCI-e 2.x on the GTX 1080 at this time as it seemed even less likely of a use case.

Game Test Methodology

We tested using our GPU test bench, detailed in the table below. Our thanks to supporting hardware vendors for supplying some of the test components.

NVidia's 368.39 drivers were used for game (FPS) testing. Game settings were manually controlled for the DUT. All games were run at presets defined in their respective charts. We disable brand-supported technologies in games, like The Witcher 3's HairWorks and HBAO. All other game settings are defined in respective game benchmarks, which we publish separately from GPU reviews. Our test courses, in the event manual testing is executed, are also uploaded within that content. This allows others to replicate our results by studying our bench courses.

Windows 10-64 build 10586 was used for testing.

Each game was tested for 30 seconds in an identical scenario, then repeated multiple times for parity.

Average FPS, 1% low, and 0.1% low times are measured. We do not measure maximum or minimum FPS results as we consider these numbers to be pure outliers. Instead, we take an average of the lowest 1% of results (1% low) to show real-world, noticeable dips; we then take an average of the lowest 0.1% of results for severe spikes.

For Dx12 and Vulkan API testing, we use built-in benchmark tools and rely upon log generation for our metrics. That data is reported at the engine level.

Video Cards Tested

PCI-e 3.0 x8 vs. x16 FPS Performance

Let's just post all the charts first, then talk numbers – they're similar enough that this is the easiest way to read the data.

Metro: Last Light

Shadow of Mordor

Call of Duty: Black Ops 3

GTA V

Ashes of Singularity (Dx12)

Here's what we've got for performance:

Between AVG FPS metrics in Metro: Last Light, we're seeing a 1.05% gap (1440p) and 0% gap (4K). Between 1% low metrics, that difference is 0.95% (1440p) and 0%.

Www.nvidia.com › Best-card-for-pci-express-x16-10-Best Card For PCI Express X16 --> 1 NVIDIA GeForce Forums

For Shadow of Mordor, the numbers are similar – we're seeing a 0.93% performance difference between AVG FPS metrics (or ~1% for 4K).

Black Ops 3, when there is a difference, shows one also just below 1%.

GTA V shows a difference of 0.52%. Ashes is similarly small.

View Product 9.5

Inconsequential Differences & Margins for Error

These numbers are close enough in some instances – like the GTA V 58.3 vs. 58 FPS output – that they're effectively within margin of test error and do not definitively show a performance gap. When a reasonable performance gap is shown – like the ~1% difference in Metro: Last Light numbers – it is imperceptible to the user but measurable with our tools. And we do mean imperceptible – we're talking 96FPS vs. 95FPS, for Metro.

Metro, by the way, is the most reliable FPS benchmarking tool we have ever used. The game produces almost precisely the same AVG, 1% low, and 0.1% lows with every single test pass, and so we trust these metrics as being outside of test variance.

Can A PCI-Express 3.0 X16 Video Card NVIDIA GeForce Forums

From a quick look, there is a little below a 1% performance difference in PCI-e 3.0 x16 and PCI-e 3.0 x8 slots. The difference is not even close to perceptible and should be ignored as inconsequential to users fretting over potential slot or lane limitations. We are not sure how this scales with SLI (particularly MDA 'mode') or dual-GPU cards, but hope to research once we've got more hardware in the lab.

We are also currently investigating the impact of PCI-e lanes on lower capacity VRAM cards, like 4GB. Hits to system resources may stress the interface more.

Mini PCI, Mini PCI-E, Mini PCI-E Half Height - Guide To ...

Editorial: Steve “Lelldorianx” Burke
Video: Andrew “ColossalCake” Coleman