EVGA

Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks

Author
Chad r
Superclocked Member
  • Total Posts : 125
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2010/11/06 14:12:57
  • Status: offline
  • Ribbons : 2
2013/07/05 16:29:32 (permalink)
Upgrading my PC to a X79 motherboard and 3930k
 
Current motherboard is http://www.asus.com/Mothe...S_Revolution/#overview
Current CPU 2700k overclocked to 4.7 ghz
 

 
I bought a https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P9X79E_WS/

 
New motherboard has PCI Express 3.0 x16 @ x16/x16/x16/x16
Current motherboard is running 2.0 x8 with my 3 GTX 680's
 
I am going to install the new motherboard tomorrow morning and start running some benchmarks, my question is, are there any benchmarks anyone would like me to run?   First with 3 Way SLI 680's on 2.0 x 8 , then compare with 3.0 x 16
 
I'll need a few hours to install new gear and overclock the 3930k, but as an example this is my highest benchmark on Valley with current PC :
 

 
I guess im hoping for something like a 10% increase in performance with the extra bandwidth , what do you guys think?
 
P.S. also...... I just found out a couple days before I bought these parts that socket 2011 doesn't officially pci 3.0 without a registry edit..... http://forums.evga.com...;m=1607292&mpage=1
 
and this kindof makes me mad, that I didn't find this out until after I ordered the motherboard..... but we shall see what Gpu-z says on startup.
#1

7 Replies Related Threads

    rjohnson11
    EVGA Forum Moderator
    • Total Posts : 102313
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2004/10/05 12:44:35
    • Location: Netherlands
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 84
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/06 04:00:48 (permalink)
    3D Mark benchmark would be nice to see.

    AMD Ryzen 9 7950X,  Corsair Mp700 Pro M.2, 64GB Corsair Dominator Titanium DDR5  X670E Steel Legend, MSI RTX 4090 Associate Code: H5U80QBH6BH0AXF. I am NOT an employee of EVGA

    #2
    Chad r
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 125
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2010/11/06 14:12:57
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 2
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/06 04:46:56 (permalink)
    3DMark11 : X9726
     
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6827378
     
     
    #3
    rjbarker
    CLASSIFIED Member
    • Total Posts : 3214
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2008/03/20 10:07:05
    • Location: Vancouver Isle - Westcoast Canada
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 21
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/06 10:12:36 (permalink)
    btw...its not the Socket  2011 Mobo that doesnt natively support PCI-E 3.0, its the CPU 3930K Sandbridge....look for IV-E 4930K 4960X in Sept fully support PCI-E 3.0
     
    Welcome to the Tri SLi Club!!1
     
    Here are my results with the rig in my Sig:

     

     

     

     

     
     

    I9 12900K EK Velocity2 / ROG Z690 Apex/ 32G Dominator DDR5 6000/ Evga RTX 3080Ti FTW3  EK Vector / 980 Pro 512G / 980 Pro 1TB/ Samsung 860 Pro 500G/ WD 4TB Red / AX 1600i /  Corsair 900D & XSPC 480 * 360 * 240 Rads   XSPC Photon 170 Rez-Vario Pump Combo - Alienware 3440*1440p 120Hz/ W11
     
    #4
    Chad r
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 125
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2010/11/06 14:12:57
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 2
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/12 14:07:33 (permalink)
    3930k @ 4.7 ghz
    highest benchmark I could get with new motherboard and cpu
    4766 on pci 2.0 x 8
    4806 on pci 3.0 x 16
    same overclock on GPUs 115% / +66/ +240
    I used the force enable gen 3 registry hack...... seems like extra bandwidth didnt translate into more points
    This valley benchmark is basically GPU limited for me, conclusion : pci 2/3, x8/16 makes very little difference in performance.
     

     
     
    #5
    Sajin
    EVGA Forum Moderator
    • Total Posts : 49168
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2010/06/07 21:11:51
    • Location: Texas, USA.
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 199
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/12 14:14:36 (permalink)
    All that for nothing. Your 3dmark score will be better though.
    #6
    raw2dogmeat
    SSC Member
    • Total Posts : 799
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2008/11/01 17:15:00
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 7
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/12 14:41:06 (permalink)
    What resolution do you play at and do you notice in game performance difference? 

    Cooler Master Cosmos S
    I7 4930K @ 4.4 GHz
    Asus Rampage IV Black  
    4 x 4 gb G.SKill - 2133  9-11-10-28-2T

    Corsair 1200w
    Sandisk Extreme II 240 gb (Windows 7, 64 bit) 
    Velociraptor 1 tb 
     (games) 
    980 Ti SLI

    XSPC Raystorm - XSPC Razer - EK Rampage IV Black Edition blocks
     
    #7
    lehpron
    Regular Guy
    • Total Posts : 16254
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2006/05/18 15:22:06
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 191
    Re:Tri SLI 680's : PCI 2.0 x 8 VS. PCI 3.0 x 16 Benchmarks 2013/07/12 14:59:37 (permalink)
    rjbarker
    btw...its not the Socket  2011 Mobo that doesn't natively support PCI-E 3.0, its the CPU 3930K Sandbridge....look for IV-E 4930K 4960X in Sept fully support PCI-E 3.0 
    The issue is that nVidia didn't enabled 3.0 on all X79 platforms since some showed signs of error.  Only as a result of consumer response, nVidia has made a program that can re-enable 3.0 at your own risk, per the reason why they disabled it in the first place.  
     
    So it is not that 32nm LGA2011 processors don't have a 3.0 controller-- the native Xeon E5-2600 and E5-4600 multi-CPU server processors that also use the socket have 3.0 (especially when you consider the i7 6-cores were harvested from the 8-core dies)-- rather nVidia's drivers disabled use of the already existing 3.0 controller early on.  They waited for Intel's technology to mature on a widescale, placing blame on them, hence default 3.0 on Ivy Bridge and Ivy Bridge-E.
     
    Ironically, AMD supported 3.0 with X79 on their Catalyst drivers from the get go.
    post edited by lehpron - 2013/07/12 15:04:06

    For Intel processors, 0.122 x TDP = Continuous Amps at 12v [source].  

    Introduction to Thermoelectric Cooling
    #8
    Jump to:
  • Back to Mobile