Started By
Message

re: Does anyone here play PC primarily?

Posted on 11/13/12 at 1:04 pm to
Posted by ILikeLSUToo
Central, LA
Member since Jan 2008
18018 posts
Posted on 11/13/12 at 1:04 pm to
Techpowerup did a pretty good test/review that summed it up. They tested FPS on the most popular 3.0 cards in 3.0 slots and in 2.0 slots. The FPS was negligible and inconsistent between the two. Sometimes, the card showed a 1fps gain in a 2.0 slot. They even tested some in PCIe 1.1, as well as at 4x, 8x, and 16x, and there was negligible difference. .1 to 1fps or so... Standard deviation would have to be higher than that, so it just shows that PCIe 3.0 means jack shite. It's like connecting a mechanical hard drive to a SATA 3 port.
This post was edited on 11/13/12 at 1:07 pm
Posted by LSU Coyote
Member since Sep 2007
53390 posts
Posted on 11/13/12 at 1:10 pm to
quote:

Sometimes, the card showed a 1fps gain in a 2.0 slot. They even tested some in PCIe 1.1, as well as at 4x, 8x, and 16x, and there was negligible difference. .1 to 1fps or so... Standard deviation would have to be higher than that, so it just shows that PCIe 3.0 means jack shite. It's like connecting a mechanical hard drive to a SATA 3 port.

That type of bandwidth really applies to work over time. Like workstations/folders/bionics.

Things like that. Systems that run 24/7 doing calculations is were you will see the increase in performance.

As for a bottleneck or bandwidth being restricted, I think the PCIe 3.0 is and will be best used by 512bit GPUs.

None the less, like you said.. there is really no difference in performance between the 2.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram