but 2.0 is now , im not bothered about whats next year.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Bulldozer Finally!
- Thread starter AceTK
- Start date
Why bring up the 7000 series then?
ONLY interested in future tech that supports your argument now and dismiss anything which eats away at it?
Okay then.
NOW 2 x 8xPCI-E 2.0 lanes are fine.
THEN when 2 x 8xPCI-E 2.0 lanes might bottleneck a 7000 series card we will have 2x 8xPCI-E 3.0
Simples.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,763
- Location
- Planet Earth
And?
Take out faulty drive, plug-in new drive oh look, RAID rebuilds. Not sure why you make it out to sound like a real pain to rebuild a RAID when it's a fully automated process.
At worst you might need to add the new disk back into the RAID disk pool but that's it.
Saying you want lots of individual disks for data redundancy is probably the most laughable argument against RAID I have ever head in my life. How is 3 to 4 disks a burden when you already run EIGHT as individual disks?
??? Are you OK?? Learn to read all my posts instead of jumping to instant conclusions. I never said it was argument against having loads of disks. If anything have a RAID array alone for data storage is an argument for having loads of SATA ports. I OTH have my data backup separated from my desktop so don't need loads of SATA ports.
So why are you so hurt just because he got a different setup to you?? I have a socket 1155 based setup myself. You do realise he has very different needs to loads of people too??
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,510
- Location
- Dormanstown.
Irony.
EXACTLY
He is in a minority because he has STUPID requirements. His stupid requirements make an AMD board with 'extra' features value compared to the same Intel board with the same connectivity options.
The point is that other people who have sensible requirements or have sensible solutions never need to buy an Intel board that costs twice as much because they do not need what it offers. The fact you can buy an AMD board for the same price as an Intel board with that expanded feature set you do not need is a totally moot point.
You realise you are talking about a guy who wants to run 8 individual disks for data redundancy (So needs that many SATA ports) and has never heard of a USB hub so wants to run a stupid amount of USB devices natively from the board instead?
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,510
- Location
- Dormanstown.
You brought up future cards needing more bandwidth, I brought up we have the means of getting that bandwidth...
I saw your point, and made a counter.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
You guys are going round in circles 
worse is using the price of intel boards to justify high end amd boards. You'll find 90% of those features available on boards that cost £100, let alone the £189 the CHV costs. People have claimed boards like the crosshairs are decent value for money on here before. I'm sorry but they are not, an almost-necessity if you are running crossfire, perhaps, but never are they going to be good value when there are very competitively priced GX boards available.
worse is using the price of intel boards to justify high end amd boards. You'll find 90% of those features available on boards that cost £100, let alone the £189 the CHV costs. People have claimed boards like the crosshairs are decent value for money on here before. I'm sorry but they are not, an almost-necessity if you are running crossfire, perhaps, but never are they going to be good value when there are very competitively priced GX boards available.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,763
- Location
- Planet Earth
The first lane gets its bandwidth from the CPU.
The slots are all the same.
Ergo, a cheap 50 quid H61 will be able to support full PCI-E 3.0, regardless of when it was bought.
Is Ivy out yet? Nope. They need Ivy for the support.
Also ;
http://uk.gigabyte.com/products/list.aspx?s=42&jid=1&p=2&v=24
Wait a minute, PCI-E 3.0 support for the boards which have Ivy support. I'd expect the list to become more comprehensive as Ivy comes closer.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/msi-gigabyte-pcie-gen3-mobo,13377.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-msi-pcie-3.0-gen3-third-gen,13485.html
"When you drop in two PCIe 3.0-capable graphics cards into certain Gigabyte P67- and Z68-based boards with an Ivy Bridge processor, 16 lanes of connectivity get split between two x16 slots. If the motherboard only has PCIe 2.0 switches, Gigabyte says the first slot will operate at PCIe 3.0 data rates, but drop to eight lanes. "
"Gigabyte does sell a (one) motherboard with newer third-gen switches on it: the Z68-based G1.Sniper 2."
PCI-E 3.0 8X is the same as PCI-E 2.0 16X in terms of performance.
You do realise that I own a Gigabyte socket 1155 motherboard and have been following the spat between MSI and them??
I run a sub £100 Intel P67 board and I have a half of what it offers turned off (USB 3.0, Firwire, Bluetooth, Serial connectivity etc etc) so I have no idea what extra features AMD offers for the money people need.
I would not class my system as low end either.
This pretty much boils down to Crossfire users wanting two full PCIE 2.0 16x lanes for the 2-3% performance it offers over two 8x lanes right? Mhhm, 'value'.
I would not class my system as low end either.
This pretty much boils down to Crossfire users wanting two full PCIE 2.0 16x lanes for the 2-3% performance it offers over two 8x lanes right? Mhhm, 'value'.
Last edited:
Are there any PCI-E 3.0 cards out now?..hell no, is PCI-E 2.0 x16 staturated yet?....hell no,down the road different story but by then probably be time to upgrade again so you guys are going round in circles.
End of the day BD official benchmarks will be here real soon( ie ...days) which will lead to more choices which is always a good thing,go Intel or AMD I don't see the point arguing over which is better,you pay your money you take your choice.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
well, the scene has somewhat changed these days but when i got my M4a78gtd pro usb3, it was one of very the first boards with native usb3 and sata 6 onboard and they were a very good price then, intel literally had nothing. These days there's no real difference except where comparing onboard video. But it's not like the onboard's 3d performance is important to many people.
Because BD is being pitched against Intel on the the overall costs of the system (That being CPU/Mobo combos)
Apparently AMD offers superior value on their Motherboards, the counter argument being a small minority get value because very few people need the extra features said board offers.
SATA 6Gbit/Sec is the only thing I have used on newer gen hardware, I do not even own a USB 3.0 device. Unless you have a requirement for a blisteringly fast external HDD is USB 3.0 even relevant yet? I will go out on a limb and say for most people - nope.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,510
- Location
- Dormanstown.
And all you've done is give links to what I've said.....
Not all boards use switches for crossfire, they use the lanes direct from CPU the 16/4 ones for example.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,763
- Location
- Planet Earth
The value preposition of AMD motherboards is in their sub £100 ones IMHO. However,when it comes to performance mATX and mini-ITX motherboards socket 1155 is just better value ATM IMHO.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 30,510
- Location
- Dormanstown.
The Asus Crosshair V doesn't have native USB 3.0 support... How does your board have native USB 3.0 support? What SB is it?
For the SATA III native Support, AMD brought that in with SB850 didn't they?
I know for X58 Intel were using 3rd party controllers for SATA III which has caused disappointment with the increase in SATA III SSD's.
Last edited: