“PCIe 2.0 x 16” and a standard “PCIe x 16”

[Jimmy328]

Is there much performance difference between “PCIe 2.0 x 16” and a standard “PCIe x 16”?

I just purchased two Sapphire HD 2600XT, standard PCIe x 16, that will be used in crossfire mode. My MB, Gigabyte P35-DQ6, has failed and I need to buy a new MB which will have a PCIe 2.0 x 16.
Is it worth sending back my 2 video cards for upgraded PCIe 2.0 x 16?

Thanks,
Jim

[DMB2000uk]

There is practically no discernible performance difference between running PCE2.0 cards on a PCIe1 mother board and vica versa.

But if you were to send back your 2600XT's and get a better single card (like a 9600GT) then you would get much better performance.

Dan

[Apoptosis]

There is practically no discernible performance difference between running PCE2.0 cards on a PCIe1 mother board and vica versa.

But if you were to send back your 2600XT's and get a better single card (like a 9600GT) then you would get much better performance.

Dan

lol... Two 2600's are better than one 9600 GT...

On an Intel chipset you can't run SLI, so he's better off doing what he has done... Be nice Dan ;)

As for your question there is about a 1% performance difference in certain games with PCIe 2.0, so no worries.

[Jimmy328]

It makes sense to keep the 2 standard PCIe x 16 video boards I have. The newer MOBO's with PCIe 2.0 x 16 are backwards compatible.
Thanks all for your suggestions.
Jim

[Jimmy328]

After some research, I've decided to return the 2 HD 2600's and go with one high-end card. I ready to buy today after some feedback.
(Am I allowed to paste the WEB site of where I want to purchase or is this a violation?)

I have my video card selection narrowed down to 5 cards; all are within my price range.
• 4 of them are the HD 4870’s with 512 MB of GDDR5, Core clock 750 MHz
• 1 of them is an HD 4850 with 1 GB of GDDR3, Core clock 625 MHz

The SAPPHIRE 100242-1GL Radeon HD 4850 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 looks like the best deal; twice the amount of memory, but only the MEM is slightly slower. Max resolution, core clock, memory clock, about the same for all 5 cards.

When I look at the “end-user reviews” on this web site, there are a high number of reviews for the HD 4870 - 512 MB - GDDR5 and only 3 reviews for the HD 4850 – 1 GB –GDDR3. Both 4850 and 4870’s have favorable reviews, but obviously, most buyers opt for the HD 4870.

Why, I don’t understand?
Is there really that much performance difference between GDDR5 and GDDR3?

My video hungry software packages are Flight Simulator X, Punch Home Design, and F.E.A.R.

Thanks all,
Jim

Proc = Core 2 Duo E6750 with Liquid Cooling System
MB = Gigabyte GA-P35-DQ6
Mem = Corsair, CM2X1024, 2 GB
HD= 2 SATA Barracuda 320 GB & WD 320 GB
Video = GeForce 8600 GT
Case/PSU = Smilodon Case w/500 Watt PSU
OS = Windows XP SP 3

[DMB2000uk]

Posting where you want to buy these cards from is perfectly acceptable.

When it comes to choosing graphics cards, the thing you have to bear in mind is that you can't tell a graphics cards performance by just looking at the raw specs alone (there are so many factors in play behind the scenes with the latest cards) the only way to see how good it is, is to read up on reviews of the cards in different games (such as on LR here).

What you should then ask yourself is how much you want to spend on a new card, and if you actually need the extra performance the 4870 offers over the 4850. Granted the extra performance now, will mean the card will be playable for that bit longer when new games come out a year down the line compared to the slower of the two.

Dan

[martini161]

if you use a very large monitor, the 1gb card may get better performance, but other wise id go for the 4870, and yes gddr5 is alot better than gddr3