Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: PCI-Express-2.0, Crossfire
Categories: Hardware
PCI-Express Connections with x16, x8 and x4
The motherboard we previously used for testing was based on the 975 chipset and offered PCI-Express slots with x16, x8 and x4 lanes. For obvious reasons, if you’ll only be using a single graphics card in your system, you’ll want to use the fastest PCI Express slot on the motherboard. In the case of our 975BX2, that would be the slot closest to the CPU, as it uses the full x16 connection.
Often you’ll only be able to tell the speed of a PCIe slot by the labelling on the motherboard. For example, the X16 slot is also marked as supporting x8 speed. This is an important bit of information for Crossfire users. After all, when two ATI graphics cards are used in a tandem configuration, the x16 connection is split into two x8 connections.
Since there are still cheap motherboards on the market that offer both AGP and PCI Express slots, you may still encounter slow slots that only support x4 speed. Tom’s Hardware ran tests in several current games at each of these speeds as well as in several resolutions. The results for x8 are a good indicator for the performance penalty that a Crossfire combination suffers, since the 975 chipset only offers two x8 connections, creating a bottleneck for both graphics cards.

In these charts, the x16 connection is considered 100 percent. Both ATI and Nvidia lose about 7 to 8 percent performance when the PEG slot only offers x8 speeds. Theoretically, the performance penalty should be twice as high for Crossfire setups. On the x4 slot, the drop in 3D speed is even more pronounced. Here, the performance of the Geforce 8800 GTS 512 dips by a full 25 percent, while ATI’s HD2900 XT loses as much as 33 percent of its 3D power.
Looking at the price of current graphics cards and the performance penalty they incur when using a slow connection, the motherboard would be the wrong place to begin saving money on. A performance hit of 25 to 33 percent is just too large.
- Previous page The Graphics Chips Compared
- Next page Crossfire x8 + x8 versus x16 + x16
-
crossfire setup
-
motherboard for both agp pci e
-
where do i get crossfire connectors
-
crossfire connector
-
fan speed for 8800 gts 512
-
x8 slot
-
cheap good motherboards
-
fastest pci card
-
will a pci e x16 support x8 speeds
-
bottleneck graphic card
-
plug pci express x8 into x16 slot
-
x16 faster than x8 x8
-
pcie x8 to x16
-
crossfire setups
-
what is graphic card x16 x8




all very nice but like every article before this one, you do not mention the causes of bandwidth uses. so, like all your previous article's here on toms it is absolutely useless for anything other than saying"ooh, look at the fancy graph, aint they pretty" because apart from graphs the article has damn all to do with testing anything.
I found it useful, I now know I can save money by not upgrading just yet. That's more beer money in my pocket, that has to be useful.
What I have, serves my needs. Besides, these articles tend to be aimed at the games-playing mentally-preadolescent set, so they can't get too in-depth.
Erm.. am I missing something?
If one card increases by about 7% going from x8 to x16, then each card in a crossfire setup would increase by about 7% going from 2x8 to 2x16. Therefore the overall performance would improve by 7%. Why would you expect it to increase by more ("twice as much, which we would have expected based on the single card results")? If anything it should increase by less, due to increased loads on the chipset/system memory/processor etc.