9800GX2 in XPS 630

Don't understand your statement.... The 9800 GX2 is 16X pci-express, not 8x.  You install it into the first 16X PCI-Express slot and that's it.

---

@skellatorboy wrote:

How much slower will the 9800gx2 be in the XPS 630 since in only supports PCI 8x not 16x?

---

 

Not much

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pci-express-2-0,1915-10.html

 

Try searching the XPS Desktops section, there are several threads regarding the 8x issue on the 630i.

 

---

@SR45 wrote:

http://www.dellcommunity.com/supportforums/board/message?board.id=Tech_Talk_XPS&message.id=75605&query.id=189468#M75605

 

Seeing for the first time the 630 16x  8x talk and now I understand the question.  Should not be a difference by contrvlr link but wish Dell would get out the proprietary business and all these issues with them

---

:smileyvery-happy: :smileyvery-happy: :smileyvery-happy: .... sorry... couldn't help myself..

contrvir,

 

Well I hate to add to the list of disappointed, but her it is... I just ordered a 630 ordered with a 9800gx2, and as soon as I receive it, I will be sending back.  I had no idea that you could wire only 8 lanes to a 16x slot, and this type of dual card is a real waste of money on this motherboard (stupid me for not looking into these forums and assuming Dell's xps units are well built). Also the 9800gx2's HybridPower feature is not utilized with the 650 chipset.

 

Regarding the link to Tom's Hardware review; as far as I can tell the card was tested at 8 lanes using PCI-e 2.0, not 1.1. PCI-e v2.0 is twice the throughput of v1.1 so I assume the results would be more like 4x. These results are not so good.

 

The question to Dell is how much more money would it have added to the computer if you had used 780i in lieu of the 650i? 50$? $100$ even $200?  I think it would have been well worth it to get 2- true x16 PCI-e v2.0 slots. Plus it probably would have solved other light/fan/ESA issues as well.

 

I have purchased 2-690's, 3-490's for my office, as well as a 410 I'm using right now (with a x16 slot with 16 lanes) and an inspiron 1720 for my wife.

---

@Architekur wrote:

 PCI-e v2.0 is twice the throughput of v1.1 so I assume the results would be more like 4x. 

---

That's some strange logic.

 

contrvlr 

 

Sorry if I’m off on my logic. I am only looking at transfer rate for comparison.

 

The transfer rate for PCIe x8 v1.1 is 0.25 GByts/s x 8 = 2 GByte/s

The transfer rate for PCIe x4 v2.0 is 0.5 GByte/s x 4 = 2 GByte/s

 

What I was trying to say was the transfer rate, therefore performance of the 630’s PCIe x8 v1.1 would be more like Tom’s Hardware test result for PCIe x4 v2.0 both having the same transfer rate.

 

I’m new to the issue. Perhaps you could enlighten me on the relative performance between v1.1 and v2.0?

contrvir,

 

Also, my "some strange" logic is shared with the same Tom's Hardware review you referenced

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pci-express-2-0,1915-5.html

 

"PCIe 2.0 x8

 

Eight PCI Express 2.0 lanes equal the performance of x16 PCI Express 1.1, providing 4 GB/s upstream and 4 GB/s downstream bandwidth to and from the graphics board."

 

What am I missing?

---

@Architekur wrote:

contrvlr 

 

Sorry if I’m off on my logic. I am only looking at transfer rate for comparison.

 

The transfer rate for PCIe x8 v1.1 is 0.25 GByts/s x 8 = 2 GByte/s

The transfer rate for PCIe x4 v2.0 is 0.5 GByte/s x 4 = 2 GByte/s

 

What I was trying to say was the transfer rate, therefore performance of the 630’s PCIe x8 v1.1 would be more like Tom’s Hardware test result for PCIe x4 v2.0 both having the same transfer rate.

 

I’m new to the issue. Perhaps you could enlighten me on the relative performance between v1.1 and v2.0?

---

 

 Well I'm sorry, I get the logic now :smileysad:

As far as 1.1 v 2.0 no luck , but I would think it has to be better than the 20% difference between 1.0a v 2.0 shown in this Crossfrie comparison.