you can use them but not all with maximum thruput at the same time. There is a big difference. The problem happens when he is using a video capture card at 4k at 60FPS with a 2.5G ethernet in the same PCI multiplexer. That's not something for a cheap board. He would have the same problem with Intel. If AMD and Intel remove extra PCI-E slots because they cannot all run at the same time with maximum speed, I would be mad and come to his come to smash his computer because he would be doing a disservice to all of us. Removing something that we all can use because he cannot use it fully? ARE WE CRAZY??? I need 4 PCI-E cards and don't need his bandwidth; I don't want to be punished. He can buy the X570 or a TRX if he needs it or read the FM next time before buying a motherboard. Don't force me to buy more expensive than I need simply because you bought cheaper than you needed.
@@marsovac "don't force me to buy a more expensive [board] than i need simply because you bought a cheaper [board] than you needed" so basically "Don't force me to buy a more expensive board, force him!!". Douche. The issue here is that the limitation isn't advertised, and it should be. On a personal note, i hope your PC gets hit by lightning =)
@@marsovac In fact, even H610 now using DMI 4.0 which is x4 PCIe 4.0 and if he bought 12100 + B610 he will be able to use all these slots without problems and it will be faster . AMD is just are outdated tech.
@ Not AN AMD Nor Nvidia nor Intel fan You think you dropped it to x8, but you dropped it way more than that. It's x8 + x8 5GT/s instead of x16 8GT/s. 10GT/s, you got ripped off for the other x6, as far as bandwidth is concerned, and GPU went from 128GT/s to 40GT/s. It is to make sure it is way too bottlenecked to use as a server, at all.
An X570 would have been the way to go for sure, or at the very least a B550 with a 2.5gbe onboard NIC so you can reduce the amount of add in cards needed.
I will say.. I used to buy the best "value" motherboards I could find. Then I had to buy a B550 Aorus Master thanks to NewEgg Shutfle. The Master is a little overkill, but there are some quality of life improvements on the Gigabyte Master and Ultra boards that are worth their salt.. especially for enthusiasts.
Yes the b550 Tomahawk has 2.5Gbps Lan, thats why i bought it. If you still need more PCI Lanes X570 is the way to go, It creates more Lanes by taking load of the CPU. The CPU doesn't have enough Lanes for everything on the board AND a bunch of expansion Cards to connect directly to it that's why the X-Series Chipsets even exist and need active cooling on the chipset.
Agree. Especially when it comes to "When installing PCIe SSD in M.2_2, PCI_E3 slot will be unavailable." and "PCIEX16_2 will run x2 mode when PCIEX1 is used."
I bought that exact motherboard, and I was 100% aware that my WiFi card is going to halve the bandwidth from x4 to x2 before buying. Maybe it's hard to find, but it is definitely mentioned somewhere in the manual or the spec sheet and I did find it.
This is why I got the B550 VISION D-P. It has PCIe switches. You can run it at x8/x8 mode off the CPU lanes for a GPU in Slot 1 and a high performance second expansion card like NVME RAID or 4K capture card in Slot 2. The shared bandwidth on the third slot is off the PCH and you're going to be fighting for it. MSI provides a block diagram for the PCI-Express topology but you're never going to know how much continuous effective bandwidth you're going to get over the PCH until you test it out.
The b550 tai chi too There are a few boards that support x8/x8 (I remember I found 3 when I was shopping for b550 a year ago) but theyre all pretty high end of b550. As expensive as low end x570.
Had similar problems in the Ivy Bridge days. Asrock Z87 Pro4 says: *If PCIE2 or PCIE4 slot is occupied, PCIE3 slot will run at x2 mode. Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H says: The PCIEX4 slot shares bandwidth with the PCIEX1_2/3 slots. The PCIEX1_2/3 slots will become unavailable when a PCIe x4 expansion card is installed. And these were all PCI-E 2.0, only the 16x or 8x+8x from the CPU were 3.0. At that time I was virtualizing AMD GPU and also needed 2nd NIC and sound card for a full "virtualized Windows PC".
Super helpful and useful information. I thought disabling unused onboard devices was a thing of the past, but wow, I guess it's till something to keep in mind.
Man. I miss when populating all the slots was a hallmark of a baller system. Also mentioning "using a geforce card because of NVENC" in a new driver update AMD added b-frame encoding support to their AMF h.264 encoder & puts it just a hair behind NVENC h.264. If for some reason you can't use external capture this may come in handy because from everything I've seen, older AMD cards like palaris tend to play very well with motherboards that don't support UEFI / secure boot.
@@Nighterlev I still cannot get any Radeon I do have to support any kind of low latency encode in OBS. I also tried to use a 7990 in windows XP because fanboys kept insisting gcn was good and that the final driver would support it. Short answer: no. Long answer: the workaround to try and force it was jank as hell and you still couldn't install it normally. Getting the gtx 690 to work in xp yielded the same result (no multi GPU), but was dramatically simpler and more stable.
@@Nighterlev wrong just look how many emulators have specific AMD bug fixes due to open gl unsupported fonction. Or most rendering program use Nvidia specific fonctions (stable diffusion,blender Optix and cuda,substance...) Or AMD fsr being faster on Nvidia than AMD due of the faster shader computing of Nvidia... Some of those problem are very recent but for some other it has been years and are still not fixed.you are really out of touch.
There are B550 boards that has 2 16x slots connected to the CPU that can run x8/x8, Gigabyte Vision (don't remeber the exact model name...) as an example. There's not many boards that has this, and they are more expensive because of the needed PCIe 4.0 switches needed. But to run all those cards you're much better off with one of these boards, or x570.
I had a similar problem with too much stuff on a B550 board and in the end i bought an X570 board which has much more bandwidth but also had a price twice as high as the B550 board
@@philscomputerlab The main reason i replaced the B550 was it only had 6 SATA ports which was not enough and a HBA card was not a option as there were no slots or bandwidth for it
It was an MSI B550 Tomahawk and it got replaced with an MSI X570S Carbon Max WIFI but that board refused to run 4 sticks of RAM at 3600 MHz so had to replace the RAM too with a kit of 2 3600 MHz sticks which now works as they should on the new X570 board
Worse, it isn't even a B550 board... it's a B550-A board, which for most intents and purposes is actually renumbered B450 board, released before the real B550 boards were released
When I upgraded my TR1920X system this spring, I wanted to go B550. In the end it became a X570S mainboard as the prices for the B550 boards with the things I wanted to have were partly higher than with the X570S boards.
I'd send it back as it's not suitable for purpose. Then pick up an x570 board. I would guess not many people use an b550 in the way you wanted to it's probably not an issue in the vast majority of cases, most of b550's would be used in basic midrange gaming PC's where this kind of thing would not be a problem, having said that the limitations are quite disappointing.
I have 1 of those Chinese lga2011 machine with a 10 core Xeon too, which I bought after seeing them on your channel, but I only bought it to have a mess with, as computers are my hobby, although I do use it as a 2nd machine in my bedroom. My 1st machine is probably way too powerful for what I need, it's a 12900K and a Z690 Hero, but again this is my hobby so I don't mind spending the dough. I usually upgrade often, selling the old stuff while it's still reasonably new, even if I only get 50% of the money back, it's still halves the price of the original purchase.
Well yes that's a nice machine you have there 😀 I'm typing this on a HP Z440, it will feature in a video soon. That thing is just rock solid, everything works.
It's a problem with all mainstream consumer motherboards these days. They always give you more physical PCI-E slots than the CPU and chipset can provide lanes for, which means cards and integrated peripherals will fight for bandwidth, or in some cases, prevent one another from working at all. Some manufacturers state that the x4 slot will run at x1 or x2 when any other chipset PCI-E slot is used, but some don't. The worst I found are those that have two physical x8/x16 slots from the chipset, with either capable of running at x4 individually. But if you use both simultaneously, e.g., with a capture card and a PCI-E SSD, you might find the SSD being dropped when the capture card is under load, because it couldn't get enough bandwidth to remain detected.
I've been complaining about this for a while, This is basically thanks to the death of the HEDT. Yes we were given cpus with more cores and were faster, but the tradeoff was the I/O. 20 to 24 PCI-e lanes isn't enough in some situations. But a word of warning, always check the diagram, Slots that go through the chipset have to share bandwidth with all the other I/O on the board, from usb to sata, ethernet. Need to check for a board that either has PLX switches or that can split its cpu pci-e lanes between the slots.
Yeah, I had 3 nvme drives in a B550 system. Guess what? The nvme that was plugged in the x4 pcie slot showing strange behaviors. Not very often, but sometimes it just unplugged randomly.
This is why I went for X570. I easily used all the bandwidth on my H87 and Z97 Boards (second x8 slot was used for m.2 adapter), and I didn't want a repeat of DMI 2.0. With X570 the bandwidth between the PCH and CPU isn't an issue since its 4x the bandwidth of DMI 2.0 in my old PC. And I can't max the connection with the 2x NVME gen 3.0 (one a Crucial P1), 1x 4TB Samsung QVO and BD ODD. Since I always end up using expansion cards to get newer features (or replace broken integrated features) I wanted the most amount of bandwidth possible between the CPU and PCH.
Because not everyone is tech savvy and most shoppers go by "ooh, more things the better!", even if the things don't work. (Just look at fake dual exhausts on cars) Basically, purposefully misleading the customers.
I seriously don't understand why motherboard & PC makers these days seem to just assume you're not going to be putting any PCIe cards (other than a GPU) in your system...
5:16 What do you expect? The B550 chipset is connected via (basically) a PCIe3 x4 connection to the CPU. So if the capture card satures a bandwidth of PCIe3 x4, nothing will be available for the rest. Or, if other devices want to transfer data, all devices connected to the chipset have to share the bandwidth. That's the inherent limitation of the chipset. It's unfortunate that this is not explicitely stated in the MB documentation, but from my point of view anyone trying to put together such a configuration should really inform himself. Or use a HEDT platform like Threadripper (but I know, expensive) BTW: This would also happen the same way on an Intel platform before 11th gen. Or better to say: it would have been even worse. Because up to Intel 10th gen, Intel only provided 20 PCIe3 lanes with the CPU, 16 for the GPU and 4 for the chipset connection. NVMe SSD were usually connected to the chipset and the chipset connection was also only PCIe3 x4. So good luck with a NVMe PCIe3x4 SSD and a capture card...
Have a similar issue with the z390 tuf I'm using with my main PC. It offers two m.2 slots, and it at least warns me that using the secondary one disables some SATA ports as well. But once I was in a position to use a second one, it wouldn't let me. Or rather, it wouldn't boot from anything at all as long as something was in that slot. My only workaround was to use an nvme to pcie adapter card. So safe to say, I don't have a lot of love for motherboards that waste space for these connectors when I'd rather just have more expansion slots instead.
I use a B550 motherboard with a Ryzen 4700G APU using its integrated graphics, which is by no means puny. This frees up the first 16x slot for other uses. Yes I'm aware that the APU has fewer external PCIe lanes than a regular Ryzen, but in my case that is not an issue. I have a SAS card in the 16x slot and a dual 2.5GB ethernet card in the 4x slot, they both work without any bottlenecks that I can see.
Both AMD and Intel are being cheap with the pci express lanes on the desktop class chips. I looked up the Ryzen 5600 and it has 24 pci express lanes. 16 for the video card. 4 for the nvme drive. That leaves only 4 shared across the rest of the entire rest of the main board hooked up to what used to be called the "southbridge" chip. Lines up perfectly with your experience in this video.
Basically i have been doing this all the time with several boards and i have rarely run into issues, most of the times it can happen that using the wrong slot will cut your gpu or other device's bandwidth, so i always read the manual of the board to try and avoid that. I also have an asus h97 plus and it has no issues using all the pcie expansion slots at the same time + the 2 legacy pci slots + the m.2 slot pupulated, i think that modern boards are very worse at managing pcie resources, likely to save some money on pcie switch/mux chips or complicated board routing. For my main pc i got an x99 platform with a 22 core xeon 2696 v4 cpu and i have enough bandwidth for my 4 pcie expansion cards ( 2 sound cards + wifi card + a usb-c expansion card) and i can still have the on board m.2 running at full bandwidth and the gpu at pcie 3.0 x16, while also using all the on board usb ports and both sata controllers i have on board. BTW For x99 try the xeon 2687w v3 or something else with base clocks above 3 ghz and more than 8 cores.
My first thought was that you didn't read the manual, but when you said you did, it's pretty clear that it's the manufacturer's fault for not providing enough info. Stuff like this definitely should be in the manual.
The way to go here was an X570 board with that networking hardware already onboard out of the box. Much less hassle. Honestly I'd go for an 8 core as a creator in this budget range as well. (Note that wifi chips can still be swapped and I'm told rather cheaply so that could be a future video topic)
I agree that you should have been warned or at least found this limitation on the manual. Ok it's not a super expensive motherboard but if this limitation isn't clear, I totally agree with you!
You will have the same issues with Intel Z chipsets. At least until 10th gen. Up to 10th gen, Intel CPUs only supported PCIe3 and the CPUs had only 20 PCIe lanes, 16 for PEG slot, 4 for the chipset. NVMe was connected to the chipset. And how many bandwidth do think will remain, if a PCIe3x4 NVMe pushes 3.5GB/s over the chipset bus. AMD already was an improvement compared to Intel starting with B350, as the CPUs supported 24 PCIe lanes, 16 for PEG, 4 for NVMe and 4 for the chipset.
@@johnscaramis2515 Man, that's sad... So why in the hell we would pay those high prices if you can't use the full port supposed potential? This is ridiculous. But glad to know now this, at least in the future I'll have in mind what i want to plug in the motherboard in order to choose any. Greetings
Awesome content and helpful, thanks for sharing. It would indeed be interesting to see a video about the X99 and if it has any tweaking capabilities and also limitations comparing to mid/high end branded motherboards.
This is a problem with all B550 boards, there is simply not enough PCIe lanes from the chipset. X570 isn't immune to it either if you have a board with 10Gbe and Thunderbolt. Way too many modern boards are removing slots for m.2 sockets. I'd rather have the PCIe slots, because I can easily adapt them to m.2 if needed!
hi that is the difference between a mainstream platform and the X99 plaform the maximum pci-e bandwidth number and also the usb is connected to the chipset :)
I was actually surprised that every port on x99 connected directly to USB 3.0, even the black ports (at least on the back ones) also on my machinist if you use M.2 SATA card, 2 (or 1) SATA ports will not work, as with B350 Gigabyte that i tinkered with (that was in manual and website, on specifications page).
It's an area very few tech UA-camrs talk about. And it would be nice if the manufacturers could bring out a 'what if' chart to cover all the possible scenarios, but instead we get something vague. I'm not a fan of buying cheap Chinese back door motherboards from AliExpress. I would appreciate you doing another video about this topic for a budget gaming motherboard and what things to look out for. This topic first interest me a few weeks now just because I was curious about raiding two M.2 PCIe cards. However, very few motherboard scenarios support this unless you spend a bit more for a mobo with more options. A tricky, but fruitful area to get into.
Hi Phil, I think you should try putting the graphics card inside the second physical x16 slot which looks like it is electrically x8 (perhaps less if the x1 slot below is in use). The performance of the GPU/nvdec/nvenc could fit your needs and you can use all cards as you wanted to.
I ran into a similar issue with an 11th gen mainboard that I paired with a 10th gen Intel CPU. It wasn't clearly advertised that you would loose an nvme slot in that configuration, where other manufacturers would just switch from CPU lanes to chipset lanes.
On both the AMD and Intel sides the low end and mainstream boards are not meant to be fully loaded with expansion cards. The amount of slots on that board are meant for flexibility first. For anyone that needs the to use all the add-on cards you want to use you would need to go with a "prosumer" class of board like an X570 or the equivalent Intel chipset. That kind of product segmentation didn't exist so much years ago but it definitely exists today.
PCIe lanes and slots are one of the reasons when I was building my current system I went with Threadripper. I've got enough PCIe lanes to run two GPUs at 16 lanes each, a dual 10 Gig NIC, and an NVMe SSD alongside all the onboard motherboard stuff.
Good information in this video. If you need max performance from some/all of your devices, you need to dig up specs on how many PCIe lanes (and which slots) are routed through the processor vs. the chipset and how many simultaneous lanes each can respectively handle without invoking PCIe switching (where the system dynamically allocates the amount of lanes a device can use).
That's not what PCIe switch means. It means switch in the sense of a network switch. In the downstream direction, the CPU can only be sending a packet to one thing at a time, no problem. If more than one device wants to send upstream to the CPU at the same time, then it will need to store their packet in a buffer, and queue it to be sent out the CPU port. The CPU can NAK any packet, so it may need to queue it to be sent to the CPU again. It starts to look like a network switch if there is peer to peer traffic from multiple downstream devices to multiple other downstream devices. It doesn't mean a bunch of "double-throw" switches that "switch" which lanes go where like a train yard.
@@douggale5962 I'm not sure what you're taking exception to. I just stated *what* it is, you're trying to describe *how* it works. Two different (though related) conversations. I kept it simple because this channel's YT comments aren't really the place to get into the nitty-gritty of PCIe architecture and logic.
I went X399 in early 2020, Zenith Alpha + 2950X for the price (at the time) of the 3950X. And I'm sticking with it pretty much for this, just to have the ability to run pretty much anything & everything.
I have the same capture card and all i did was turn of wifi from bios to work properly now the only issue is the pcie lane doesn’t boot on the first time i have to restart my pc 1 or 2 times. Am curre on the new asus tuff x670e wifi am5 motherboard.
Even among high end or enthusiast boards, you do have to shop around and ask or look for people’s experiences to ensure your specific use cases will be met. You’d think that paying a premium would be a guarantee of full functionality of everything, but sadly that’s not the case. Hope you work things out and find a board that works better for you.
Should have gone with a B550 that already has built in WIFI 6 and 2.5gb LAN. The GB B550M AORUS PRO AX for example has this, and it's the same price as that MSI board.
That is an 8x slot but you'd only want to allocate 4 to it. No point in having a WiFi card if you have wired LAN. Yes the more things that you need that are included on the motherboard the better. Even the X470 MSi boards are restricted when you plug in the 2nd M.2.
I was looking at upgrading my windows desktop (been using a mac as my daily driver since 2020) to an AMD Ricezen, but the hardest thing to find was a motherboard with an optical audio output. They exist, but they're a lot more expensive than other models. I ended up having to buy a new phone, so the Ryezen upgrade is going to have to go on the back burner for a while. I do think it's a bit silly that they put more slots on the board than there's bandwidth for. What's the point in having the slots if using all of them is just going to cause issues. The only thing I can think to try would be to swap the GPU and capture card, that way it would have the full bandwidth and the GPU would share the bandwidth with the other cards. That might be less of an issue if you're not doing gaming, but obviously it's going cause a pretty big hit to performance if you are.
I tried swapping GPU and captue card and the capture still wasn't silky smooth as I wanted. Why do you need optical out? I'm thinking you could use an old Audigy card with optical bracket. Bluetooth is another option if you don't want electrical wires.
@@philscomputerlab That's really strange, I guess their drivers aren't expecting it to connect directly to the CPU, so perhaps they need to update the drivers to be more compatible with the new platform. I'm using an old Sony surround sound amp with an optical input, since I find the analogue outputs on motherboards to be too noisy. I'm currently using an old X-Fi card with optical output. The analogue outputs are a lot less noisy than on-board audio, although I just use the optical output anyway. I've found the drivers are a bit buggy, and there's no real advantage using a discrete card if there's an on-board optical output. Basically I just want to eliminate the extra card because of those buggy drivers. Perhaps their newer cards are better, but if I'm going to spend extra on a sound card, I might as well spend less extra and get a motherboard with an optical output.
@@philscomputerlab That's a good idea, although I just checked and it looks like they don't include a SPDIF header on the modern boards. It is a shame, because it would be a cheap way to add an extra option.
If you are not doing gaming, would using a ryzen 5700g (or 5600g) so a video card is not needed help ? It is hard finding an affordable ATX motherboard for those of us looking to use lots of pci. Perhaps manufacturers want us to use usb external devices.
This video was more interesting than I expected. I mean the topology of the board doesn't surprise me at all, but the fact that the bandwidth to the slot is so low is. 4K60 capture requires a little over 11 gigabit (possible with 3.0 x2, and given that you see above 8 gigabit in the test program shows you have at least an x2 link) and the uplink for the chipset is a little below 32 gigabit, so there should be plenty of headroom for the devices you disabled while they're idling, and honestly even while operating fully. Makes me wonder how the chipset is doing PCIe switching, it almost makes sense if you think of the chipset as doing time division instead of proper switching. But that seems kind of crazy to me. Not sure if anyone else mentioned it but one could theoretically convert that top M.2 slot into a PCIe slot and use a riser cable if you have a case with a vertical CPU mount. Assuming of course the storage bandwidth requirements aren't super intense. But I agree with what others have said about people's preferences for M.2 slots ruining things since it's much more awkward to convert M.2 to PCIe than PCIe to M.2. That and people ignoring the use case of large amount of IO and not a lot of cores for HEDT. The new AM5 platform is giving another x4 lanes from the CPU, but of course I expect every board will just route those to an M.2 slot because that's what consumers demand. Edit: After talking to a friend it seems the key factor may be the PCIe generation of the cards in question. Apparently he has noticed that the bandwidth through PCIe switches can fall apart when mixing (i.e. the chipset may not be converting the PCIe 2 transaction up to PCIe 3 speeds). Sadly this means there's not a whole lot you can do about it since a lot of add in cards use lower versions of the PCIe spec presumably for cost reasons.
You can't, sometimes through the lower slots, they might share, so you might not be able to run the lowest PCIe slot if you're using the lowest SATA M.2 slot. It's a either or situation. I found this out on a ASRock B450M Pro4 motherboard. My old setup used a Ryzen 3800X, ASRock B450M Pro4 and 64GB 3200C16. My new setup is a Chinese X99 board w/ Xeon 2697v3 and 128GB 2133C22 ECC. Cards in use from top to bottom: AVerMedia Live Gamer 4k, Fusion ioScale 3.2TB PCIe SSD, LSI MegaRAID, 2.5GB NIC, Nvidia Quadro P600. and my main OS is on a 240GB SATA SSD. It works fantastic for streaming/recording and hosting VM's that have servers for Minecraft, UT'99, Rust, 7D2D, Wreckfest and Ground Branch.
Wouldn't it have been better to cheap out with an x470 motherboard instead? They are about the same price or cheaper than B550 and they should have more PCIe lanes?
Yeah I feel you man. I have a Asus B450-E and for a year I didn't know that my GPU was running at half the PCIe speed (x8 instead of x16) because I had installed the SSD in the second M.2 slot instead of the first. Just ridiculous stuff with these consumer motherboards. If you want a real motherboard that actually works you have to go with a WRX80 unfortunately. Which I really want but can't afford it right now.
WTF, that's possible? I've never heard that the first PCI-E x16 slot could even share bandwidth with anything else if not explicitly set as x8/x8 in the BIOS. Or did you put your GPU in the second x16?
Yea this is my main beef with everything below the HEDT rank where there is literally no point having so many PCIe slots because the CPU doesn't have enough PCIe lanes to spare. It doesn't help that both Intel and AMD don't seem to be interested in entertaining the HEDT crowd anymore.
i wonder how the msi b550 tomahawk fares, i assume that it's a step up from that motherboard you are using. i paid about 140$ for mine on a sale in June 2021
I would not expect it to be so limited for sure. I don't like these limitations, I believe some of them are artificial to get you to spend more on the higher tier. I know that "if it has a bios, you flash it" usually 😆, but in any case if you haven't it might be something. Cheers Phil, good luck.
agree, graphic cards like rx6500xt is a clear example. you are forced to use b550 board(pcie 4.0) otherwise the performance will be crippled with b450(pcie 3.0)
Most of these limitations have to do with how many pcie lanes the CPU itself supports. If you want to use more lanes than what the CPU supports, you have to use a PCIe switch chip on the motherboard, which will allow more devices to be connected at the same time, but won't increase the bandwidth in and out of the CPU itself. They're not really artificially limited, unless you're of the impression that all CPUs should have as many PCIe lanes as a server CPU.
Nope, these are not artificial, at least not in the case of the B550 chipset. It's basically a B450 chipset with PCIe3 enabled. And all AMD chipsets and also Intel chipsets until 10th gen only have 4 PCIe lanes for the chipset connection. Not sure how the bandwidth requirements for the capture card is, but if you have a network connection, several USB connections and a capture card running, 4GB/s will simply not be enough. And don't think Intel would be better. Until 10th gen, Intel CPUs had 20 PCIe3 lanes. 16 for the GPU, 4 for the chipset connection. NVMe SSDs were connected to the chipset.
Personally I have built a few budget gaming pc's using the B550 chipset and only encountered this once as a customer wanted both nvme's populated but also an add in sound card and wifi card it was a no go ... sorted by single larger capacity nvme and like you did disabled the onboard nic... my main rig is X570 with ryzen 9 5950X no issues although I don't use add I cards other than GPU all mvme slots are used but only 2 sata
Thats indeed the reason why many people like to use old server/workstation hardware, like the 2011-v3 socket you had before. the single-core performance becomes atrocious by todays standards, but you get much more pcie-e lanes and lots of cheaply to populate memory slots. especially the first gen threadripper or epyc generation it noteworthy for that. recently there are high end board + threadripper 1920/1950 combos for around 250€ up on ebay.
I have a 6th gen ASUS intel motherboard, look for the H170 pro it still has PS/2 ports and 2 original PCI slots. it could easily be a retro bridge machine between older PCs.
I had an issue like this with an ASRock b350 board where it disabled some SATA ports when I used the second M.2 slot but you had to read through everything very carefully to understand that. I eventually got an X370 board refurbished for about $60 USD off of Newegg that worked a treat.
I believe the issue there is the lane count, the chipset only has 4 lanes available, your cards use 1 + 4 + 1, the bandwith would be ok because they are 2.0 versus 3.0 from the chipset, but the lanes are wired, so there is only 4 lanes regardless if you use them in 3.0 or 2.0 mode, the wifi and network each get 1 but your AverMedia gets 2 lanes at 3.0 but the card is only 2.0 and you end up with half the possible bandwith, but by your tests you're somewhat close to 3x 2.0 in bandwith when you disable stuff
X99 is a Workstation/Server Motherboard chipset wich have more PCIe Lanes, AMD's only Workstation is TRX/WRX Threadripper option, Ryzen 3000/5000 have 24 PCIe lanes(x4 to chipset(gen3 on B550 & gen 4 on x570), x16 for GPU, x4 for NVME/SATA)
Hi Phill if you are fine with your nvme being on the chipset you can verly likley take the cpu nvme slot and use a 4x riser to attach the capture card directly. Intel 11th gen and newer also have these exta 4 cpu lanes.
Yes, it for sure referred about shared pcie resources, which will cause what you've experienced. So yeah 3 decades of computer building experience do help with some manufacturers that do not underline some important details.
Its false advertising and you definitely have a point here. Many are missing this point in comments. If board has 4-5-6-20 slots and they are physically wired x1,x4,x8,x16.. you should be able to use them ALL at maximum speed and AT THE SAME TIME. Otherwise if chipset is not able to sustain such speeds, put better chipset in or wire slots accordingly. This cost cutting bs must stop and I don't care that 90% of users will never run into this bottleneck.
If you really need to have WiFi, definitely consider a motherboard that either has it built onboard or at least has a dedicated 2230 sized m.2 slot for it. The WiFi chipsets that I usually look for and are known to be the most reliable are the (older) Intel AX200 (for WiFi 6) and (newer) Intel AX210 (for WiFi 6E). I recently bought official AX210 m.2 cards from the Framework Marketplace, by the way. Also, for AM4 motherboard brands, I heavily lean toward ASRock or Asus if I want unbuffered ECC support. ASRock has stated that all their AM4 motherboards support unbuffered ECC for Ryzen (with the exception of consumer APUs, which lacks ECC support), while Asus is mostly a hit for ECC (I know at least my B550-F Strix with WiFi does). I can confirm my ASRock x570m Pro4 and B450m Pro4 also support ECC UDIMMs. Gigabyte boards are also ok (when I'm not looking for ECC support). I usually stay away from MSI boards as some of their boards I've used in the past would sometimes just randomly boot the UEFI shell for no reason and I'd have to keep resetting.
Have you tried doing bios mod on that x99 to make it turbo boost way more on all cores? Miyconst hardware has crazy amount of x99 videos and modded bioses, if you want to try that?
I just commented about alternative solutions. But stealing this responce from reddit. Got the answer for myself and hopefully it helps with other suffering from this. The maximum payload for onboard lan/ wifi is only 128 byte and devices in same PCIE lane will follow with the lowest ones. That is why there is no sufficient bandwidth for GC573. Probably the workaround is to buy a USB ethernet adaptor and turn off the onboard lan / wifi adaptar Hwinfo can apperentaly show you the payload size. It seems a bit lacking but worth looking in to. It explains how you only received ~12% bandwirh by disabling the onboard nic. Very intriguing definitely learned something just now. Edit this description makes more sense "the problem is that PCIe Payload is set per PCIe Switch, so whatever the lowest device you have it will be locked to it." Still haven't found the mechanism behind it but it does make sense for compatibility. What a rabbit hole I opend up. You would need a intergrated nic that supports more than 128 payload size. So mabye a mobo with built in 2.5g would work fine.
It's common knowledge of pc builders that if you need pci slots you need a better cpu and motherboard. Everyone else does not need pci slots besides the 16x.
Hello i have motherboard asus rog strix b450-f gaming but it doesnt have pci express x4 2.0 for aviamedia 4k Live Gamer 4K GC573 will it for on pci16 for this motherboard? or do i need change it to one with pci4?
Yeah, but all the PCI slots shared the same bandwidth. Nothing you'd want to use today. And with more cards in the PC, you also had troubles, although different ones than today ;)
"i read the manuals very carefully" You should have checked forums and user comments. Content creation is a higher level of usage and you shouldn't cheap out on it.
petty much got annoyed at my msi b450 gaming plus, wanted it cus had 6 sata ports but 2 get disabled by NVMe so coudnt use the other 2, and didnt know the other PCIes that arent nvme or 16x for gpu are PCIE 2, so extra nvmes on pcie1x ran at 450mb, annoying
Good information, thanks. Hard to find a manufacturer that produces a product to the best. There is always something missing/not working. How much have you gained now over the x99 motherboard?
@@philscomputerlab OK, fair enough. I recently bought a X99-CH8, E5-2680 V4, 128GB DDR4 ECC RAM for virtualization. Added 2 AMD GPU RX550 and RX580, 10GB Ethernet and a USB 3.2 5 port card. So far I am happy, even a bit slower than newest stuff. On the other hand it works for what I am doing.
@@philscomputerlab a video would be soooooo awesome! I'm planning on a future XP build using AMD FX CPU and asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 motherboard I recently picked up. Only thing I'm missing is another GPU for SLI
'What's the point having all these PCIe slots and you can't use all of them?', totally valid point and should be pointed out by the motherboard maker.
you can use them but not all with maximum thruput at the same time. There is a big difference. The problem happens when he is using a video capture card at 4k at 60FPS with a 2.5G ethernet in the same PCI multiplexer. That's not something for a cheap board. He would have the same problem with Intel. If AMD and Intel remove extra PCI-E slots because they cannot all run at the same time with maximum speed, I would be mad and come to his come to smash his computer because he would be doing a disservice to all of us. Removing something that we all can use because he cannot use it fully? ARE WE CRAZY??? I need 4 PCI-E cards and don't need his bandwidth; I don't want to be punished. He can buy the X570 or a TRX if he needs it or read the FM next time before buying a motherboard. Don't force me to buy more expensive than I need simply because you bought cheaper than you needed.
@@marsovac "don't force me to buy a more expensive [board] than i need simply because you bought a cheaper [board] than you needed" so basically "Don't force me to buy a more expensive board, force him!!". Douche. The issue here is that the limitation isn't advertised, and it should be. On a personal note, i hope your PC gets hit by lightning =)
@@marsovac In fact, even H610 now using DMI 4.0 which is x4 PCIe 4.0 and if he bought 12100 + B610 he will be able to use all these slots without problems and it will be faster . AMD is just are outdated tech.
@ Not AN AMD Nor Nvidia nor Intel fan You think you dropped it to x8, but you dropped it way more than that. It's x8 + x8 5GT/s instead of x16 8GT/s. 10GT/s, you got ripped off for the other x6, as far as bandwidth is concerned, and GPU went from 128GT/s to 40GT/s. It is to make sure it is way too bottlenecked to use as a server, at all.
It is pointed out by the motherboard maker. Both on the website as well as in the manual.
An X570 would have been the way to go for sure, or at the very least a B550 with a 2.5gbe onboard NIC so you can reduce the amount of add in cards needed.
I will say.. I used to buy the best "value" motherboards I could find. Then I had to buy a B550 Aorus Master thanks to NewEgg Shutfle. The Master is a little overkill, but there are some quality of life improvements on the Gigabyte Master and Ultra boards that are worth their salt.. especially for enthusiasts.
Yes the b550 Tomahawk has 2.5Gbps Lan, thats why i bought it.
If you still need more PCI Lanes X570 is the way to go, It creates more Lanes by taking load of the CPU.
The CPU doesn't have enough Lanes for everything on the board AND a bunch of expansion Cards to connect directly to it that's why the X-Series Chipsets even exist and need active cooling on the chipset.
Agreed, X570. Maybe you can find one on ebay on the cheap. But as anything, that can be a little risky.
So what, x570 would be overkill for an ITX Based motherboard?
@@adventureoflinkmk2 Technically yes. If you have two nvme m.2 slots on the board and one X16 slot you can easily get along with a B550 board.
Agree. Especially when it comes to "When installing PCIe SSD in M.2_2, PCI_E3 slot will be unavailable." and "PCIEX16_2 will run x2 mode when PCIEX1 is used."
"Sata 3_4 and Sata 3_5 Are unavilable while using M2_2 in SATA mode"
@@mmllmmll22 Same principle.
I bought that exact motherboard, and I was 100% aware that my WiFi card is going to halve the bandwidth from x4 to x2 before buying. Maybe it's hard to find, but it is definitely mentioned somewhere in the manual or the spec sheet and I did find it.
This is why I got the B550 VISION D-P. It has PCIe switches. You can run it at x8/x8 mode off the CPU lanes for a GPU in Slot 1 and a high performance second expansion card like NVME RAID or 4K capture card in Slot 2. The shared bandwidth on the third slot is off the PCH and you're going to be fighting for it. MSI provides a block diagram for the PCI-Express topology but you're never going to know how much continuous effective bandwidth you're going to get over the PCH until you test it out.
The b550 tai chi too
There are a few boards that support x8/x8 (I remember I found 3 when I was shopping for b550 a year ago) but theyre all pretty high end of b550. As expensive as low end x570.
You are wrong. You don't realize that they aren't the full 8GT/s They are PCIe 2.0 switches, 5GT/s.
Had similar problems in the Ivy Bridge days.
Asrock Z87 Pro4 says: *If PCIE2 or PCIE4 slot is occupied, PCIE3 slot will run at x2 mode.
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H says: The PCIEX4 slot shares bandwidth with the PCIEX1_2/3 slots. The PCIEX1_2/3 slots will become unavailable when a PCIe x4 expansion card is installed.
And these were all PCI-E 2.0, only the 16x or 8x+8x from the CPU were 3.0.
At that time I was virtualizing AMD GPU and also needed 2nd NIC and sound card for a full "virtualized Windows PC".
TUESDAY BONUS VIDEO? What a treat!
Super helpful and useful information. I thought disabling unused onboard devices was a thing of the past, but wow, I guess it's till something to keep in mind.
Man. I miss when populating all the slots was a hallmark of a baller system. Also mentioning "using a geforce card because of NVENC" in a new driver update AMD added b-frame encoding support to their AMF h.264 encoder & puts it just a hair behind NVENC h.264. If for some reason you can't use external capture this may come in handy because from everything I've seen, older AMD cards like palaris tend to play very well with motherboards that don't support UEFI / secure boot.
what about vega?
Yeah but let's be honest... AMD driver still sucks...short time support.and lacking in opengl and shader compilation performance.
@@Nighterlev I still cannot get any Radeon I do have to support any kind of low latency encode in OBS.
I also tried to use a 7990 in windows XP because fanboys kept insisting gcn was good and that the final driver would support it. Short answer: no. Long answer: the workaround to try and force it was jank as hell and you still couldn't install it normally. Getting the gtx 690 to work in xp yielded the same result (no multi GPU), but was dramatically simpler and more stable.
@@Nighterlev wrong just look how many emulators have specific AMD bug fixes due to open gl unsupported fonction. Or most rendering program use Nvidia specific fonctions (stable diffusion,blender Optix and cuda,substance...) Or AMD fsr being faster on Nvidia than AMD due of the faster shader computing of Nvidia... Some of those problem are very recent but for some other it has been years and are still not fixed.you are really out of touch.
@@Tailslol radeon openGL performance got fixed recently, maybe few months ago. now it's really good. check it out if you have amd card =)
Didn't know this "cheap out" trick until now; thanks a lot!
There are B550 boards that has 2 16x slots connected to the CPU that can run x8/x8, Gigabyte Vision (don't remeber the exact model name...) as an example. There's not many boards that has this, and they are more expensive because of the needed PCIe 4.0 switches needed. But to run all those cards you're much better off with one of these boards, or x570.
I had a similar problem with too much stuff on a B550 board and in the end i bought an X570 board which has much more bandwidth but also had a price twice as high as the B550 board
When I was looking, X570 boards started at just a bit under double the price, it was hard to justify but now in hinsight...
@@philscomputerlab The main reason i replaced the B550 was it only had 6 SATA ports which was not enough and a HBA card was not a option as there were no slots or bandwidth for it
It was an MSI B550 Tomahawk and it got replaced with an MSI X570S Carbon Max WIFI but that board refused to run 4 sticks of RAM at 3600 MHz so had to replace the RAM too with a kit of 2 3600 MHz sticks which now works as they should on the new X570 board
Worse, it isn't even a B550 board... it's a B550-A board, which for most intents and purposes is actually renumbered B450 board, released before the real B550 boards were released
When I upgraded my TR1920X system this spring, I wanted to go B550. In the end it became a X570S mainboard as the prices for the B550 boards with the things I wanted to have were partly higher than with the X570S boards.
I'd send it back as it's not suitable for purpose. Then pick up an x570 board. I would guess not many people use an b550 in the way you wanted to it's probably not an issue in the vast majority of cases, most of b550's would be used in basic midrange gaming PC's where this kind of thing would not be a problem, having said that the limitations are quite disappointing.
I have 1 of those Chinese lga2011 machine with a 10 core Xeon too, which I bought after seeing them on your channel, but I only bought it to have a mess with, as computers are my hobby, although I do use it as a 2nd machine in my bedroom. My 1st machine is probably way too powerful for what I need, it's a 12900K and a Z690 Hero, but again this is my hobby so I don't mind spending the dough. I usually upgrade often, selling the old stuff while it's still reasonably new, even if I only get 50% of the money back, it's still halves the price of the original purchase.
Well yes that's a nice machine you have there 😀 I'm typing this on a HP Z440, it will feature in a video soon. That thing is just rock solid, everything works.
Do the same thing as you, once you got one you can't go back 💀💀💀. (Same with guitars and cars)
@@kaleb8518 Les Paul by any chance?
It's a problem with all mainstream consumer motherboards these days.
They always give you more physical PCI-E slots than the CPU and chipset can provide lanes for, which means cards and integrated peripherals will fight for bandwidth, or in some cases, prevent one another from working at all. Some manufacturers state that the x4 slot will run at x1 or x2 when any other chipset PCI-E slot is used, but some don't.
The worst I found are those that have two physical x8/x16 slots from the chipset, with either capable of running at x4 individually. But if you use both simultaneously, e.g., with a capture card and a PCI-E SSD, you might find the SSD being dropped when the capture card is under load, because it couldn't get enough bandwidth to remain detected.
I've been complaining about this for a while, This is basically thanks to the death of the HEDT. Yes we were given cpus with more cores and were faster, but the tradeoff was the I/O. 20 to 24 PCI-e lanes isn't enough in some situations. But a word of warning, always check the diagram, Slots that go through the chipset have to share bandwidth with all the other I/O on the board, from usb to sata, ethernet. Need to check for a board that either has PLX switches or that can split its cpu pci-e lanes between the slots.
Now I know 🙂 I might look at the X299 platform...
A very important topic that none talk about, good information, mate. SP and MSI are from Taiwan, an independent country.
I ran into a similar 'reality' with a budget B450 motherboard (Asrock B450M Pro4). The X470/570 chipset is definitely the way to go.
Yeah, I had 3 nvme drives in a B550 system. Guess what? The nvme that was plugged in the x4 pcie slot showing strange behaviors. Not very often, but sometimes it just unplugged randomly.
This is why I went for X570. I easily used all the bandwidth on my H87 and Z97 Boards (second x8 slot was used for m.2 adapter), and I didn't want a repeat of DMI 2.0. With X570 the bandwidth between the PCH and CPU isn't an issue since its 4x the bandwidth of DMI 2.0 in my old PC. And I can't max the connection with the 2x NVME gen 3.0 (one a Crucial P1), 1x 4TB Samsung QVO and BD ODD.
Since I always end up using expansion cards to get newer features (or replace broken integrated features) I wanted the most amount of bandwidth possible between the CPU and PCH.
Love me some modern philscomputerlab vids
çok iyi bilgiler veriyor :D
My last problem was too many usb devices with h110 motherboard. If you can't populate all usb connectors at the same time, why include so many..
Because not everyone is tech savvy and most shoppers go by "ooh, more things the better!", even if the things don't work. (Just look at fake dual exhausts on cars)
Basically, purposefully misleading the customers.
I seriously don't understand why motherboard & PC makers these days seem to just assume you're not going to be putting any PCIe cards (other than a GPU) in your system...
5:16 What do you expect? The B550 chipset is connected via (basically) a PCIe3 x4 connection to the CPU. So if the capture card satures a bandwidth of PCIe3 x4, nothing will be available for the rest. Or, if other devices want to transfer data, all devices connected to the chipset have to share the bandwidth.
That's the inherent limitation of the chipset. It's unfortunate that this is not explicitely stated in the MB documentation, but from my point of view anyone trying to put together such a configuration should really inform himself.
Or use a HEDT platform like Threadripper (but I know, expensive)
BTW: This would also happen the same way on an Intel platform before 11th gen. Or better to say: it would have been even worse. Because up to Intel 10th gen, Intel only provided 20 PCIe3 lanes with the CPU, 16 for the GPU and 4 for the chipset connection. NVMe SSD were usually connected to the chipset and the chipset connection was also only PCIe3 x4. So good luck with a NVMe PCIe3x4 SSD and a capture card...
Thanks for the warning! That is disappointing. I was planning on a B board but I may have to reconsider how I budget for my next build.
Have a similar issue with the z390 tuf I'm using with my main PC. It offers two m.2 slots, and it at least warns me that using the secondary one disables some SATA ports as well. But once I was in a position to use a second one, it wouldn't let me. Or rather, it wouldn't boot from anything at all as long as something was in that slot. My only workaround was to use an nvme to pcie adapter card.
So safe to say, I don't have a lot of love for motherboards that waste space for these connectors when I'd rather just have more expansion slots instead.
I use a B550 motherboard with a Ryzen 4700G APU using its integrated graphics, which is by no means puny. This frees up the first 16x slot for other uses. Yes I'm aware that the APU has fewer external PCIe lanes than a regular Ryzen, but in my case that is not an issue. I have a SAS card in the 16x slot and a dual 2.5GB ethernet card in the 4x slot, they both work without any bottlenecks that I can see.
The pcie layout is a mess on b550 boards. A real mine field for consumers.
All the B550 specs I read listed contradictory info about lane allocations. I got an X570 board instead so I wouldn't have to think about it.
very useful video i encountered same issue with my b350 pc mate msi motherboard. i cant use all neither pci slots nor usb slots at the same time
Both AMD and Intel are being cheap with the pci express lanes on the desktop class chips. I looked up the Ryzen 5600 and it has 24 pci express lanes. 16 for the video card. 4 for the nvme drive. That leaves only 4 shared across the rest of the entire rest of the main board hooked up to what used to be called the "southbridge" chip. Lines up perfectly with your experience in this video.
Basically i have been doing this all the time with several boards and i have rarely run into issues, most of the times it can happen that using the wrong slot will cut your gpu or other device's bandwidth, so i always read the manual of the board to try and avoid that.
I also have an asus h97 plus and it has no issues using all the pcie expansion slots at the same time + the 2 legacy pci slots + the m.2 slot pupulated, i think that modern boards are very worse at managing pcie resources, likely to save some money on pcie switch/mux chips or complicated board routing.
For my main pc i got an x99 platform with a 22 core xeon 2696 v4 cpu and i have enough bandwidth for my 4 pcie expansion cards ( 2 sound cards + wifi card + a usb-c expansion card) and i can still have the on board m.2 running at full bandwidth and the gpu at pcie 3.0 x16, while also using all the on board usb ports and both sata controllers i have on board.
BTW For x99 try the xeon 2687w v3 or something else with base clocks above 3 ghz and more than 8 cores.
My first thought was that you didn't read the manual, but when you said you did, it's pretty clear that it's the manufacturer's fault for not providing enough info. Stuff like this definitely should be in the manual.
The way to go here was an X570 board with that networking hardware already onboard out of the box. Much less hassle. Honestly I'd go for an 8 core as a creator in this budget range as well.
(Note that wifi chips can still be swapped and I'm told rather cheaply so that could be a future video topic)
I agree that you should have been warned or at least found this limitation on the manual. Ok it's not a super expensive motherboard but if this limitation isn't clear, I totally agree with you!
Man, i have heard a lot about those issues and it's unreal that you can't get a real full usable Motherboard if it is not a Z version.... Damnit
Z or X. Z for Intel, and X for AMD
You will have the same issues with Intel Z chipsets. At least until 10th gen. Up to 10th gen, Intel CPUs only supported PCIe3 and the CPUs had only 20 PCIe lanes, 16 for PEG slot, 4 for the chipset. NVMe was connected to the chipset. And how many bandwidth do think will remain, if a PCIe3x4 NVMe pushes 3.5GB/s over the chipset bus. AMD already was an improvement compared to Intel starting with B350, as the CPUs supported 24 PCIe lanes, 16 for PEG, 4 for NVMe and 4 for the chipset.
@@johnscaramis2515 Man, that's sad... So why in the hell we would pay those high prices if you can't use the full port supposed potential? This is ridiculous. But glad to know now this, at least in the future I'll have in mind what i want to plug in the motherboard in order to choose any. Greetings
Awesome content and helpful, thanks for sharing. It would indeed be interesting to see a video about the X99 and if it has any tweaking capabilities and also limitations comparing to mid/high end branded motherboards.
Good to know, I'd get in touch with MSI. Maybe at least they correct their manual or website to save others time and money.
This is a problem with all B550 boards, there is simply not enough PCIe lanes from the chipset. X570 isn't immune to it either if you have a board with 10Gbe and Thunderbolt. Way too many modern boards are removing slots for m.2 sockets. I'd rather have the PCIe slots, because I can easily adapt them to m.2 if needed!
Hi Phils. Could you tell me what is the model of test bank, and where can I buy it? Very thanks in advance..
hi that is the difference between a mainstream platform and the X99 plaform the maximum pci-e bandwidth number and also the usb is connected to the chipset :)
I was actually surprised that every port on x99 connected directly to USB 3.0, even the black ports (at least on the back ones) also on my machinist if you use M.2 SATA card, 2 (or 1) SATA ports will not work, as with B350 Gigabyte that i tinkered with (that was in manual and website, on specifications page).
yes please, do a video about that motherboard. I'm curious how good the x99 chinese boards are like.
It's an area very few tech UA-camrs talk about. And it would be nice if the manufacturers could bring out a 'what if' chart to cover all the possible scenarios, but instead we get something vague. I'm not a fan of buying cheap Chinese back door motherboards from AliExpress. I would appreciate you doing another video about this topic for a budget gaming motherboard and what things to look out for. This topic first interest me a few weeks now just because I was curious about raiding two M.2 PCIe cards. However, very few motherboard scenarios support this unless you spend a bit more for a mobo with more options. A tricky, but fruitful area to get into.
Hi Phil, I think you should try putting the graphics card inside the second physical x16 slot which looks like it is electrically x8 (perhaps less if the x1 slot below is in use). The performance of the GPU/nvdec/nvenc could fit your needs and you can use all cards as you wanted to.
I ran into a similar issue with an 11th gen mainboard that I paired with a 10th gen Intel CPU. It wasn't clearly advertised that you would loose an nvme slot in that configuration, where other manufacturers would just switch from CPU lanes to chipset lanes.
On both the AMD and Intel sides the low end and mainstream boards are not meant to be fully loaded with expansion cards. The amount of slots on that board are meant for flexibility first. For anyone that needs the to use all the add-on cards you want to use you would need to go with a "prosumer" class of board like an X570 or the equivalent Intel chipset. That kind of product segmentation didn't exist so much years ago but it definitely exists today.
PCIe lanes and slots are one of the reasons when I was building my current system I went with Threadripper. I've got enough PCIe lanes to run two GPUs at 16 lanes each, a dual 10 Gig NIC, and an NVMe SSD alongside all the onboard motherboard stuff.
Nice!
Good information in this video. If you need max performance from some/all of your devices, you need to dig up specs on how many PCIe lanes (and which slots) are routed through the processor vs. the chipset and how many simultaneous lanes each can respectively handle without invoking PCIe switching (where the system dynamically allocates the amount of lanes a device can use).
That's not what PCIe switch means. It means switch in the sense of a network switch. In the downstream direction, the CPU can only be sending a packet to one thing at a time, no problem. If more than one device wants to send upstream to the CPU at the same time, then it will need to store their packet in a buffer, and queue it to be sent out the CPU port. The CPU can NAK any packet, so it may need to queue it to be sent to the CPU again. It starts to look like a network switch if there is peer to peer traffic from multiple downstream devices to multiple other downstream devices.
It doesn't mean a bunch of "double-throw" switches that "switch" which lanes go where like a train yard.
@@douggale5962 I'm not sure what you're taking exception to. I just stated *what* it is, you're trying to describe *how* it works. Two different (though related) conversations.
I kept it simple because this channel's YT comments aren't really the place to get into the nitty-gritty of PCIe architecture and logic.
I went X399 in early 2020, Zenith Alpha + 2950X for the price (at the time) of the 3950X. And I'm sticking with it pretty much for this, just to have the ability to run pretty much anything & everything.
98% sure that MSI mentions somewhere that using either of the x1 slots knocks the x16 slot down to x2 or some such
If you need PCIe expansion, you either want x570 or something like a proart from Asus that splits the CPU 16x into two 8x slots
I have a b550 also. A b550unify , I have all 4 nvme slots populated. No issues but it's not a mid range board.
I learned something new, Thanks!
I have the same capture card and all i did was turn of wifi from bios to work properly now the only issue is the pcie lane doesn’t boot on the first time i have to restart my pc 1 or 2 times. Am curre on the new asus tuff x670e wifi am5 motherboard.
Even among high end or enthusiast boards, you do have to shop around and ask or look for people’s experiences to ensure your specific use cases will be met. You’d think that paying a premium would be a guarantee of full functionality of everything, but sadly that’s not the case. Hope you work things out and find a board that works better for you.
Very helpful - thank you!
Should have gone with a B550 that already has built in WIFI 6 and 2.5gb LAN. The GB B550M AORUS PRO AX for example has this, and it's the same price as that MSI board.
In my humble opinion, you should be able to use as many dang cards as you want! The more expansion, the better the system is!
That might explain why my A520 board was having PCIe 1x WiFi issues on one slot, but not the other
That is an 8x slot but you'd only want to allocate 4 to it. No point in having a WiFi card if you have wired LAN. Yes the more things that you need that are included on the motherboard the better. Even the X470 MSi boards are restricted when you plug in the 2nd M.2.
I was looking at upgrading my windows desktop (been using a mac as my daily driver since 2020) to an AMD Ricezen, but the hardest thing to find was a motherboard with an optical audio output. They exist, but they're a lot more expensive than other models. I ended up having to buy a new phone, so the Ryezen upgrade is going to have to go on the back burner for a while.
I do think it's a bit silly that they put more slots on the board than there's bandwidth for. What's the point in having the slots if using all of them is just going to cause issues. The only thing I can think to try would be to swap the GPU and capture card, that way it would have the full bandwidth and the GPU would share the bandwidth with the other cards. That might be less of an issue if you're not doing gaming, but obviously it's going cause a pretty big hit to performance if you are.
I tried swapping GPU and captue card and the capture still wasn't silky smooth as I wanted. Why do you need optical out? I'm thinking you could use an old Audigy card with optical bracket. Bluetooth is another option if you don't want electrical wires.
@@philscomputerlab That's really strange, I guess their drivers aren't expecting it to connect directly to the CPU, so perhaps they need to update the drivers to be more compatible with the new platform.
I'm using an old Sony surround sound amp with an optical input, since I find the analogue outputs on motherboards to be too noisy. I'm currently using an old X-Fi card with optical output. The analogue outputs are a lot less noisy than on-board audio, although I just use the optical output anyway. I've found the drivers are a bit buggy, and there's no real advantage using a discrete card if there's an on-board optical output. Basically I just want to eliminate the extra card because of those buggy drivers. Perhaps their newer cards are better, but if I'm going to spend extra on a sound card, I might as well spend less extra and get a motherboard with an optical output.
@@UpLateGeek Fair enough. Older motherboards often had a spdif header. Not sure if that is still a thing.
@@philscomputerlab That's a good idea, although I just checked and it looks like they don't include a SPDIF header on the modern boards. It is a shame, because it would be a cheap way to add an extra option.
If you are not doing gaming, would using a ryzen 5700g (or 5600g) so a video card is not needed help ? It is hard finding an affordable ATX motherboard for those of us looking to use lots of pci. Perhaps manufacturers want us to use usb external devices.
The PCI-E 16x at the bottom at 2:32 is a 8x ... you can see the soldered pins. (half size) always misleading :/
This video was more interesting than I expected. I mean the topology of the board doesn't surprise me at all, but the fact that the bandwidth to the slot is so low is. 4K60 capture requires a little over 11 gigabit (possible with 3.0 x2, and given that you see above 8 gigabit in the test program shows you have at least an x2 link) and the uplink for the chipset is a little below 32 gigabit, so there should be plenty of headroom for the devices you disabled while they're idling, and honestly even while operating fully.
Makes me wonder how the chipset is doing PCIe switching, it almost makes sense if you think of the chipset as doing time division instead of proper switching. But that seems kind of crazy to me.
Not sure if anyone else mentioned it but one could theoretically convert that top M.2 slot into a PCIe slot and use a riser cable if you have a case with a vertical CPU mount. Assuming of course the storage bandwidth requirements aren't super intense.
But I agree with what others have said about people's preferences for M.2 slots ruining things since it's much more awkward to convert M.2 to PCIe than PCIe to M.2. That and people ignoring the use case of large amount of IO and not a lot of cores for HEDT. The new AM5 platform is giving another x4 lanes from the CPU, but of course I expect every board will just route those to an M.2 slot because that's what consumers demand.
Edit: After talking to a friend it seems the key factor may be the PCIe generation of the cards in question. Apparently he has noticed that the bandwidth through PCIe switches can fall apart when mixing (i.e. the chipset may not be converting the PCIe 2 transaction up to PCIe 3 speeds). Sadly this means there's not a whole lot you can do about it since a lot of add in cards use lower versions of the PCIe spec presumably for cost reasons.
This is why it pained me to transition from my x79 rampage iv formula to a mainstream platform. I really like having the expansion of HEDT platforms.
You can't, sometimes through the lower slots, they might share, so you might not be able to run the lowest PCIe slot if you're using the lowest SATA M.2 slot. It's a either or situation. I found this out on a ASRock B450M Pro4 motherboard.
My old setup used a Ryzen 3800X, ASRock B450M Pro4 and 64GB 3200C16. My new setup is a Chinese X99 board w/ Xeon 2697v3 and 128GB 2133C22 ECC.
Cards in use from top to bottom: AVerMedia Live Gamer 4k, Fusion ioScale 3.2TB PCIe SSD, LSI MegaRAID, 2.5GB NIC, Nvidia Quadro P600. and my main OS is on a 240GB SATA SSD. It works fantastic for streaming/recording and hosting VM's that have servers for Minecraft, UT'99, Rust, 7D2D, Wreckfest and Ground Branch.
Very nice 👌👍
@@philscomputerlab it was nice that I was able to build the whole thing for under $1000 too!
Wouldn't it have been better to cheap out with an x470 motherboard instead? They are about the same price or cheaper than B550 and they should have more PCIe lanes?
Yeah I feel you man. I have a Asus B450-E and for a year I didn't know that my GPU was running at half the PCIe speed (x8 instead of x16) because I had installed the SSD in the second M.2 slot instead of the first.
Just ridiculous stuff with these consumer motherboards.
If you want a real motherboard that actually works you have to go with a WRX80 unfortunately. Which I really want but can't afford it right now.
WTF, that's possible? I've never heard that the first PCI-E x16 slot could even share bandwidth with anything else if not explicitly set as x8/x8 in the BIOS. Or did you put your GPU in the second x16?
Yea this is my main beef with everything below the HEDT rank where there is literally no point having so many PCIe slots because the CPU doesn't have enough PCIe lanes to spare. It doesn't help that both Intel and AMD don't seem to be interested in entertaining the HEDT crowd anymore.
i wonder how the msi b550 tomahawk fares, i assume that it's a step up from that motherboard you are using.
i paid about 140$ for mine on a sale in June 2021
Reminds me of when the USB hubs used IRQs that basically meant you couldn't use all the slots and/or not use your Sound Blaster in MS-DOS...
I would not expect it to be so limited for sure. I don't like these limitations, I believe some of them are artificial to get you to spend more on the higher tier. I know that "if it has a bios, you flash it" usually 😆, but in any case if you haven't it might be something. Cheers Phil, good luck.
agree, graphic cards like rx6500xt is a clear example. you are forced to use b550 board(pcie 4.0) otherwise the performance will be crippled with b450(pcie 3.0)
Most of these limitations have to do with how many pcie lanes the CPU itself supports. If you want to use more lanes than what the CPU supports, you have to use a PCIe switch chip on the motherboard, which will allow more devices to be connected at the same time, but won't increase the bandwidth in and out of the CPU itself. They're not really artificially limited, unless you're of the impression that all CPUs should have as many PCIe lanes as a server CPU.
Nope, these are not artificial, at least not in the case of the B550 chipset. It's basically a B450 chipset with PCIe3 enabled. And all AMD chipsets and also Intel chipsets until 10th gen only have 4 PCIe lanes for the chipset connection. Not sure how the bandwidth requirements for the capture card is, but if you have a network connection, several USB connections and a capture card running, 4GB/s will simply not be enough.
And don't think Intel would be better. Until 10th gen, Intel CPUs had 20 PCIe3 lanes. 16 for the GPU, 4 for the chipset connection. NVMe SSDs were connected to the chipset.
@@stale2665 That's the point, market segmentation. If you need bandwidth to the CPU, both Intel and AMD will require you to buy a HEDT platform.
Personally I have built a few budget gaming pc's using the B550 chipset and only encountered this once as a customer wanted both nvme's populated but also an add in sound card and wifi card it was a no go ... sorted by single larger capacity nvme and like you did disabled the onboard nic... my main rig is X570 with ryzen 9 5950X no issues although I don't use add I cards other than GPU all mvme slots are used but only 2 sata
Thats indeed the reason why many people like to use old server/workstation hardware, like the 2011-v3 socket you had before. the single-core performance becomes atrocious by todays standards, but you get much more pcie-e lanes and lots of cheaply to populate memory slots. especially the first gen threadripper or epyc generation it noteworthy for that. recently there are high end board + threadripper 1920/1950 combos for around 250€ up on ebay.
Me too, I just went with X99-CH8 E5-2680 V4 and 128GB DDR4 ECC RAM. For virtualization.
I have a 6th gen ASUS intel motherboard, look for the H170 pro
it still has PS/2 ports and 2 original PCI slots. it could easily be a retro bridge machine between older PCs.
I also forgot to mention, it has a serial header on the board.
I had an issue like this with an ASRock b350 board where it disabled some SATA ports when I used the second M.2 slot but you had to read through everything very carefully to understand that. I eventually got an X370 board refurbished for about $60 USD off of Newegg that worked a treat.
For capture card, I suggest using secondary PC, with integrated graphics, that have good encoder.
I believe the issue there is the lane count, the chipset only has 4 lanes available, your cards use 1 + 4 + 1, the bandwith would be ok because they are 2.0 versus 3.0 from the chipset, but the lanes are wired, so there is only 4 lanes regardless if you use them in 3.0 or 2.0 mode, the wifi and network each get 1 but your AverMedia gets 2 lanes at 3.0 but the card is only 2.0 and you end up with half the possible bandwith, but by your tests you're somewhat close to 3x 2.0 in bandwith when you disable stuff
X99 is a Workstation/Server Motherboard chipset wich have more PCIe Lanes, AMD's only Workstation is TRX/WRX Threadripper option, Ryzen 3000/5000 have 24 PCIe lanes(x4 to chipset(gen3 on B550 & gen 4 on x570), x16 for GPU, x4 for NVME/SATA)
Hi Phill if you are fine with your nvme being on the chipset you can verly likley take the cpu nvme slot and use a 4x riser to attach the capture card directly.
Intel 11th gen and newer also have these exta 4 cpu lanes.
Ah yes the riser card, yea that could work
Yes, it for sure referred about shared pcie resources, which will cause what you've experienced. So yeah 3 decades of computer building experience do help with some manufacturers that do not underline some important details.
2:22 correction its 8x
Its false advertising and you definitely have a point here.
Many are missing this point in comments. If board has 4-5-6-20 slots and they are physically wired x1,x4,x8,x16.. you should be able to use them ALL at maximum speed and AT THE SAME TIME.
Otherwise if chipset is not able to sustain such speeds, put better chipset in or wire slots accordingly.
This cost cutting bs must stop and I don't care that 90% of users will never run into this bottleneck.
i will stick with x299.... no such issues when you have 44-48lanes direct off the cpu ..
Try pouring eucalyptus oil on it, maybe it will help.
If you really need to have WiFi, definitely consider a motherboard that either has it built onboard or at least has a dedicated 2230 sized m.2 slot for it. The WiFi chipsets that I usually look for and are known to be the most reliable are the (older) Intel AX200 (for WiFi 6) and (newer) Intel AX210 (for WiFi 6E). I recently bought official AX210 m.2 cards from the Framework Marketplace, by the way.
Also, for AM4 motherboard brands, I heavily lean toward ASRock or Asus if I want unbuffered ECC support. ASRock has stated that all their AM4 motherboards support unbuffered ECC for Ryzen (with the exception of consumer APUs, which lacks ECC support), while Asus is mostly a hit for ECC (I know at least my B550-F Strix with WiFi does). I can confirm my ASRock x570m Pro4 and B450m Pro4 also support ECC UDIMMs.
Gigabyte boards are also ok (when I'm not looking for ECC support). I usually stay away from MSI boards as some of their boards I've used in the past would sometimes just randomly boot the UEFI shell for no reason and I'd have to keep resetting.
Have you tried doing bios mod on that x99 to make it turbo boost way more on all cores? Miyconst hardware has crazy amount of x99 videos and modded bioses, if you want to try that?
Yes it works great 😀 I followed the guide from Miyconst...
I'm asking a tech guy I'm following because he has smart things to say if he did his homework
Bonus Video!
I just commented about alternative solutions.
But stealing this responce from reddit.
Got the answer for myself and hopefully it helps with other suffering from this.
The maximum payload for onboard lan/ wifi is only 128 byte and devices in same PCIE lane will follow with the lowest ones. That is why there is no sufficient bandwidth for GC573.
Probably the workaround is to buy a USB ethernet adaptor and turn off the onboard lan / wifi adaptar
Hwinfo can apperentaly show you the payload size.
It seems a bit lacking but worth looking in to.
It explains how you only received ~12% bandwirh by disabling the onboard nic.
Very intriguing definitely learned something just now.
Edit this description makes more sense
"the problem is that PCIe Payload is set per PCIe Switch, so whatever the lowest device you have it will be locked to it."
Still haven't found the mechanism behind it but it does make sense for compatibility.
What a rabbit hole I opend up.
You would need a intergrated nic that supports more than 128 payload size. So mabye a mobo with built in 2.5g would work fine.
Thanks I'll look into this ...
thank you so much for this video
You are so welcome!
It's common knowledge of pc builders that if you need pci slots you need a better cpu and motherboard. Everyone else does not need pci slots besides the 16x.
Hello i have motherboard asus rog strix b450-f gaming but it doesnt have pci express x4 2.0 for aviamedia 4k Live Gamer 4K GC573 will it for on pci16 for this motherboard? or do i need change it to one with pci4?
Yes it will work in the 16x slot but that's usually were the graphics card goes?
That second x16 length slot is wired x8 not just x4 btw.
From their website:
1x PCIe 4.0/ 3.0 x16 slot (PCI_E1)
1x PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (PCI_E3), supports x4 speed
2x PCIe 3.0 x1 slots
I remember the time where Pentium 3 boards like the Asus P3B-f had 6 PCI Slots AND an AGP slot AND an ISA slot.
Yeah, but all the PCI slots shared the same bandwidth. Nothing you'd want to use today. And with more cards in the PC, you also had troubles, although different ones than today ;)
ive seen x299 boards for really cheap that would give you all the lanes you would ever need
ive never had an issue with a motheerboard using problems like this.
"i read the manuals very carefully" You should have checked forums and user comments. Content creation is a higher level of usage and you shouldn't cheap out on it.
Maybe I should have, but if a customer cannot make a buying decision based on information provided, then isn't there something not right?
petty much got annoyed at my msi b450 gaming plus, wanted it cus had 6 sata ports but 2 get disabled by NVMe so coudnt use the other 2, and didnt know the other PCIes that arent nvme or 16x for gpu are PCIE 2, so extra nvmes on pcie1x ran at 450mb, annoying
Good information, thanks. Hard to find a manufacturer that produces a product to the best. There is always something missing/not working. How much have you gained now over the x99 motherboard?
I switched back to the X99 system, but waiting for a faster CPU to arrive 😅
@@philscomputerlab OK, fair enough. I recently bought a X99-CH8, E5-2680 V4, 128GB DDR4 ECC RAM for virtualization. Added 2 AMD GPU RX550 and RX580, 10GB Ethernet and a USB 3.2 5 port card. So far I am happy, even a bit slower than newest stuff. On the other hand it works for what I am doing.
Hey Phil, have you done any test/videos for AMD FX in Windows XP? I don't remember. If not, could be a good idea...
I haven't but the work fine with Windows XP. But I believe the Phenom II are just as good to use. Both work great though!
@@philscomputerlab a video would be soooooo awesome!
I'm planning on a future XP build using AMD FX CPU and asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 motherboard I recently picked up. Only thing I'm missing is another GPU for SLI
@@mOddEdLiKeHeLL What FX CPU are you thinking of using?
@@philscomputerlab I have a FX-8320 and 6300.
@@mOddEdLiKeHeLL Nice. Both are overpowered for XP I feel, so go with the 6300
it's cpu limitation. Ryzen if i remember correctly can use 24 lanes simultaneously.