# GPU-Z reports Wrong PCIe Version



## chctulc (Sep 27, 2016)

My Asrock 990FX Extreme6 motherboard http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme6/
...is PCIe V2.0.   I just bought 2 new cards 1) Evga GTX 1060 3GB and 2) Gigabyte RX-470 4GB.  When running GPU-Z's render test, it shows the cards running at v1.1.  The RX-470 _correctly_ reports it is a v3.0 card, but the GTX 1060 reports _incorrectly_ that it is a v1.1 card.  Here is the screenshot for the RX-470:  http://imgur.com/a/9EwM3

I am using ver. 1.11.0 of GPU-Z.  Is this just an issue with the new Pascal and Polaris cards that maybe GPU-Z needs a fix for?  (Oddly enough, HWInfo64 reports the same thing)
http://imgur.com/a/9EwM3
I don't think the problem is the motherboard.  My other cards (GTX 980, GTX 970, and HD-270X) all show up correctly when in the Asrock board. 

Does anyone know another pgm. that I can use to verify the version the cards are actually running at?


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 27, 2016)

Might be a motherboard issue unless you go into the BIOS and switch the primary PCIe x16 slot from Auto detect to the maximum supported PCIe speed for your motherboard. I've had it happen on a MSI Z77 motherboard before, caught it the same way the OP did with GPU-Z.


----------



## peche (Sep 27, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Might be a motherboard issue unless you go into the BIOS and switch the primary PCIe x16 slot from Auto detect to the maximum supported PCIe speed for your motherboard. I've had it happen on a MSI Z77 motherboard before, caught it the same you did OP with GPU-Z.


same here on a GA-Z68X-UD3-B3

Regards,


----------



## chctulc (Sep 27, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Might be a motherboard issue unless you go into the BIOS and switch the primary PCIe x16 slot from Auto detect to the maximum supported PCIe speed for your motherboard. I've had it happen on a MSI Z77 motherboard before, caught it the same you did OP with GPU-Z.


Thanks for the reply.  If that is the issue, I'm screwed.  I can't find any such entry in the BIOS.  Under the South Bridge is squat.
It's just odd that it is just the new cards that have this issue.  And both AMD and Nvidia.  My Maxwells and earlier are fine.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 27, 2016)

clutchc said:


> Thanks for the reply.  If that is the issue, I'm screwed.  I can't find any such entry in the BIOS.  Under the South Bridge is squat.
> It's just odd that it is just the new cards that have this issue.  And both AMD and Nvidia.  My Maxwells and earlier are fine.


I was looking at the manual for your board, didn't see anything listed or in the screen shots in the manual. Both PCIe x16 slots should be auto detected, and set at v2.0 by the UEFI.


> PCIe slots:
> PCIE1 (PCIe 2.0 x1 slots) is used for PCI Express x1 lane width cards.
> PCIE2 (*PCIe 2.0 x16 slot*) is used for PCI Express x16 lane width graphics cards.
> PCIE3 (*PCIe 2.0 x16 slot*) is used for PCI Express x16 lane width graphics cards.
> ...


Prefer not suggesting a BIOS update unless necessary, but maybe Asrock has added in the option? Disregard if your already running version 1.40.
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme6/?cat=Download&os=BIOS


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 27, 2016)

Try the gpu test next to the pcie version in gpuz, my gpu pcie freq drops to 1.1 for non game use and goes to 2.0 for game use


----------



## chctulc (Sep 27, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> I was looking at the manual for your board, didn't see anything listed or in the screen shots in the manual. Both PCIe x16 slots should be auto detected, and set at v2.0 by the UEFI.
> 
> Prefer not suggesting a BIOS update unless necessary, but maybe Asrock has added in the option? Disregard if your already running version 1.40.
> http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme6/?cat=Download&os=BIOS


Yeah, already running the latest BIOS.  Same with the gfx cards; latest VBIOS.  I'd just like to know if the cards are really creeping along at 2.5 GT/s (v1.1) or if it is just a software reporting glitch.  I can't think of any other pgm other than GPU-Z and HWInfo that monitors that.



eidairaman1 said:


> Try the gpu test next to the pcie version in gpuz, my gpu pcie freq drops to 1.1 for non game use and goes to 2.0 for game use


I've already done that.  Didn't you check out the link above?


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 27, 2016)

clutchc said:


> Yeah, already running the latest BIOS.  Same with the gfx cards; latest VBIOS.  I'd just like to know if the cards are really creeping along at 2.5 GT/s (v1.1) or if it is just a software reporting glitch.  I can't think of any other pgm other than GPU-Z and HWInfo that monitors that.
> 
> 
> I've already done that.  Didn't you check out the link above?


From looking at the screenshot of GPU-Z with the PCIe power management stress test open for the RX-470 I would say yes, somethings off with the motherboard running the slot at v1.1 instead of setting the slot to version 2.0.

Edit: Maybe the Windows 7 power profile?


----------



## chctulc (Sep 27, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> From looking at the screenshot of GPU-Z with the PCIe power management stress test open for the RX-470 I would say yes, somethings off with the motherboard running the slot at v1.1 instead of setting the slot to version 2.0.


Well, I'm baffled.  The RX-470 is recognized as v3.0, but running at v1.1.  Yet my GTX 970 shows correctly.  I just moved the RX-470 to my other machine.  GPU-Z reports it correctly in that board.
Guess I'll not use those cards in that board.

Edit:  Fixed a typo.  Changed v2.0 to v1.1


----------



## ChristineAndRusty (Sep 27, 2016)

Got a bricked dEll board that always says 2.0 x 16 until I drop a card in it. Inspiron 531, Model ORY206, AMD 5000+, not much of a box but tests things real well. Currently running a Radeon 5570 that is supposed to be 2.0.  It reads just like everything else does, "PCI-E 1.1x16 @x16 1.1". Tried a lot of cards just to see if they work so I can put them in something that kinda goes together (strange but true, they're give aways), I look them all up, print it out, plug it in, do the things it needs to run (both Nvidia, AMD, ATI, a lot of manufactures, like I said this is the tester) and it always reads the same. I was wondering if it is the validator or if it's just this box? When I match them up with the computer that is going to be home for them they register different most of the time-bozo/old/decrepit things people "fixed" and I end up with it because they bought a new computer type boards. Yet thinking about this I notice other boards always register 2.0x16 no matter the card. There again, the board specs say so but the card specs say different. CPU-ID has a graphics section-limited stuff- in it as far as any other program to check it in.
Random thoughts?
(AFTERTHOUGHT: there is a bench program out there, not sure how well it works but they have a free section it's " https://unigine.com/products/benchmarks/heaven/ " like I said, never tried it, it was on a hard drive I had)


----------



## chctulc (Sep 27, 2016)

ChristineAndRusty said:


> Got a bricked dEll board that always says 2.0 x 16 until I drop a card in it. Inspiron 531, Model ORY206, AMD 5000+, not much of a box but tests things real well. Currently running a Radeon 5570 that is supposed to be 2.0.  It reads just like everything else does, "PCI-E 1.1x16 @x16 1.1". Tried a lot of cards just to see if they work so I can put them in something that kinda goes together (strange but true, they're give aways), I look them all up, print it out, plug it in, do the things it needs to run (both Nvidia, AMD, ATI, a lot of manufactures, like I said this is the tester) and it always reads the same. I was wondering if it is the validator or if it's just this box? When I match them up with the computer that is going to be home for them they register different most of the time-bozo/old/decrepit things people "fixed" and I end up with it because they bought a new computer type boards. Yet thinking about this I notice other boards always register 2.0x16 no matter the card. There again, the board specs say so but the card specs say different. CPU-ID has a graphics section-limited stuff- in it as far as any other program to check it in.
> Random thoughts?
> (AFTERTHOUGHT: there is a bench program out there, not sure how well it works but they have a free section it's " https://unigine.com/products/benchmarks/heaven/ " like I said, never tried it, it was on a hard drive I had)


Yeah, I think you may be right.  I believe the cards are actually running at the correct version/GT/s, because their benchmarks are within specs.  But I'd just like to confirm somehow.  
I've used both Unigine Heaven and Valley quite a bit. Didn't think about checking to see if they record PCIe version.  Thanks.  I'll check.


----------



## Adam Krazispeed (Sep 27, 2016)

clutchc said:


> My Asrock 990FX Extreme6 motherboard http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme6/
> ...is PCIe V2.0.   I just bought 2 new cards 1) Evga GTX 1060 3GB and 2) Gigabyte RX-470 4GB.  When running GPU-Z's render test, it shows the cards running at v1.1.  The RX-470 _correctly_ reports it is a v3.0 card, but the GTX 1060 reports _incorrectly_ that it is a v1.1 card.  Here is the screenshot for the RX-470:  http://imgur.com/a/9EwM3
> 
> I am using ver. 1.11.0 of GPU-Z.  Is this just an issue with the new Pascal and Polaris cards that maybe GPU-Z needs a fix for?  (Oddly enough, HWInfo64 reports the same thing)
> ...




My R9 fury x is in a non gen 3 ( gen2 slot) in my asus sabertooth 990fx /gen3 R2.0 Ver.1.x MB amd 8150, the gen3 slots1 & 3 run in Gen3 x16 Load and Idle, but hasnt ran right sence my upgrade from r9 290?? i get better FPS when installed in the black pcie-2.0 only slot and it idles at x16 1.1 but goes to @ x16 2.0 when clicking ? mark, does your Radeon card, have a setting in global options in radeon setting for power efficiancy or nvidia has performance set to util. nv control panel there should be a setting in 3d setting and set maximum performance by (Prefere maximum Performance)

I dont have and RX 470 or that mb so i cant figure it out, check bios setting ...


----------



## Adam Krazispeed (Sep 27, 2016)

power efficancy setting somewhere else, or maybe a bad bios flash, just had that idea...maybe a bug in the last bios flashed ???


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 27, 2016)

clutchc said:


> Yeah, I think you may be right.  I believe the cards are actually running at the correct version/GT/s, because their benchmarks are within specs.  But I'd just like to confirm somehow.
> I've used both Unigine Heaven and Valley quite a bit. Didn't think about checking to see if they record PCIe version.  Thanks.  I'll check.


You could try AIDA64's GPGPU Benchmark. The Memory Read, and Write Tests were the other clues that the PCIe slot on the MSI Z77 board I had was running the primary slot at v1.1 all the time.



https://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/2720/aida64-extreme-v5-75-zip-package


----------



## chctulc (Sep 28, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> From looking at the screenshot of GPU-Z with the PCIe power management stress test open for the RX-470 I would say yes, somethings off with the motherboard running the slot at v1.1 instead of setting the slot to version 2.0.
> 
> Edit: Maybe the Windows 7 power profile?
> View attachment 79343


Thanks.  I'll check when I get back to that machine.  What should it be set at?  Maximum power savings, minimum power savings, or off?


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 28, 2016)

clutchc said:


> Thanks.  I'll check when I get back to that machine.  What should it be set at?  Maximum power savings, minimum power savings, or off?


You could switch to the High Performance profile (sets link management off) to try it out.

*Early Warning*
I doubt it's going to make a difference since the motherboard is responsible for the setting during POST.


----------



## chctulc (Sep 28, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> You could switch to the High Performance profile (sets link management off) to try it out.
> 
> *Early Warning*
> I doubt it's going to make a difference since the motherboard is responsible for the setting during POST.


The default setting for max power savings was "off" while in High Performance Mode.  But it didn't make any difference what I chose.  The RX-470 still seems to run at v1.1 mode.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 28, 2016)

clutchc said:


> The default setting for max power savings was "off" while in High Performance Mode.  But it didn't make any difference what I chose.  The RX-470 still seems to run at v1.1 mode.


Sorry about that, it was a last ditch effort before moving on to guessing what else besides the motherboard.


----------



## chctulc (Sep 28, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> Sorry about that, it was a last ditch effort before moving on to guessing what else besides the motherboard.


Thanks for the suggestions all the same.  It appears to be related solely to this Asrock board.  I've tried both of those "problem cards" in my 2 x Intel boards and my 2 x other AMD boards.  All allow the card to run at either 2.0 or 3.0 as expected.  I'm going to start a ticket at Asrock and see if they have any ideas.


----------



## ChristineAndRusty (Oct 1, 2016)

biffzinker said:


> You could try AIDA64's GPGPU Benchmark. The Memory Read, and Write Tests were the other clues that the PCIe slot on the MSI Z77 board I had was running the primary slot at v1.1 all the time.
> View attachment 79349
> https://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/2720/aida64-extreme-v5-75-zip-package



THANK YOU!
That is what I've been looking for, when I get some good reads off the Capeverde and the Oland I'll post them. (screen shots are a little tough when some needed keys are missing, I am gonna make the leap backward to my old big round connector keyboard-Zenith-it has never failed me-wireless Goodwill $2.00 ill-Logitech™ junk....   ). It may be a pain in the elbow, BUT, I had to do it for a while when 7 came out. Every time it would update it would re do my power settings to their idea of what I wanted. Electricity being free as it is (yeah, about that...) I would have to go into power and turn it up all the way and on some would have to reset it each time with AMD Overdrive or the MSI's After Burner-non Riva tuner as I can't figure out how to maximize it for SETI anyway, I have it but I turn it off so I don't keep getting a "Can't connect to server". But that was the only way I could do it and now it updates the same, something changed in the updates that leave those settings alone after SP1. In setup not all bios's will have it, but I can adjust voltages up to the "just about to much" point and Windows will not play with that. There again, days of research and trial and error. It has produced results, One an AMD M3A78-CM, highly tunable, and a Gigabyte six core ECC I think it is, really confusingly highly tunable, somewhat unstable at the extremes, but I haven't fried anything yet either, kinda don't want to turn it all the way up. I did get a bios update on one of these that changed how the card read, something like "3.0x16 @ 16x2.0" but the thing was toast when I got it and only ran sporadically with a GT740 2gb DDR3. Bios update got it to fire without going through setup every time, ran like crazy, and a moth ended it all finally. It read "1.0x8 @ 16x1.0" in the beginning. It was not AGP either. It was a single PCI card slot Foxcom. I got it somewhere and I will get around to framing it, hangin it, and may the poor moth rest in peace-bless him for saving me from giving up................thank you for the tool tip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 1, 2016)

I went back, and tested for you @ChristineAndRusty since you replied (thanks for clicking on the Thanks button.) 

I artificially limited my primary PCIe x16 slot to the older v1.1, and v2.0 past standards so you have some reference bandwidth numbers to go by. There will of course be a slight (small) variation when comparing different chipset platforms between motherboards to keep mind but it shouldn't deviate much if any.

*Entered UEFI (or legacy BIOS) and switched PCIe to v1.1*

 


*Same as above but switched PCIe to v2.0*

 

*Older post in this thread is at PCIe v3.0*






*Edit: *


ChristineAndRusty said:


> (screen shots are a little tough when some needed keys are missing,


If you push the Alt+Print Screen keys the main/active window for the program will be copied to the clipboard. Then all you need to do is open paint or favorite image editor, new file or paste the image, and save the file to disk.


----------

