Tuesday, January 18th 2022

PSA: GPU-Z shows PCI-Express x16 for Radeon RX 6500 XT / Navi 24. It really is x4

AMD announced the Radeon RX 6500 XT and RX 6400 at CES just a few days ago. These new entry-level cards debut the company's first 6 nm GPU, codenamed "Navi 24"—the smallest chip from the RDNA2 family. Navi 24 is barely the size of a motherboard chipset, roughly 100 mm² in die size. The chip only features a 64-bit wide GDDR6 memory interface, needing just two memory chips to achieve 4 GB of memory size. While AMD has been fairly quiet about it, people quickly found out that the Navi 24 GPU only uses a PCI-Express 4.0 x4 host interface. While the physical connector is x16, there is only enough signal traces for x4.

Even the most updated 2.43.0 public version of GPU-Z misreports the bus interface as PCIe x16 4.0 though, which will certainly lead to confusion in the reviewer community who trust GPU-Z to report the correct specs and speeds for their articles. Maybe that's the reason why AMD has decided to not send us a sample this time—a first in 15 years.

Update Jan 20th: GPU-Z 2.44.0 has been released, which properly reports the PCIe bus configuration of RX 6500 XT.


The underlying technical reason for this misreporting is that since a few generations AMD has designed their GPUs with a PCI-Express bridge inside, which makes things much more flexible and helps to separate the IP blocks. The bridge distributes the transferred data to the various subdevices, like the graphics core and HD Audio interface, as displayed in the screenshot above. Internally the GPU core operates at x16, despite the external PCIe 4.0 interface, only the link between the GPU's integrated bridge and the motherboard runs at x4. Since current GPU-Z does not know that the running GPU is Navi 24 it asks the graphics core for its link speed and width, which happily reports "PCIe x16 4.0" (instead of "PCIe x4 4.0"), which is of course correct from the perspective of the graphics core. The problem is that upstream a bottleneck exists that operates at only x4. For supported GPUs, GPU-Z is of course aware of such a topology and will check the upstream devices for bottlenecks, but this capability has to be added on a case-by-case basis. This situation also affects the reported PCIe speed, too. For example on older Intel systems, which don't support PCIe 4.0. Internally the GPU always operates at PCIe 4.0, even on PCIe 3.0 or older motherboards.

We plan to correct this with an update to GPU-Z shortly.
Add your own comment

57 Comments on PSA: GPU-Z shows PCI-Express x16 for Radeon RX 6500 XT / Navi 24. It really is x4

#1
Dragokar
I highly doubt that's that the reason for not sending out a sample to you guys.......I also truly believe that in a PCIe Gen 4 Slot it doesn't matter, in Gen 3 it might be a problem.
Posted on Reply
#2
wolf
Better Than Native
As the HUB video has already shed some light on, I do think this card will suffer under certain conditions because of it. A shame really, with an 8x interface and a more sane MSRP and street value, it could've been decent. Just seems like compromise after compromise with this card. I'd rather pay more to get more relatively when anything is a complete ripoff.
Posted on Reply
#3
Space Lynx
Astronaut
wolfAs the HUB video has already shed some light on, I do think this card will suffer under certain conditions because of it. A shame really, with an 8x interface and a more sane MSRP and street value, it could've been decent. Just seems like compromise after compromise with this card. I'd rather pay more to get more relatively when anything is a complete ripoff.
It still will be interesting to see benchmarks if they ever come, if not that is fine too, I am pretty sure my gtx 1070 laptop beats this card, which is kind of sad.
Posted on Reply
#5
Space Lynx
Astronaut
crow1001Shame on AMD.
it does seem like a waste of resources when you are dealing with finite supply chains of usable sand for the silicon, production time of factory allocation which is extremely limited even for old fabs, etc.
Posted on Reply
#6
Prima.Vera
OK, but now the trick question is, if you install this on an old mobo with PCI-E 3.0 slots only, what is going to be the speed?. If is still x4 on a PCI-E 3.0 slot, then that's a problem.
Posted on Reply
#7
ToTTenTranz
A $200 graphics card based on a 100mm^2 chip with 4GB 64bit VRAM, which is strongly bottlenecked by some ridiculously small area savings on the bus towards the CPU/RAM (looking at the Navi 21 block diagram this was what, 3mm^2 compared to 8 lanes?).

I get them ripping out the video encoders considering this was apparently a GPU to use in laptop configurations with APUs that already have those blocks.
I don't get them ripping out most of the PCIe lanes, especially when many of these GPUs are going into laptops with Cezanne APUs that only have PCIe 3.0. Either Rembrandt is miserably late and should be here by now, or the APU and dGPU divisions aren't speaking with each other.

AMD sometimes makes some immensely terrible decisions and this is one of them.
Posted on Reply
#9
windwhirl
Prima.VeraOK, but now the trick question is, if you install this on an old mobo with PCI-E 3.0 slots only, what is going to be the speed?. If is still x4 on a PCI-E 3.0 slot, then that's a problem.
It's gonna be x4. There are no physical lanes for anything beyond that, according to some.
Posted on Reply
#10
Chaitanya
Wishful thinking but I hope this GPU ends up being a failure(given current market its highly unlikely) stupidly high "msrp", too many "compromises".
Posted on Reply
#11
Igb
DragokarI highly doubt that's that the reason for not sending out a sample to you guys.......I also truly believe that in a PCIe Gen 4 Slot it doesn't matter, in Gen 3 it might be a problem.
Yeah, I totally agree, this is for sure a minor misunderstanding, the guys at AMD probably just forgot to check their email, since exposing the truth does not affect this GPU perception (or their image as a brand) in any way... (/sarcasm)

As you said, this is probably not a problem on pcie4.0 systems, but since this card is aimed at low end computers, it is a problem indeed because this has no more physical lanes. If you plug this on a pcie3.0 motherboard, it will run at 3.0 x4. That could be a problem in some cases. Old (but still somehow competitive in the low end) sandy bridge cpus are 2.0, and before you tell me that is too old and underpowered, that is what i would have expect to pair with a gpu like this, and well, pcie 2.0 at 4x is indeed a big problem even for a relatively weak card.
Posted on Reply
#12
z1n0x
"We love gamers" - Lisa Su

edit: In before some rabid fanboy attack me, Jensen Huang is no different, so chill.
Posted on Reply
#13
Darksword
This card is going to be a massive dud. :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#14
Selaya
DarkswordThis card is going to be a massive dud. :shadedshu:
unfortunately even a massive dud will be unobtainium in this market, since theres only one checkbox this product has to tick to sell: [x] it exists.
Posted on Reply
#15
crow1001
Obviously the 6500 is salvaged laptop dies, would explain the PCIe X4 and lack of video decode as that is not required in a laptop as the APU/IGPU does it.
Posted on Reply
#17
xBruce88x
Great job with the PSA. Honest to come out and say there is a potential issue with your software ahead of time, and that you're working on a fix.

Sadly it does not bode well for my pcie 3 system.
Posted on Reply
#18
windwhirl
DeathtoGnomesDoes this apply to both windows 10 & 11?
It's a hardware "issue", not a operating system one.
Posted on Reply
#19
Colddecked
Selayaunfortunately even a massive dud will be unobtainium in this market, since theres only one checkbox this product has to tick to sell: [x] it exists.
AMD is trying their damn hardest to test this theory.
Posted on Reply
#20
birdie
DeathtoGnomesDoes this apply to both windows 10 & 11?
Does physics apply to some operating systems but not others? I don't know, you bet.
Posted on Reply
#21
JalleR
Looks like a Miner card, they only need 1x PCI-E


4x for a 4GB card will be a problem in many situations
Posted on Reply
#22
Turmania
z1n0x"We love gamers" - Lisa Su

edit: In before some rabid fanboy attack me, Jensen Huang is no different, so chill.
that was when they were totally s**t in both cpu and gpu segment, and had to sell 150 usd products to stay afloat, after gaining some performance, they showed the middle finger to the very same base.... but then that base deserves it and sad part is that they will never learn.
Posted on Reply
#23
kapone32
JalleRLooks like a Miner card, they only need 1x PCI-E


4x for a 4GB card will be a problem in many situations
4GB is not enough to make a card viable mining card.
Posted on Reply
#24
KainXS
Looking at some of the benches on the 5500XT at 4X, I really did not expect the performance to get kicked as much as it does even on 4.0 on some titles.
Posted on Reply
#25
mechtech
I’d like to see this tested on a pcie gen 3 and gen 2 mobo to see how performance is impacted compared to gen 4.

I wonder if these cars are going to be mainly for OEMs??
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 18th, 2024 04:48 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts