WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,812 (1.61/day)
- Location
- Gurley, AL
| System Name | Pandemic 2020 |
|---|---|
| Processor | AMD Ryzen 5 "Gen 2" 2600X |
| Motherboard | AsRock X470 Killer Promontory |
| Cooling | CoolerMaster 240 RGB Master Cooler (Newegg Eggxpert) |
| Memory | 32 GB Geil EVO Portenza DDR4 3200 MHz |
| Video Card(s) | ASUS Radeon RX 580 DirectX 12 DUAL-RX580-O8G 8GB 256-Bit GDDR5 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video C |
| Storage | WD 250 M.2, Corsair P500 M.2, OCZ Trion 500, WD Black 1TB, Assorted others. |
| Display(s) | ASUS MG24UQ Gaming Monitor - 23.6" 4K UHD (3840x2160) , IPS, Adaptive Sync, DisplayWidget |
| Case | Fractal Define R6 C |
| Audio Device(s) | Realtek 5.1 Onboard |
| Power Supply | Corsair RMX 850 Platinum PSU (Newegg Eggxpert) |
| Mouse | Razer Death Adder |
| Keyboard | Corsair K95 Mechanical & Corsair K65 Wired, Wireless, Bluetooth) |
| Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 |
While not fully true, they may not be able to make a chipset that supports full PCIe x16 lanes (two each).
With first and second gen pcie cards, 16x wasnt necessary as they couldnt take advantage of the extra bandwidth. Nowadays however, the newer cards thrive with that extra bandwidth. I guess Intel feels a small performance hit wont hurt anyone.
And for the life of me, I would like to know why the bearlake chipset isnt capable of full 16X PCIe lanes. Any Intel knowers out there able to shed light on this?
With first and second gen pcie cards, 16x wasnt necessary as they couldnt take advantage of the extra bandwidth. Nowadays however, the newer cards thrive with that extra bandwidth. I guess Intel feels a small performance hit wont hurt anyone.
And for the life of me, I would like to know why the bearlake chipset isnt capable of full 16X PCIe lanes. Any Intel knowers out there able to shed light on this?
