Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Asmedia 1061 PCIe 2x - Benchmark Failed !

01 Jul 2013   #11
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post
These are the specs of your board. Yes, the board's own SATA ports are SATA II so it's normal that they are worse.

Note the part about "Expansion SLots"
4 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16 or x16, x8, x8 or quad x8)
1 x PCIe x4
1 x PCI

You see how the x16 slots are of PCIe 2.0 while the x4 slot is not (so is a 1.0)? That means the addon SATA III card works at half capacity (it is supposed to be used in a 2.0 slot not in a 1.0 slot, that has half the bandwith).

Since that motherboard states that can run two full x16 pcie 2.0 slots, and you have a single graphics card, I suggest to try placing that SATA card in one of such x16 slots (possibly the one closer to the graphics card) as that would double its bandwith. Then test again and see if it improves.

Btw, this tutorial allows you to scan and upload automatically your specs into your profile with our forum's own utility program. Please do so, as it is easier to help if we know how it is made.
<

Newegg.ca - SYBA SY-PEX40039 PCI-Express 2.0 SATA III &#40;6.0Gb&#47;s&#41; Controller Card

Compliant with PCI-Express Specification V2.0 and Backward Compatible with PCI-Express 1.x


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
01 Jul 2013   #12
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post
These are the specs of your board. Yes, the board's own SATA ports are SATA II so it's normal that they are worse.

Note the part about "Expansion SLots"
4 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16 or x16, x8, x8 or quad x8)
1 x PCIe x4
1 x PCI

You see how the x16 slots are of PCIe 2.0 while the x4 slot is not (so is a 1.0)? That means the addon SATA III card works at half capacity (it is supposed to be used in a 2.0 slot not in a 1.0 slot, that has half the bandwith).

Since that motherboard states that can run two full x16 pcie 2.0 slots, and you have a single graphics card, I suggest to try placing that SATA card in one of such x16 slots (possibly the one closer to the graphics card) as that would double its bandwith. Then test again and see if it improves.

Btw, this tutorial allows you to scan and upload automatically your specs into your profile with our forum's own utility program. Please do so, as it is easier to help if we know how it is made.
2 x PCIe x1
-.-
I read fast I think !

Possible to adapte 1x to 2x
My System SpecsSystem Spec
01 Jul 2013   #13
bobafetthotmail

Win 7 Pro 64-bit 7601
 
 

Ok, ok, my mistake.

This is your board's relevant part
3 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16 or x16, x8, x8)
2 x PCIe x1
1 x PCI

The 2 PCIe x1 are 1.0. So I'm still right.

Quote:
Newegg.ca - SYBA SY-PEX40039 PCI-Express 2.0 SATA III (6.0Gb/s) Controller Card

Compliant with PCI-Express Specification V2.0 and Backward Compatible with PCI-Express 1.x
I think you are a bit confused between PCIe interface lenght (the number of lanes) and PCIe version.
The card linked has a x1 PCIe interface. x1 means that the interface length is short, and there is only one PCIe "lane" (one for up and one for down transfers).

The PCIe version (the 1.0 and 2.0) determines the speed of each of such "lanes". A 1.0 PCIe lane gives you at max 250 mb/s up AND down per lane. A 2.0 PCIe lane gives you 500 MB/s up and down per lane. A 3.0 PCIe gives you 1 GB/s up and down per lane (if both card and slot are PCIe 3.0).

This means that a PCIe 2.0 x1 card is equivalent in bandwith to a PCIe 1.0 x2 card, but the 1.0 card needs twice as much lanes.

"Backwards compatible" means that a PCIe 2.0 card can run at PCIe 1.0 speed if it is placed in a 1.0 slot (and it's actually logic, the faster interface is bottlenecked by the slower one).
So each of its 2.0 lanes will work at half bandwidth, and it will be as if you bought a PCIe 1.0 card.

To get more bandwidth and get decent score in that benchmark you must place that card in a PCIe 2.0 slot (as you cannot really do anything else with the x1 slots on your mobo as they are too slow for a SSD), which in your board is one of the big x16 ones for additional graphic cards. This way even if the card will still have only one lane (as the card is still x1) each lane has 500 MB/s which will be enough to run the SSD.

It will waste 15 lanes, but at least the only lane it uses will be a PCIe 2.0 lane, so you get the full 500 MB/s you so desperately need for your SSD.

Can you please trust me a little and try it? The benchmark will prove me right.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

02 Jul 2013   #14
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

[QUOTE=bobafetthotmail;2451527]Ok, ok, my mistake.

This is your board's relevant part
3 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16 or x16, x8, x8)
2 x PCIe x1
1 x PCI

I will answer later, some training at my job I read fast
My fault the link I sent with the mobo said Rampage Extreme
I took fastely the picture.

So if I understand rightly, you asking to me to use a 16x with a 1x lane device?
I understand the fact of pci 2.0 and lane 1x 2x
I think I just read fast and had to find a solution when I bought the adaptor.
OR maybe read wrong spec...
So my fault lol
I will bench my 6gb sata from marvell even Ive seen many trouble from this controller.
Will se what happen but at this time I cant do for the moment.
I have to re-read what you said
Have to go
My System SpecsSystem Spec
02 Jul 2013   #15
bobafetthotmail

Win 7 Pro 64-bit 7601
 
 

Quote:
So if I understand rightly, you asking to me to use a 16x with a 1x lane device?
Yes, because it's the only way to have it run at 2.0 speeds with that board.

Quote:
I will bench my 6gb sata from marvell even Ive seen many trouble from this controller.
From the specs you linked, they say that drives connected to that controller can't be used for boot drives.

Marvell® PCIe 9128 controller : *1

(and quite a bit below, last line under Note)

*1: These SATA ports are for data hard drives only. ATAPI devices are not supported.

And in general, that controller seems to be crap.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
06 Jul 2013   #16
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

ATA Packet Interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*1: These SATA ports are for data hard drives only. ATAPI devices are not supported.

And in general, that controller seems to be crap.

--
ATA Packet Interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
--
ATAPI devices are also "speaking ATA", as the ATA physical interface and protocol are still being used to send the packets. On the other hand, ATA hard drives and solid state drives do not use ATAPI.

ATAPI devices include CD-ROM and DVD-ROM drives, tape drives, and large-capacity floppy drives such as the Zip drive and SuperDisk drive.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
06 Jul 2013   #17
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post
Ok, ok, my mistake.

This is your board's relevant part
3 x PCIe 2.0 x16 (dual x16 or x16, x8, x8)
2 x PCIe x1
1 x PCI

The 2 PCIe x1 are 1.0. So I'm still right.

Quote:
Newegg.ca - SYBA SY-PEX40039 PCI-Express 2.0 SATA III (6.0Gb/s) Controller Card

Compliant with PCI-Express Specification V2.0 and Backward Compatible with PCI-Express 1.x
I think you are a bit confused between PCIe interface lenght (the number of lanes) and PCIe version.
The card linked has a x1 PCIe interface. x1 means that the interface length is short, and there is only one PCIe "lane" (one for up and one for down transfers).

The PCIe version (the 1.0 and 2.0) determines the speed of each of such "lanes". A 1.0 PCIe lane gives you at max 250 mb/s up AND down per lane. A 2.0 PCIe lane gives you 500 MB/s up and down per lane. A 3.0 PCIe gives you 1 GB/s up and down per lane (if both card and slot are PCIe 3.0).

This means that a PCIe 2.0 x1 card is equivalent in bandwith to a PCIe 1.0 x2 card, but the 1.0 card needs twice as much lanes.

"Backwards compatible" means that a PCIe 2.0 card can run at PCIe 1.0 speed if it is placed in a 1.0 slot (and it's actually logic, the faster interface is bottlenecked by the slower one).
So each of its 2.0 lanes will work at half bandwidth, and it will be as if you bought a PCIe 1.0 card.

To get more bandwidth and get decent score in that benchmark you must place that card in a PCIe 2.0 slot (as you cannot really do anything else with the x1 slots on your mobo as they are too slow for a SSD), which in your board is one of the big x16 ones for additional graphic cards. This way even if the card will still have only one lane (as the card is still x1) each lane has 500 MB/s which will be enough to run the SSD.

It will waste 15 lanes, but at least the only lane it uses will be a PCIe 2.0 lane, so you get the full 500 MB/s you so desperately need for your SSD.

Can you please trust me a little and try it? The benchmark will prove me right.
How willl be safe the setup a card 1x lane in a 16 x lane -.-
My System SpecsSystem Spec
06 Jul 2013   #18
bobafetthotmail

Win 7 Pro 64-bit 7601
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by p1tcho0 View Post
ATA Packet Interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*1: These SATA ports are for data hard drives only. ATAPI devices are not supported.
ATA hard drives and solid state drives do not use ATAPI.
Yes, but the sentence before the one for ATAPI says that the port supports such drives ONLY if they are data drives. Not system drives.
There is noting stopping you from trying to do it, but if the spec sheet of your board says it's not supported, then it's likely not going to work.

Quote:
How willl be safe the setup a card 1x lane in a 16 x lane -.-
Your distrust is hurting my feelings. No seriously, I know what I'm saying. PCIe is designed to be smart enough enough for that to work without any issue.

From wikipedia article about pci-e please see the bolded parts:


Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by wikipedia
A connection between any two PCIe devices is known as a link, and is built up from a collection of one or more lanes. All devices must minimally support single-lane (×1) link. Devices may optionally support wider links composed of 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, or 32 lanes. This allows for very good compatibility in two ways:
  • A PCIe card physically fits (and works correctly) in any slot that is at least as large as it is (e.g., an ×1 sized card will work in any sized slot);
  • A slot of a large physical size (e.g., ×16) can be wired electrically with fewer lanes (e.g., ×1, ×4, ×8, or ×12) as long as it provides the ground connections required by the larger physical slot size.
In both cases, PCIe negotiates the highest mutually supported number of lanes. Many graphics cards, motherboards and bios versions are verified to support ×1, ×4, ×8 and ×16 connectivity on the same connection.
And googling Will a x1 pcie fit in a x16 slot? turns tons of positive answers, even people that ran x16 graphic cards on x1 or x4 Pci-e slots and made a video about it (slight slot modification).
Or people that run 4 cards each from a x1 slot for bit-mining (using the graphic cards as badass calculators to do very hard math, their game performance would totally suck with a x1 slot)
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 Jul 2013   #19
p1tcho0

Windows 7 64 BIT
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by p1tcho0 View Post
ATA Packet Interface - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*1: These SATA ports are for data hard drives only. ATAPI devices are not supported.
ATA hard drives and solid state drives do not use ATAPI.
Yes, but the sentence before the one for ATAPI says that the port supports such drives ONLY if they are data drives. Not system drives.
There is noting stopping you from trying to do it, but if the spec sheet of your board says it's not supported, then it's likely not going to work.

Quote:
How willl be safe the setup a card 1x lane in a 16 x lane -.-
Your distrust is hurting my feelings. No seriously, I know what I'm saying. PCIe is designed to be smart enough enough for that to work without any issue.

From wikipedia article about pci-e please see the bolded parts:



Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by wikipedia
A connection between any two PCIe devices is known as a link, and is built up from a collection of one or more lanes. All devices must minimally support single-lane (×1) link. Devices may optionally support wider links composed of 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, or 32 lanes. This allows for very good compatibility in two ways:
  • A PCIe card physically fits (and works correctly) in any slot that is at least as large as it is (e.g., an ×1 sized card will work in any sized slot);
  • A slot of a large physical size (e.g., ×16) can be wired electrically with fewer lanes (e.g., ×1, ×4, ×8, or ×12) as long as it provides the ground connections required by the larger physical slot size.
In both cases, PCIe negotiates the highest mutually supported number of lanes. Many graphics cards, motherboards and bios versions are verified to support ×1, ×4, ×8 and ×16 connectivity on the same connection.
And googling Will a x1 pcie fit in a x16 slot? turns tons of positive answers, even people that ran x16 graphic cards on x1 or x4 Pci-e slots and made a video about it (slight slot modification).
Or people that run 4 cards each from a x1 slot for bit-mining (using the graphic cards as badass calculators to do very hard math, their game performance would totally suck with a x1 slot)
Maybe positive and how dangerous will be the setup !
My System SpecsSystem Spec
07 Jul 2013   #20
bobafetthotmail

Win 7 Pro 64-bit 7601
 
 

Did you read the wikipedia article?
No danger at all.
PCI-e is designed to be able to do that without issues.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Asmedia 1061 PCIe 2x - Benchmark Failed !




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
ASMEDIA USB 3.0 driver
i need this driver for the latest version and cant seem to find it. ASMEDIA ASM104x USB 3.0 host controller driver. Hardware IDs: PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_1042&SUBSYS_84881043&REV_00 PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_1042&SUBSYS_84881043 PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_1042&CC_0C0330 PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_1042&CC_0C03
Drivers
ASMedia Controller?
Hi guys :) I'm looking at getting an Asus z87 Pro mobo for my first build. I see that there are 2 SATA ports on the mobo that are controlled by the AS Media Controller. What does this mean? What does it do? Thanks guys :)
Hardware & Devices
Running PCIe 3.0 Graphics Card on PCIe 2.0?
I'm strongly considering a P9X79 WS MOBO for the 40-48 PCIe lanes it has available (depending on who you are talking to; I want to run a GPU, an LSI Internal SATA/SAS 9211-8i 6Gb/s PCI-Express 2.0 RAID Controller Card, a couple of TV tuners and a WiFi card). Because of space constraints in the...
Graphic Cards
pcie 2.0 video card on pcie 1.1 slot
I am planning to upgrade my video card. I saw this one from Nvidia. Geforce GTS 450. I checked the specs and i saw the "bus" and it says PCI-E 2.0 x 16. My motherboard(Asus P5G41T-MLX3) has PCIe x16. I also have researched that the PCIE is backward compatible meaning the GTS 450 is compatible with...
Graphic Cards
Computer Can't Find A PCIe Device (UAD 2 Quad PCIe Card)
Hello! I have a UAD Quad PCIe card (A card for music making, not a soundcard tho), which my computer can't find. It has a LED light that indictates that it's getting power from the computer and so on. System: Windows 7 32bit Proffesional Motherboard: Asus M4N68T CPU: AMD Phenom 3Ghz (4x)
Hardware & Devices
Is there a diiference beetween PCIe x16 and PCIe x16 2.0
Are there both PCIe x16 and PCIe x16 2.0 cards/slots out there ? If so will a PCIe x16 2.0 work ok in an regular PCIe x16 ? Thanks
Graphic Cards


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:22.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App