62 replies to this topic

[m.oreilly]

the 2.0 has more power to the slot, meaning that newer cards need not have all the extra external power hookups, and along with future gpu die shrinks will give us less power consumption, heat, etc., along with more badwidth, quite a bit, actually:
http://www.pcisig.co...qs/pcie2.0_faq/

[eniparadoxgma]

hog, on Feb 19 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

In my case, considering my video card and my not-top-but-not-so-bad ram, when I'm having slowdowns in some games (read Crysis) I think it's due in major part to my cpu. Then again, even if it's OC'ed high, it's a low-end dual-core. Some single cores might (and probably will) perform better. Couldn't say about yours though, what is it again?

It's a Opteron 148 (1mb L2 cache) @ 2.815ghz. Crysis is actually the one game I'm not worried about. I like it, but I'm not stressing all the eye candy of it because it's still too far ahead of the GPU technology right now. However, I can actually play it just fine on my x1900 on all medium and I think it still looks just fine.

It's anything other than Crysis I'm wondering about: mostly FPS games, but some others.

So MO, then if you have a 2.0 card and mobo with 2.0 slots you're already getting the maximum benefit that you can get via 2.0 tech then, right? And if you were to switch out your motherboards and have everything the exact same other than not having the 2.0 slots, you would not get as good of video performance as you do now because of it? Hmm...well I hope it's not too big a loss, as I'll be using a 2.0 card in a 1.1 slot. I really should've paid more attention to the reviews and benchmarks to see if they were using a 2.0 compatible motherboard with the cards when they tested them.

[m.oreilly]

i dunno if there are any real benefits for us regular peeps atm, maybe more to come in the near future. and as far as crysis, i don't think anybody can run the thing full flat out. i dunno if the thing is just a sloppy pig of an app with "very high settings" enabled, or what.