Recent content by integer

So I moved the RTX 3080 to the x4 PCIe 4.0 slot. And ... performance was the same as the x16 slot! Couldnt believe it. Scored 16800 in Timespy. So looks like I'll keep it there and have the x16 available for Quad NVME :)

Hmm I think it's fine. Cos I believe PCI 4.0 backward compatible with 3.0. IE if you plug a 4.0 device into a 3.0 connector, it just operates as 3.0.

My answer may disappoint cos I'm kinda doing the whole SFF thing on easy using an Asus x570 mATX board. 😂 Interesting didn't know that . Thanks

Haha, no takers it seems. Well guess I gotta just try it and benchmark then!

Yeah maybe 28GB/s is too much wishful thinking. That said, the 15000mb/s from that post you sent was using a phison e16 ssd. Those tend to be around 5GB/s max for seq read. whereas the sn850 is using WD's own proprietary controller and pulls off 7GB/s on the same test. So 7*4*0.75 = 21GB/s...

" single server nvme" - not sure I understand that phrase. Quad nvme should be able to get close to 4x performance. I'm hoping for a 25000MB/s on seq read on Crystalmark. The Sn850 has a read of 7000MB/s and 5000MB/s write. Utter insansnity, and I want to dial it up to the max cos why not...

Anyone considered running a new PCIe 4.0 GPU on a x4 4.0 slot? I'm on X570 so limited to 20 lanes. (Threadripper is great for lanes, but it's big, expensive, and slow on singlecore. so 5000 series + x570 it is) Anyhow, the primary x16 4.0 slot seems like a bit of a waste for a 4.0 GPU equipped...

I went with Cerberus but was so conflicted about whether to go with X. Anyone committed one way then switched later? Upcoming build is 5950x/rtx 3080/sf750/x570 pro4 matx, and if I can make it a 4x4x4x4x quad WD sn850 nvme array. Cerberus X seems like the way to go cos you have more options...

I'm in a similar situation to AP, though running a regular 5900x in a ASRock x570 Pro4 mATX board, not an APU. So my current thinking of running the GPU in the 4x (16 physical) slot (3rd one). Now usually that would be crazy talk. However since its gen 4.0 I'm guessing its similar in data rate...

I see sliger.com upsells a Asetek branded AIO the 670LS. Can't seem to find much on this in the way of reviews. It;s 27mm vs 30mm thickness for the NZXT x52. Kinda conflicted which AIO to go for in this case. It will be a fairly dense build, 3080 + 5950x and quad nvme AIC card so space gonna be...

Ahh good catch, I missed that. Hmm so I wonder if it would be possible with 15mm thick 120's instead? Cos I see he's using 25mm. Or you reckon the MB would still need to be moved down? I really like the top mounted rad. After watching that now infamous Gamers Nexus video on AIO placement, kinda...

Oh nice to know that undervolt is available on the beta. On the topic of cooling, wonder if there's a reason folks aren't doing more top mounted AIO's? Seems like it should be popular and heck even the default!. I know it's not officially supported, but dont see why it cant be done if you...

Anyone rocking an mATX board in the cerberus? I'm hoping to pull of a dense system. So a 5950x and a 3080 using ASrock X570M board to keep it together. CPU prob water, and GPU maybe air? Wondering where to place things, and even if it can be done. Like can you have a side 240 Rad with an mATX...

Thanks for update on the new AMD Ryzen chips. My 5800 on the way too. Also you might want to consider an undervolt if you haven't already. EDIT: nm, I see undervolting is currently temporarily suspended on 5000. Should be coming with an AGESA update though in the future...

I really love the high airflow design of the SM580, but need also need mATX. Anyone know if it's possible to have a Cerberus with this style of of side vent?