4 ms·

That's correct of course. But, do you know of some benchmarks showing the real world problems those AM3+ boards can have? I'd really be interested in a proper s

by onli 10y ago

That's correct of course. But, do you know of some benchmarks showing the real world problems those AM3+ boards can have? I'd really be interested in a proper source.

dogma1138 10y ago
There aren't any "universal" benchmark since each motherboard will implement those features differently, different chipset, differently bandwidth allocated to it (USB 3.1 supports from 1 to 8 or 16 PCIE lanes IIRC) even things like the length of the traces can affect the performance. So you'll have to check for benchmarks for individual motherboards by make and model, not all reviews cover USB 3.1 or NVME since many of the reviewers don't even understand that those features can behave substantially differently so googling AM3+ USB 3.1 testing or something would be your best option some reviews do include those tests for example: https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/6106/5/msi-990fxa-gaming-am3+-moederbord-review-usb-31-tests https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/6106/5/msi-990fxa-gaming-am... Overall considerably lower performance and that's against older intel motherboards that do not have native USB 3.1 support either, mostly because of PCIE 3.0 support and substantially better PCIE latency over both the PCH PCIE bridge and the native CPU PCIE lanes. Based on the numbers from this benchmark I can tell you that the USB 3.1 10gig performance on newer motherboards is considerably better than that, just by comparing my X99 (which is also tested in the aforementioned benchmark) to my high end Z170 motherboards with the same storage peripherals. Overall I'm getting slightly better speeds on my X99 setup than they had (probably slightly faster storage) but the Z170 offers anywhere between 20 to 30% better performance depending on the benchmark with the same SSD based external storage.

4 ms·

That's correct of course. But, do you know of some benchmarks showing the real world problems those AM3+ boards can have? I'd really be interested in a proper s

by onli 10y ago

That's correct of course. But, do you know of some benchmarks showing the real world problems those AM3+ boards can have? I'd really be interested in a proper source.

dogma1138 10y ago
There aren't any "universal" benchmark since each motherboard will implement those features differently, different chipset, differently bandwidth allocated to it (USB 3.1 supports from 1 to 8 or 16 PCIE lanes IIRC) even things like the length of the traces can affect the performance. So you'll have to check for benchmarks for individual motherboards by make and model, not all reviews cover USB 3.1 or NVME since many of the reviewers don't even understand that those features can behave substantially differently so googling AM3+ USB 3.1 testing or something would be your best option some reviews do include those tests for example: https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/6106/5/msi-990fxa-gaming-am3+-moederbord-review-usb-31-tests https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/6106/5/msi-990fxa-gaming-am... Overall considerably lower performance and that's against older intel motherboards that do not have native USB 3.1 support either, mostly because of PCIE 3.0 support and substantially better PCIE latency over both the PCH PCIE bridge and the native CPU PCIE lanes. Based on the numbers from this benchmark I can tell you that the USB 3.1 10gig performance on newer motherboards is considerably better than that, just by comparing my X99 (which is also tested in the aforementioned benchmark) to my high end Z170 motherboards with the same storage peripherals. Overall I'm getting slightly better speeds on my X99 setup than they had (probably slightly faster storage) but the Z170 offers anywhere between 20 to 30% better performance depending on the benchmark with the same SSD based external storage.