Question Using PCI 5.0 NVMe SSDs on Z890 motherboards ?

[Elvorfin]

Hi all. I am in the process of specing a DIY gaming build which I haven't done for a number of years so it's time to get back up to speed with what's what in the hardware scene. I've been reading the TH article on the new Arrow lake processors which states there are 24 lanes for PCI-E 5 and 20 for 4. However having been looking at specs for motherboard manufactures i am a little confused.

For example, on the Gigabyte site for the AORUS boards there is a statement "The PCIEX16 slot can only support a graphics card or an NVMe SSD" I am trying to work out whether putting a PCI-E 5.0 NVMe drive in will compromise the channels available to my GPU (like it does on the Z790 chipset) or whether i will dtill get the full x16 PCI-E 5.0 for the GPU.

I think i may have just confused myself but would like it confirmed before I drop any cash on hardware.

 

[Lutfij]

Welcome to the forums, newcomer!

A lot of people are overthinking the PCIe 5.0 part of the builds. As it stands you won't be able to tell the difference between a PCIe5.0 and 4.0 drive/GPU unless you're going for a synthetic benchmark. Real world scenarios, you're good with PCIe 4.0 gear for both storage and graphics.

 

[Elvorfin]

To be honest I'm not sure that i really would notice the difference between 4.0 and 5.0 drive wise, it was just that when i delved into the small print on the Z790 specs I started to wonder if I was digging a hole for myself with strangling the performance of a 2 grand video card (RTX4090).

From the research I have been doing today it looks like the LGA 1851 package is going to be dead pretty much as soon as it's born, and the RTX 50 series GPUs are going to be even more stupidly expensive that the RTX 40.

So maybe is should stick with Z790 and an i9-14900KF and save a little green to boot.

 

[geofelt]

To be honest I'm not sure that i really would notice the difference between 4.0 and 5.0 drive wise, it was just that when i delved into the small print on the Z790 specs I started to wonder if I was digging a hole for myself with strangling the performance of a 2 grand video card (RTX4090).

From the research I have been doing today it looks like the LGA 1851 package is going to be dead pretty much as soon as it's born, and the RTX 50 series GPUs are going to be even more stupidly expensive that the RTX 40.

So maybe is should stick with Z790 and an i9-14900KF and save a little green to boot.

In graphics performance, the difference in performance between pcie 3/4/5 only shows up with the strongest of graphics cards and even then is is in low single digit numbers.

Where do you get the assertion that lga1851 is dead on arrival?
Everything new will be replaced; that is how progress works.

New products have some risks for early adopters.
You can expect frequent bios updates.
We are still getting them for the AMD recent launches.

I would have no problem with Z790 and i9-14900K.
You can expect it to work.
On a high end build, I think it is penny wise and pound foolish t try to save $25 or so by buying a F suffix processor.
Integrated graphics is most helpful when testing and can save you if you ever have a discrete GPU issu.

 

[Elvorfin]

My intention on my first pass build spec was not to wait for the RTX50 as the 4090 will more than suffice for my intentions, I was more interested in the increased drive performance, or at least investigating it, on PCI-E 5.0 and i fullyunderstand the pitfalls of going "bleeding edge" with technology.

My comment on the LGA 1851 was based on the fact that LGA 1700 has seen 3 generations of Intel processors and this one will see one. Not withstanfding that I am not in the habit of swapping processors ever iteration, That is just a waste on monet in my opinion as the gains are usually minimal.

To be honest i hadn't realised that the F nomeclature meant that it didn't have intel GPU on chip, as i said (or miht not have) the last PC build i did was with a i7-3930K and a GTX 670! So i may be a little out of touch. Going back to it now as I've been less than inpressed with the hardware in my OTS Alienware.

 

[Syntaximus]

Save yourself some money and stick with Gen 4 drives.

As stated the real-world difference between them isn't very noticeable.
Gen 5 drives also run hot / require more cooling.

 

[Elvorfin]

Save yourself some money and stick with Gen 4 drives.

As stated the real-world difference between them isn't very noticeable.
Gen 5 drives also run hot / require more cooling.

I hear what you are saying regarding the speed differential, and as you rightly say faster = hotter .... usually. Given the number of fans going into this build (11 and 2x360mm radiators) I dont think cooling is going to be an issue.

 

[geofelt]

What is your proposed build?
11 fans seems to me to be too much.

 

[Syntaximus]

I was speaking more to direct cooling actually; gen 5 drives often come with large passive coolers, or even active ones.
A gen 4 drive will be absolutely fine with the thermal pads and cover that comes with a given board.

 

[Elvorfin]

What is your proposed build?
11 fans seems to me to be too much.

HAVN SC420 case
3x 140mm inlet fans
2x 360mm radiators with 3x120mm fans
2x 120mm case fans at rear
Water cooled CPU
Water cooled GPU

 

[Elvorfin]

I was speaking more to direct cooling actually; gen 5 drives often come with large passive coolers, or even active ones.
A gen 4 drive will be absolutely fine with the thermal pads and cover that comes with a given board.

Yes I know, and most high end motherboards have integral heatsinks covering the NVMe slots anyways now.