ASRock Forums : x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... https://forum.asrock.com/ Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved. Mon, 22 Jun 2026 19:07:35 +0000 Sun, 22 Jan 2017 03:26:59 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Web Wiz Forums 12.04 360 https://forum.asrock.com/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=4262 <![CDATA[ASRock Forums]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_images/web_wiz_forums_black.png https://forum.asrock.com/ <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : BTW Jim, awesome graphics you...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22373&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22373 Author: jimgravina
Subject: 4262
Posted: 22 Jan 2017 at 3:26am

[/QUOTE]
BTW Jim, awesome graphics you do. Impressive.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you!  No, i'm happy with the speeds...just was hoping for a little more form the Thunderbolt interface.  

Thank you all!
Jim
]]> Sun, 22 Jan 2017 03:26:59 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22373&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22373 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : jimgravina wrote:USB 3.0 was...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22370&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22370 Author: wardog
Subject: 4262
Posted: 22 Jan 2017 at 1:54am

Originally posted by jimgravina jimgravina wrote:


USB 3.0 was giving me roughly 330mb/s and 287mb/s write.

Thunderbolt was giving me 320mb/s read and 300 mb/s write.


All in all, that USB speed is nothing to sneeze at.



BTW Jim, awesome graphics you do. Impressive.
]]> Sun, 22 Jan 2017 01:54:45 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22370&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22370 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : Thank you so much for you input....]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22367&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22367 Author: jimgravina
Subject: 4262
Posted: 22 Jan 2017 at 12:42am

Thank you so much for you input.  Its definitely a brand new Drive.  Just bought it 2 days ago and is completely empty.  The drives are 2x 3TB Western Digital Se Gold drives at 7200 in RAID 0 controlled by hardware in the enclosure itself.  They are SUPPOSED to be WD BLACK drives but thats another story....

...they advertised BLACK drives on the box and their website but when I opened it they were the WD Gold drives which upon research I guess are a little better suited for RAID and that there shouldnt be a speed DECREASE from the BLACKS.  WD said they recently switched from BLACKS to GOLD because they gave better performance and just havent updated with advertising.  

As far as power...I have all power saving stuff turned off.  Both CPU and Windows Power Plans.


]]> Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:42:09 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22367&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22367 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : jimgravina wrote:It&#039;s...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22366&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22366 Author: parsec
Subject: 4262
Posted: 22 Jan 2017 at 12:22am

Originally posted by jimgravina jimgravina wrote:

It's the new Weatern Digital My Book Pro 6TB external drive which is set up in RAID 0. It has both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt 2. Yes...it's faster than the USB connection, but not by much. I used the supplied thunderbolt cBke that came with the hard drive.

USB 3.0 was giving me roughly 330mb/s and 287mb/s write.

Thunderbolt was giving me 320mb/s read and 300 mb/s write.

Tested with both crystal disk and black magic disk speed test. Crystal disk was giving me slightly lower speeds.

Reviews on this drive was showing upwards of 400mb/s over thunderbolt. I know it's not an allles to apples comparison but thought I would be a little closer to that than I am.


The speeds of that drive can be affected by many things. Reviews test drives under the best circumstances usually, for example the drive will be new and empty, so it will perform at its best. An HDDs speed varies depending upon where the data is stored on its platters, the inner tracks are slower than the outer tracks. If the HDD has been used for a while, it may need a good defragment to keep its data together, more contiguous as it is called.

CPU power saving options cause reduced IO performance, as well as the Windows Power Plan being used.

Since the benchmark results of both interfaces are so close, my guess is the drive itself is the limiting factor. If any HDD could perform at 400MB/s, that would be a miracle, but I assume that is in RAID 0.

USB does not use the same interface to the drive that SATA does, so cannot use the AHCI protocol, which helps SATA perform better. I don't know what the internal interface between the drive and the Thunderbolt connection is for the external drive, it might be the same packet type interface of USB.
]]> Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:22:52 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22366&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22366 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : It&#039;s the new Weatern Digital...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22363&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22363 Author: jimgravina
Subject: 4262
Posted: 21 Jan 2017 at 10:19pm

It's the new Weatern Digital My Book Pro 6TB external drive which is set up in RAID 0. It has both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt 2. Yes...it's faster than the USB connection, but not by much. I used the supplied thunderbolt cBke that came with the hard drive.

USB 3.0 was giving me roughly 330mb/s and 287mb/s write.

Thunderbolt was giving me 320mb/s read and 300 mb/s write.

Tested with both crystal disk and black magic disk speed test. Crystal disk was giving me slightly lower speeds.

Reviews on this drive was showing upwards of 400mb/s over thunderbolt. I know it's not an allles to apples comparison but thought I would be a little closer to that than I am. ]]> Sat, 21 Jan 2017 22:19:34 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22363&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22363 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : What device(s) were you testing...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22358&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22358 Author: parsec
Subject: 4262
Posted: 21 Jan 2017 at 12:17pm

What device(s) were you testing connected to the Thunderbolt card?
]]> Sat, 21 Jan 2017 12:17:47 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22358&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22358 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : So you&#039;re using both of the...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22356&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22356 Author: jimgravina
Subject: 4262
Posted: 21 Jan 2017 at 9:21am


[/QUOTE]
So you're using both of the other x16 slots now?
[/QUOTE]

Yes as I have 2 graphics cards installed.  However, I played around today and removed the 2nd graphics card to test out the Thunderbolt card....

The results were not nearly what I expected them to be so I am probably just going to stick with USB 3.0 as the benchmarks didnt show the Thunderbolt connection to be that much more superior.

Unless i did something wrong, but i dont hink so...
]]> Sat, 21 Jan 2017 09:21:49 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22356&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22356 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : jimgravina wrote:What M.2 SSD...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22353&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22353 Author: parsec
Subject: 4262
Posted: 21 Jan 2017 at 8:55am

Originally posted by jimgravina jimgravina wrote:


What M.2 SSD are you using?
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, after re-reading I can see the confusion.  I have the Samsung 950 Pro...which is connected directly to the small M.2 slot.  Which I guess means I will certainly lose the PCIE5 slot....

What I am trying to do is install the ASROCK Thunderbolt 2 Add in card and the only open slot I have is the PCIE5, which obviously will now not be available.  

Would I be able to install that card on a PCIe 2.0 x1 slot?  I currently have a sound card in there I can remove (dont really need the sound card).

Please let me know, thanks for getting back to me. 
[/QUOTE]

The ASRock Thunderbolt 2 AIC card needs a PCIe 2.0 X4 interface (20Gbps) to provide its full performance.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/spec/card.asp?Model=Thunderbolt%202%20AIC

The PCIe 2.0 x1 slots are 5Gbps, so the Thunderbolt card would be extremely limited in bandwidth, if it would work at all in a PCIe 2.0 x1 slot.

So you're using both of the other x16 slots now?

]]> Sat, 21 Jan 2017 08:55:22 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22353&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22353 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : What M.2 SSD are you using? Sorry,...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22350&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22350 Author: jimgravina
Subject: 4262
Posted: 20 Jan 2017 at 11:39pm

[/QUOTE]

What M.2 SSD are you using?
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, after re-reading I can see the confusion.  I have the Samsung 950 Pro...which is connected directly to the small M.2 slot.  Which I guess means I will certainly lose the PCIE5 slot....

What I am trying to do is install the ASROCK Thunderbolt 2 Add in card and the only open slot I have is the PCIE5, which obviously will now not be available.  

Would I be able to install that card on a PCIe 2.0 x1 slot?  I currently have a sound card in there I can remove (dont really need the sound card).

Please let me know, thanks for getting back to me. 
]]> Fri, 20 Jan 2017 23:39:19 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22350&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22350 <![CDATA[x99x Killer M.2 PCIe question... : jimgravina wrote:Hey all,Curious...]]> https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22334&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22334 Author: parsec
Subject: 4262
Posted: 20 Jan 2017 at 9:52am

Originally posted by jimgravina jimgravina wrote:

Hey all,

Curious about something with my M.2 port and PCIe 5 slot.  I have the ASROCK x99x Fatality Killer 3.0 board and the manual states that if a M.2 PCIe is used, then the PCIe 5 slot will be disabled.  

Is this true only for a PCIe based M.2?  In other words, if the M.2 was connected to a card in which you then add to a PCIe slot.  OR...is it true if you have the M.2 connected directly to the M.2 slot itself.  

Im asking because I need to use the PCIe 5 slot to add the ASROCK thunderbolt add in card and thats the only open slot I have left and need to know if they M.2 drive is gonna screw me...


Thank you!
Jim




I'm confused by what your configuration is. Multiple scenarios are possible, and two flavors of M.2 SSDs, PCIe and SATA.

Are you using an adapter card, M.2 to PCIe slot adapter, which is inserted in a PCIe slot for an M.2 PCIe SSD?

If that is correct, then the PCIE5 slot will still be available.

If you have an M.2 PCIe SSD connected to the Ultra M.2 slot itself, then the PCIE5 slot will not be available. The PCIe lanes are shared between the M.2 slot and PCIE5 slot. You can use one or the other, but not both.

But it sounds like you might have a SATA M.2 SSD, is that true? If so, and the specs are confusing about this, it seems you will NOT lose the PCIE5 slot. Instead, you lose the SATA3_2 port.

What M.2 SSD are you using?
]]> Fri, 20 Jan 2017 09:52:10 +0000 https://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4262&PID=22334&title=x99x-killer-m-2-pcie-question#22334