@JackSted@Lost_N_BIOS , a litte side-topic post here, this one about something working: I added a second 970evo to my Z9 system, mounted it to the Asrock UltraQuad card and was able to access it wihout any hassle. Of course this should go like that anyway, as the Z9 board has the bitfurcation options enabled by default. I still find it very interesing that this feature was available for the corporate branch of socket 2011 systems since sandy/ivy bridge came up, while it was suppressed on the domestic so-called “enthusiast platform” systems. And because X79 and C602 are from the same breed and -if I’m not mistaken- in some cases from the same silicone (with some features deactivated by firmware on X79) this should be seen as an encouragement for those who want to make use of bitfurcation on their X79 systems also. One reason to let the bifurcation feature deactivated on X79 may be that boards for that platform usually have x16 ports integrated which are in one way or another switched or share resources. At least on C602 dual-socket systems you can make use of 40 PCIe lanes that don’t need to be shared, like on the Z9PED8-WS board. However, an unswiched and unshared slot like slot 4 on the P9X79E-WS should be able to be bitfurcated to ×4×4 without too much problems. I have done that on my X79E-Ws already but did not try out the ultraquad card in there. I just witnessed that the ×4 PCIe card which populated that slot all along did still work after activating bitfurcation. I will populate that port with a supermicro ×4×4 M.2 card sometime in the future.
Here are some impressions of the two 970s used on the Z9PED8-WS system.
Again, the theoretical read transfer rate is capped at ~3000 MB/s. I’m not sure if that relates to a cooling issue (SSDs may be too cool, suggested by @JackSted ?) or if the bitfurcation and the loger signal paths through the UltraQuad card cause some lag. I’ll see. No furhter benchmarks made yet. But benching the Evo970 500GB before gave similar results.
Poaaibly because P9X79 is a “WS” board, that or due to it was launched much earlier than the Z9 maybe, so less need to enable those back then… all guesses
Being cheapest at the time the P9X79 I have been lucky in that this board is actualy closer to an vanilla worstation c602 board not offering 4 way sli/xfire with PLX. Funnily enough the first windows 10 install had my chipset drivers as c600 default. And yes it is funny that features in hardware are mostly present across all skews of platform are supressed in BIOS but thats sadly how the world turns, look at the tesla 3 car that has a full sized battery but you pay extra to unlock full battery in software. Hell Intel basically only bakes like 4 different CPU’s but sells them as like 200 different models with all features enabled on the EUR 14000,- Xeons. Anything over 2200 MB/s for sequential read speed, is a good number for the 970 EVO esp. considering filesystem and PCIE protocol overhead, the samsung advertised speed of 3500 does not consider either of those. If all you want is seq. large file performance XFS or even NFS would be a faster file system if you would like to jump down another rabbit hole. A more windows native solution at the cost of a few CPU cycles (not much more then intel RST) is windows software raid wich gave me about 4000 MB/s (NTFS) with 2 of these drives.
@JackSted - Before I got the Ultra Quad I used my first 970 on a plain PCIe×4 - M2 Adaptor Card. In any testing situation, the read speed was higher, compared to any of the 970s on the Ultra Quad. It’s true that theoretical read speeds of 3400 as well as 3000 and even 2200MB/s are way beyond anything I am used to from Sata SSDs. I just find it noticeable that using bitfurcation (or the ultra quad card) caps this rate. And I was wondering what might be the reason for this. It is more curiosity shrug
Hi, everybody. My Corsair did not work, there was no description on the Russian site of the Corsair. European found this: “Supported platforms: Intel 100, 200, X99, X299 chipsets AMD Socket AM4 Platform”. I’ll leave it till better times. Ordered in China, that adapter and bought a samsung 970 pro 512 GB. All set the first time. Thank you!
Hello everyone! I’m sorry, I read this topic in order to understand my mistakes and gather information here on how to correctly set the desired values and where, so that the expansion card for SSDs (Dell Ultra-Speed Drive Quad PCIe NVMe M) works on my motherboard 2 SSD x16 Card). With certain settings, I can boot from the SSD on which Win10 x64 is installed. But the rest of the disks are not visible in the system, only one. From the answer of @JackSted , I correctly understood that it is impossible to do this on my motherboard at all, and that will not help in solving this problem. Click on the link to see the BIOS photo. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Mr5vAV…Ss5AVe5F7eiZySK Or is it still possible to somehow use the full adapter for four SSD drives?
@alex_tech Right now only 2 NVME drives work on the Asus Hyper M.2 x16 Card. I suggest you try the Dell Ultra-Speed Drive Quad NVMe M.2 PCIe x16 Card in the bottom (white) PCIE slot with the first 2 NVME slots populated (with larger drives?) and IOU 1 set to x4x4.
At this moment I am unsure as to what the limitation is to enable correct x4x4x4x4 operation when set on either of the top 2 x16 (electrical) slots I only get the first and last NVME slot recognised. I suspect it has to do with missing devices somewhere in the bios for root ports 2b, 2c, 3b and 3c or that those might need some missing electrical function.
Your bios photo link gives a 404.
Offtopic: For future problems I kindly suggest you start a new thread or stick to one thread for each issue. It is much easier to follow for those that wish to help or those that have the same problem in the future. Right now you’re spread across 3 threads.
I apologize, I wrote in two topics. Where exactly such a problem with separation is, and in the topic where the MOD BIOS was made for my version of the motherboard. Thank you so much for helping me create the BIOS, I express @ Lost_N_BIOS. I moved the link on foto from my other post, they work there. [OFFER] ASUS P9X79 DELUXE BIOS 4801 MOD NVME Dxe4 (2)
Try the Dell Ultra-Speed Drive Quad NVMe M.2 PCIe x16 Card in the bottom (white) PCIE slot with the first 2 NVME slots populated (with larger drives?) and set Advanced \ System Agent Configuration\ IOH Conficuration\ IOU1 - PCIe Port set to x4x4. That should have the first 2 drives show up if the Dell Ultra-Speed Drive Quad NVMe M.2 PCIe x16 Card is anything like the Asus Hyper M.2 x16 Card. Good Luck
@JackSted @Lost_N_BIOS I have my X79-E WS System running Win10 from NVME boot drive now. With CSM deavtivated an Secure Boot Enabled in Bios.
Have no designated NVME Sytem SSD for my Z9PE-D8 WS Board yet. But just an hour ago I got the NVME-Mod Bios flashed simply using Fernandos Method with Afuwinx64 v3.05.04 and the /GAN option.
Ran from out of the command prompt’s box without any issues. I don’t know why multiple previous attemps to flash it didn’t prove succesful… but this time it did.
Thanks to both of you so far, I don’t recall which of you did finally provide the image I used for the Z9 Board. I got it sent from @Lost_N_BIOS , but maybe it was an updated version of one that @JackSted made.
Anyway, I’d be interested in adding recent microcode updates, ME-updates or Oprom- Updates if available.
Greetings,
Hopefully I won’t get scolded for asking this here (it looks like the correct thread for this question…)
Can PCIe Bifurcation be added/enabled on the ASUS Z87-PLUS motherboard?
Thanks!
From this HW generations, only to HEDT platforms like X79/X99 motherboards.
IOMMU /SR-IOV groups
EDIT:
They do since they have their own “PLX” IC chipset and manage the PCIe lanes, this of course on a slot x16/x8 available lanes.
I think this solution is only valid for someone that has a high-end board, with a spare PCIe3.0 x16 slot that will not interfere (split) his high-end GPU on slot x16_1…
Boards with enough slots, i would advise an option of 2 separate PCIe NVMe adapters if looking for a boot/storage configuration, but the main issue on this old boards is trying to get them at least working with NVMe @ 3.0x4 on the available slots and still not to split our GPU… right? Damm hard as most of them get the rest of the slots only as PCIe2.0x4
But definitely not money to spend on a “Plus” board…my opinion only.
@MeatWar
Thanks for confirming what my additional research was telling me (to the extent that I knew/understood what I was looking for : - ).
Do those spendy NVMe adapters (e.g. Amazon.com) solve this problem? I don’t think I’m going there since the whole point of the exercise of modding the Z87-Plus BIOS is to save money! But I am curious.
