Andreas_Wolf wrote:
>> What were you trying to do then by giving that reply?
>> Where's the connection to my specific questions?

> I was raising a point based on the the models of video card that Jim
> talks about using so that reply was really pointed in his direction .

Okay, so you hit the wrong "Reply" button and quoted the wrong message twice

> if I understand correctly everything is going to pass through 4 lanes to the cpu .

Yes, that's what I wrote in comment #40 of this thread, two weeks ago in that other thread and two months ago in yet another thread

> What would the impact of say transferring data from a drive attached to a
> pciex4 sata 3 card to a drive attached to a pciex1 sata 2 card while playing
> audio from internet radio with a PCI based network card and pciex1 Audio card ?

As I wrote in comment #40, I *think* that the bridge and the SATA3 card could negotiate to use only 2 of the 4 connected lanes, which would still be 67% more bandwidth than required for full-speed SATA3. In your scenario, this would leave x2 bandwidth for the x1 SATA2 card, the x1 audio card and the x1 PCI bridge (with the NIC). This means that the 4 input lanes would have to be multiplexed to 5 output lanes, so bandwidth would likely not be enough to sustain full speed for all cards anymore.
I don't know what would happen, but I can imagine that the x2 connection between bridge and SATA3 card would be re-negotiated to x1, resulting in reduction to 83% SATA3 speed, but freeing one more lane so that there are 3 lanes for the other three cards connected by x1.

> If you transfer via the pciex4 to the onboard sata no problem ? or if you do the
> internet radio and transfer from the pciex1 to the onboard sata also no problem ? .

I guess so.