HP Omen 880-160se desktop owners with 8700k help

[Marc_L_NY]

I did not mean to infer that two separate distinct BIOS’s are needed.  There is currently only one BIOS version and it does not support any single GPU in x16. If HP decides to create a new BIOS version, it will support a single GPU in x16. Dual GPU’s (SLI) in x8 or single GPU in x8 is currently what’s configured. This is a defect that should have been corrected prior to release.

[FattysGoneWild]

I could never be convinced HP did not know about this. They tried to pull a fast one and got caught red handed. How can ANY legit reviewer not mention or find this being a true "gamer". I found it right away. I see no reason why this could not be adressed through a bios update. The hardware is there to physically do it. This does not seem to be a high priroty though for HP/Omen team. 

I asked a youtuber what their card shows when running and its at x8. They have a 7700k so this has carried over to the 8700k machines as well. TISK TISK HP!

[aleksnordman]

this motherboard 8x only !

HP decived us

[Howie411]

Well here you go,  below email I received from the Executive Esclation Folks.    (In short, its not something they can fix.    Its a nice machine but I'm going to return mine.   Sorry, I can't except a gaming machine that has a major flaw even if it only would be a 1%-3% performance hit.   Its totally unacceptable.

"Our engineering team has determined that this can’t be resolved via a BIOS update.  As you noted, the unit has 2 slots, and the current design runs both slots at 8x speed. 

We do regret that our Product Specification sheet did not clearly communicate the state of each slot, and will be updating the specs sheet to reflect this.  We thank you for bringing this to our attention and as you might expect, our engineering team will look at opportunities in future to provide 16x support."

[Marc_L_NY]

If HP does not provide a BIOS update to fix this defect (which I believe would solve this issue), I recommend folks that are not satisfied and still in their return window to return their desktops (like I did).

For folks that are not in their return window and are not satisfied, I would suggest they:

1) Request to reopen their return window; OR... 

2) Request an additional matching GPU (gratis); OR... 

3) Request a new MOB with installation (gratis); OR...

4) Initiate a class action proceeding against HP for their misrepresentation and for any damages you may have incurred.

[Big_Dave]

I would be very suprised if a BIOS update doesn't correct the problem.  If not, this motherboard would be most likely the only one in industry with an 8x primary video x16 PCIe version 3 slot that I have seen.  This assumes of course that the PCIe x16 slot closest to the CPU is the slot in question and that the other x16 PCIe slot in not populated and that the graphics card is not the issue.

[aleksnordman]

Only 8x. Contacts for 16x physically absent.

[FattysGoneWild]

---

@Big_Davewrote:

I would be very suprised if a BIOS update doesn't correct the problem.  If not, this motherboard would be most likely the only one in industry with an 8x primary video x16 PCIe version 3 slot that I have seen.  This assumes of course that the PCIe x16 slot closest to the CPU is the slot in question and that the other x16 PCIe slot in not populated and that the graphics card is not the issue.

---

Alienware is pulling this same stunt with their newer R7's as well right now. The slot only runs at x8 for a single video card.

[Grzwacz]

Hi FGW

I am baffled as to why any MB OEM would do this.

It does not make any sense.

Graphics cards get data lanes from the processor. All other I/O comes from the chipset.

I build systems primarily using Gigabyte and Asus MBs and have never seen a board from either manufacturer that did not run one graphics card at x16 when installed in the correct PCIe slot and the associated MB/CPU architecture specs indicated that this is the way the system would work .

The data lanes should be hardwired on the PCB. I also think a BIOS update should correct this.

Why not use all data throughput when it is part of the design specifications? Is there a cost saving to be made by doing this?

Again, this does not make any sense to me.

There are chipset I/O design limitations on Z series boards. I have a Maximus X Hero board with two M.2 sockets. The one near the top PCIe x16 slot only supports NVME. The M.2 socket near the bottom of the board supports SATA or NVME.

This dual support M.2 socket in SATA mode kills two SATA ports. If I run a NVME PCIe 3x4 drive at x4 it kills using less than x4 devices in other PCIe slots. I have to run the NVME drive at x2 (will not do this) to install something like a soundcard in a free x1 slot or x16 slot.

So I have a soundcard installed in an x1 slot and use the top PCIe 3x4 M.2 socket only for a 960 EVO.

Tom

[FattysGoneWild]

---

@Grzwaczwrote:

Hi FGW

I am baffled as to why any MB OEM would do this.

It does not make any sense.

Graphics cards get data lanes from the processor. All other I/O comes from the chipset.

I build systems primarily using Gigabyte and Asus MBs and have never seen a board from either manufacturer that did not run one graphics card at x16 when installed in the correct PCIe slot and the associated MB/CPU architecture specs indicated that this is the way the system would work .

The data lanes should be hardwired on the PCB. I also think a BIOS update should correct this.

Why not use all data throughput when it is part of the design specifications? Is there a cost saving to be made by doing this?

Again, this does not make any sense to me.

Tom

---

I was going to mention it could be some kind of OEM cost savings with a few pennys on every board made. No idea. I have never EVER come across something like this just as you. I will give HP a benefit of the doubt this will be fixed by a new board revision. If and when it does. I will be asking to send mine back under warranty for the updated board.