# Pixelblaze plus expander: 8 or 9 outputs?

**URL:** <https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Tags:** beginner\
**Created:** [May 31, 2026, 3:56am UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697 "2026-05-31T03:56:10Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bpilat](https://forum.electromage.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/e9a140/32.png) [@Bpilat](https://forum.electromage.com/u/Bpilat)\
**Post date:** [May 31, 2026, 3:56am UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697/1 "2026-05-31T03:56:10Z")

</div>

When using a Pixelblaze and one expander, is the Pixelblaze’s one output available to control one string of pixels AND provide signal to the expander?

I’m curious if the total outputs of a Pixelblaze plus one expander is 8 or 9. Thanks!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wizard](https://forum.electromage.com/user_avatar/forum.electromage.com/wizard/32/4_2.png) [@wizard](https://forum.electromage.com/u/wizard)\
**Post date:** [May 31, 2026, 3:58am UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697/2 "2026-05-31T03:58:38Z")

</div>

Hi @Bpilat ,  
It does take the output from PB, so it becomes 8, not 9. You can add additional output expanders after that to add 8 at a time that share the same output from PB. So if you really need 9, 2 expanders will do that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![marcmerlin](https://forum.electromage.com/user_avatar/forum.electromage.com/marcmerlin/32/3637_2.png) [@marcmerlin](https://forum.electromage.com/u/marcmerlin)\
**Post date:** [September 2, 2026, 5:25am UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697/3 "2026-09-02T05:25:04Z")

</div>

@Bpilat please note that you will be limited by the bandwidth of the expander as well as the limited speed of the PB in generating lots of pixels, so unless you wanted an expander for wiring reasons and star wiring patterns, the expander is not going to let you run more LEDs than the neopixel bus speed limit on a single string (or maybe a tiny bit more, but not by much) due to the speed limitations of the PB itself.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![wizard](https://forum.electromage.com/user_avatar/forum.electromage.com/wizard/32/4_2.png) [@wizard](https://forum.electromage.com/u/wizard)\
**Post date:** [September 2, 2026, 10:43pm UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697/4 "2026-09-02T22:43:18Z")

</div>

This will not be true for much longer. But still limited by expander bandwidth to about 66k pixels a sec.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![marcmerlin](https://forum.electromage.com/user_avatar/forum.electromage.com/marcmerlin/32/3637_2.png) [@marcmerlin](https://forum.electromage.com/u/marcmerlin)\
**Post date:** [September 2, 2026, 11:18pm UTC](https://forum.electromage.com/t/pixelblaze-plus-expander-8-or-9-outputs/4697/5 "2026-09-02T23:18:15Z")

</div>

this is great news, what’s going to improve

1. the raw bandwidth between PB and the output expander? (2Mbit/s was it?)
2. the efficiency of the interpreter/compiler that runs the code so it runs much closer to native C++ and outputs frames a lot faster than it currently does?