Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PCI Express 5.0 Announced With 32GT/s Transfer Rates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Danny3 View Post
    If if it's going to come with the same major downsides as X570 I really don't care about what it's bringing.

    I am already considering to buy a X470 motherboard for the Ryzen third generation (zen2) processors instead of x570 because I don't like the higher power consumption and even if I might let this pass considering the performance improvements, for sure I cannot let it pass the fact that the chipset requires an active cooler.
    I really don't want any noise coming from the motherboard itself.
    And besides the noise I don't want to worry about what happens when the fan get's stuck by some loose wire, insect, dust or when it will eventually die.
    I was just getting to be happing that we're eliminating one more moving part from the computer slowly replacing the HDDs with SSDs and now another moving part comes directly on the motherboard.
    And there's one thing when a non vital component dies and a whole lot different when the most important component dies (the motherboard).
    I plan to keep my new motherboard for around 10 years like I did with the other ones, but with a moving part I bet that is impossible.
    I see the X50 as:
    More power hungry
    More noisy (because of the fan)
    More failure prone (because of the fan)

    The last two are NO-GO for me, so I made up my mind I would buy an x470 motherboard instead.
    If you're that worried about it get the Gigabyte X570-Aorus-XTREME as it's just a heatsink there.

    Leave a comment:


  • ms178
    replied
    Originally posted by Teggs View Post

    Is that a design flaw, or just a consequence of saturating two PCIe 4.0 x4 buses over a sustained period (which I understand is the condition which draws more power/requires cooling)?

    Honest question.
    It could be a bit of both. From what I have heard so far, NVMe-RAID is pushing the I/O quite heavily and maybe that draws too much power or produces to much heat in the specific function block on that IC? As we haven't seen many other PCIe 4.0 implementations, that could be restricted to AMD's specific implementation of that particular feature. At least I haven't heard of the same trouble with IBM's PCIe 4.0 implementation.

    This article here is enlightening still for my point above, that PCIe 4.0 and 5.0 are pushing this technology to its limits: https://www.eetasia.com/news/article...t-at-what-cost

    Leave a comment:


  • Melcar
    replied
    Regarding the X570 chipset:
    - There have been chipsets in the past that have used much more power.
    - The fan is only needed to provided additional cooling under certain circumstances.
    - I see the inclusion of active cooling as a motherboard vendor thing than a fault of AMD. There is no reason why a properly designed cooling setup (heatsinks with proper fins and heatpipes) would not be able to keep this chip cool. Instead of all the plastic shrouds and lights, vendors should have focused on proper cooling. It's not like these boards are going to be cheap (people are already speculating $300-400).

    Leave a comment:


  • andrei_me
    replied
    Isn't there any aftermarket fan for PCH or water cooler block for it? Like the ones we buy for CPU etc

    Leave a comment:


  • ms178
    replied
    Originally posted by andrei_me View Post
    What's the (real) issue with high power usage on PCH and using active cooling solution? To me it sounds like "mimimi"
    It is a reliability issue, and not everyone is comfortable replacing a fan on their motherboard in four years of time (or throw away a still decent board). As I still use an X58 board, that had a pretty hot PCH, too. But my Asus P6T Deluxe V2 managed to integrate a copper heat fan design which went up to the finned VRM heatsink. In all fairness to AMD, if NVMe-RAID is the only condition where active cooling is needed, that would lessen my harsh critique quite a bit. That scenario would be very narrow and I won't expect normal users to be impacted that much as NVMe raid is not a common use case for normal consumers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teggs
    replied
    Originally posted by ms178 View Post

    You have to thank AMD for that engineering disaster as that design was built in-house and - as it turns out - drew much more power under certain conditions.
    Is that a design flaw, or just a consequence of saturating two PCIe 4.0 x4 buses over a sustained period (which I understand is the condition which draws more power/requires cooling)?

    Honest question.

    Leave a comment:


  • lem79
    replied
    I thought I heard something about the fans on the X570 boards only spinning up when needed? (which I assume will be under high sustained I/O workloads, like using PCIe 4.0 SSDs). Might have been one of recent videos by Hardware Unboxed.

    Overall excited by Zen 2 and X570. Hoping to see RX5700 support come to the kernel+mesa soon so I can build a complete new AMD system in August/September.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    HTML typo:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    Code:
    or <a hr[ef="...">coming up with AMD X570 systems</a>,

    Leave a comment:


  • andrei_me
    replied
    What's the (real) issue with high power usage on PCH and using active cooling solution? To me it sounds like "mimimi"

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by xorbe View Post

    giga-transfers
    When I first saw that term years ago, I thought it was giga-Tesla per second.

    We don't even have that many PCIe 4.0 devices on the market, and 5.0 is already announced?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X