Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PCI Express 7.0 Specification Announced - Hitting 128 GT/s In 2025

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    Name a single one that's actually shipping. I've seen announcements of controllers and Samsung has at least one enterprise SSD on the market (2.5" U.2 form factor, BTW), but I have yet to find any reviews of PCIe 5.0 NVMe M.2 SSDs.

    And no: consumers don't need (i.e. can't benefit from) PCIe 5.0 SSDs. There's plenty more headroom left in PCIe 4.0. Intel simply got embarrassed by AMD leap-frogging them on PCIe 4.0 and decided to turn the tables, in Alder Lake. There's no practical justification for what they did, but it certainly had the effect of pushing up prices of Alder Lake motherboards.
    Apacer AS2280F5/Zadak TWSG5 there basically the same PCIe 5.0 NVMe M.2 SSD . Getting them at the moment is hard and expensive. I will give you I have not been seeing reviews of them either yet.

    Not exactly true nothing to gain. There are already M.2 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD that hit the max transfer rates of PCIe 4.0. The M.2 restricted to 4 lanes of PCIe is about the only area that has been hitting the PCIe4.0 limit hard other than the AMD graphics cards where they cut the lanes back way too much on the low end cards.

    Plenty more headroom basically ignored that we have m.2 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD that speed is not really being limited by the storage but by the bus.

    We are new in the PCIe 5.0 hardware.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by brad0 View Post

      High speed Ethernet adapters and high speed disk I/O are pretty obvious use cases and lots of demand outside of HPC or scientific data acquisition.
      This article is about PCIe 7.0, so are you suggesting consumer 100GbE in a 1x slot? Or Terabit Ethernet? 64GB/s m.2 NVME SSDs? There are already interconnects for extreme high performance, but PCI Express is a mainstream standard for "PCs". As coder mentioned above, you're going to have to really improve memory bandwidth before you can even begin to make any use of this technology. Is it really for PCs?

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
        - Lower duty graphics cards to get more storage into the 16 lane slot. PCIe 4.0 1x equals a PCIe 1.0 8x slot. (Not everyone is a gamer)
        This is what integrated graphics is for. It's built into the CPU, no PCIe slot required.

        Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
        - 10Gbps Ethernet, move it off the 4x/8x slot
        10G is not a mainstream consumer technology. Heck 2.5G is barely making a dent. 99% are still on 1G inside the home today.

        Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
        - Extra USB3 ports
        Consumer mobos already have a bunch of these built in already. x1 expansion cards are readily available.

        Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
        - Non RAID SATA ports for JBOD
        Large numbers of SATA ports is not a consumer use case. New PC's use one or two M.2 drives primarily. And existing boards have four, six, or even more SATA ports already.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by brad0 View Post
          High speed Ethernet adapters and high speed disk I/O are pretty obvious use cases and lots of demand outside of HPC or scientific data acquisition.
          Those are not use cases, those are technologies. Technologies that are already prevalent in the workstation/server market, but not needed on a home internet peecee. What is the use case of these technologies for the typical home consumer? I don't see one.

          M.2 NVMe disks provide oceans of performance, far more than most consumers can use. And the new consumer market hotness that 99% don't even own yet is 2.5G which works full speed on even a Gen1 x1 PCIe slot.

          To be clear, high speed disk and lan are both very well served already on workstation boards, and even on 'prosumer' gamer boards. Those are different markets than the typical home productivity peecee.

          If your requirements are for workstation/server or gamer class hardware, and you bought a consumer peecee instead, that's your own mistake. I have SAS RAID arrays and 10G SFP switches in my home, but I don't pretend this is typical consumer hardware - it's clearly workstation/server class stuff, Supermicro mobo's, etc. and definitely not what a typical consumer is shopping for in their home. Remember, the consumer market is a race to the bottom i.e. who can sell it for the cheapest price. Adding features that 99% of buyers have no use for, and will never use, is not a winning strategy in that market.
          Last edited by torsionbar28; 23 June 2022, 09:19 AM.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
            M.2 NVMe disks provide oceans of performance, far more than most consumers can use. And the new consumer market hotness that 99% don't even own yet is 2.5G which works full speed on even a Gen1 x1 PCIe slot.
            You just wrote a lie. 2.5G network card at full speed need more than a Gen1 pcie. 2.5G networking max at least 312MB/s of bandwidth(there is driver overhead) Yes Gen1 PCIe slot x1 taps out at 250MB/s. So this is Gen2 x1 at least and that is without many forms of driver overhead.

            5G networking exceeds Gen2 x1 so this is Gen3x1. 10G networking happens push the limit of Gen4x1.

            Reason why you see a lot of 2.5G that is Gen1 is because they for Gen1 x4 slots. Yes you can get 5G network card to work on a x4 Gen1 slot.

            Of course these are only for single port cards and you have double port cards.

            To be clear, high speed disk and lan are both very well served already on workstation boards, and even on 'prosumer' gamer boards. Those are different markets than the typical home productivity peecee.
            To be real with general consumer boards coming out with 2.5G in the B650 coming this is on a Gen4 x1. If you want the same behavour if you on motherboard 2.5G dies you will be wanting at least a Gen4 x1 slot to put equal Network card into.

            Now of course the fact that everything connected to the B650 chipset is being run by a Gen4 x4 connection to the CPU may not be ideal.

            Remember this time around the X series chipsets from AMD don't have a fan requirement. General consumers like business reliability is important fans on motherboard absolutely don't achieve this.

            Yes wanting room to possible expand network connection if you start migrating out of consumer into workstation work with a consumer board has to be considered. For most consumer stuff I see the B650 with 4.0 will be usable. It has enough that you can push a B650 board into the workstation space a little.

            The idea that M.2 NVMe disks provide oceans of performs is current day future we have GPU Direct Storage. This now means the GPU and CPU can be wanting data transfered from the NVMe at the same time this does change things.

            Lot of general consumer boards end up with GPU inserted to extend their life.

            torsionbar28 the NVMe in the next generation of stuff is going to be the pressure point. GPU now are fairly much not using the full PCIe 4.0 slot. Yes GPU pulling textures for a game from NVMe directly with OS also pulling stuff from NVMe directly is going to exceed the speed max out NVME PCIe 4.0 can provide now. Yes we have NVMe m.2 that can fully fill the PCIe 4.0 x4 they have. Yes you can get GPU cards that have direct storage support and break the system by running out of IO.

            I see a point to PCIe 5.0 M.2 NVME. The change to allow direct storage access from GPU does put a higher transfer speed requirement from the NVME storage. How that plays out we might need PCIe 6.0 M.2 NVME in the next generation of stuff it all depends on how heavy this GPU direct storage access from games and other applications happen to be.

            Lot of general consumers still play games on their hardware.


            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by Teggs View Post
              It does make me expect that various parties will start skipping over PCIe versions eventually.
              So far, each version of PCIe is more expensive to implement than the previous one and largely benefits from experience in doing so. Until version 6.0, they all doubled the signalling frequency, with 4.0 and 5.0 typically requiring more/better PCB layers and retimers to make it work. In 6.0, they enlarged the symbol space and changed to using Flits, which add complexity to the PHY and transceiver. 7.0 is set to reuse that, but who knows where they'll end up.

              Originally posted by Teggs View Post
              If PCIe isn't replaced by that time.
              Who knows, but there's such momentum behind it that it's probably easier for the PCIe standard to bridge to photonics than to get similar momentum behind a fresh standard. That said, PCIe seems to be incorporating an increasing amount of complexity focused on managing the issues related to signaling over copper.

              The whole transition to PAM4 seemed to suggest copper had basically run out of frequency headroom. That they plan to stick with PAM4 is therefore very interesting. It gives me the feeling that 7.0 might be the end of the road, for copper. We'll see.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by s_j_newbury View Post
                This article is about PCIe 7.0, so are you suggesting consumer 100GbE in a 1x slot? Or Terabit Ethernet? 64GB/s m.2 NVME SSDs? There are already interconnects for extreme high performance, but PCI Express is a mainstream standard for "PCs". As coder mentioned above, you're going to have to really improve memory bandwidth before you can even begin to make any use of this technology. Is it really for PCs?
                First, who knows if PCIe 7.0 will ever trickle down to mainstream PCs. Ethernet >= 100 Gbps probably never will, given how long the transition to 10 Gigabit has taken.

                Second, CXL.Mem is probably the best use case & one of the key drivers behind this stuff. We seem to be headed for a world of tiered memory, where you have a some GBs of RAM in-package with the CPU, and those systems requiring further expandability can put more memory out on the bus. This scales better and is more flexible, because system bandwidth is no longer pre-partitioned between memory & devices. It also provides the benefits of a unified, coherent memory model for all devices in the system - not so heavily biased towards privileging the CPU (not that it has much relevance to mainstream PC use cases).

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
                  Consumer mobos already have a bunch of these built in already. x1 expansion cards are readily available.
                  Right. So, for USB 4, then.

                  Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
                  Large numbers of SATA ports is not a consumer use case. New PC's use one or two M.2 drives primarily. And existing boards have four, six, or even more SATA ports already.
                  A lot of motherboards are dropping to just 2-4 SATA connectors. You mostly see > 4 on server/workstation and some higher-end gaming boards.

                  That's reasonable, but those wanting to run a fileserver on a low-cost board might need to add a HBA card for more SATA connectivity. I still do some backups to BD-R and use another drive for occasionally ripping CDs, which chews up 2 more SATA ports. So, the fileserver I'm planning to replace currently has 8 SATA ports in use: 5 HDDs, one SSD for the OS, and 2 for optical drives. The motherboard had 6 chipset-integrated ports + 1, so I had to use a PCIe card for the 8th.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by coder View Post
                    First, who knows if PCIe 7.0 will ever trickle down to mainstream PCs. Ethernet >= 100 Gbps probably never will, given how long the transition to 10 Gigabit has taken.

                    Second, CXL.Mem is probably the best use case & one of the key drivers behind this stuff. We seem to be headed for a world of tiered memory, where you have a some GBs of RAM in-package with the CPU, and those systems requiring further expandability can put more memory out on the bus. This scales better and is more flexible, because system bandwidth is no longer pre-partitioned between memory & devices. It also provides the benefits of a unified, coherent memory model for all devices in the system - not so heavily biased towards privileging the CPU (not that it has much relevance to mainstream PC use cases).
                    Which is back to the 1970s microcomputer designs, including the original IBM PC where the motherboard/CPU card usually contained a small amount of memory, and additional memory was attached to the system expansion bus with the peripherals.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
                      This is what integrated graphics is for. It's built into the CPU, no PCIe slot required.


                      10G is not a mainstream consumer technology. Heck 2.5G is barely making a dent. 99% are still on 1G inside the home today.


                      Consumer mobos already have a bunch of these built in already. x1 expansion cards are readily available.


                      Large numbers of SATA ports is not a consumer use case. New PC's use one or two M.2 drives primarily. And existing boards have four, six, or even more SATA ports already.
                      Ah...you wanted to assess my choices, I see.

                      Well perhaps I want consumer board choices at less money than a workstation or server would provide? That means use cases that are non traditional in a consumer setting.

                      If consumer boards provide a PCIe Gen 4 1X slot and one has an additional need beyond what the board provides, one should be able to meet it, otherwise remove the slot on consumer boards.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X