Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PCIe 7.0 Specification v0.5 Published - Full Spec Next Year

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

  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
    Crazy how 7.0 x1 is faster than 3.0 x16, when you consider 3.0 is still quite good in most cases.
    Not faster, but approximately the same speed. Each step is about double, so the version number works like an exponent. log2(16) = 4 and 7 - 3 = 4. Or, to put it another way: (2^7 / 2^3) = 16


    Leave a comment:


  • back2未來
    replied
    Originally posted by ahrs View Post

    That's what riser-cables are for and the sort of people that operate more than one 4090 at a time are happy with that. From a thermal standpoint you don't want all of those multiple GPUs you have stuck in a hotbox anyway.

    Personally, I'd be happy if motherboards started coming with more .m2 slots. I have 2 in my machine and wanted to install a 3rd recently for increased capacity. I had to buy a PCI adapter to do it and those aren't cheap if you need support for multiple drives. In my case it was just a single drive so the cheap adapter I got from Sabrent worked fine but I hope future generations of motherboards address this. I really don't need so many SATA ports anymore and would gladly trade some of them for .m2 slots.
    [ Sata 3.0 was announced ~2008/2009 and revisions updated up to 3.5 ~2020, but stayed with ~6Gbps; Sata Express never got popular (with appearing on markets with m.2), but could have provided ~2GBps(~16Gbps), while being told requiring significantly increased power compared to serial ATA 3.x ]

    Leave a comment:


  • ahrs
    replied
    Originally posted by pong View Post
    But as the NVIDIA 4090 shows basically the GPU's already just about the size of many motherboards so even if you HAD the slots for more,
    you're not going to have the space mechanically or PSU / cable sanity if you tried.
    That's what riser-cables are for and the sort of people that operate more than one 4090 at a time are happy with that. From a thermal standpoint you don't want all of those multiple GPUs you have stuck in a hotbox anyway.

    Personally, I'd be happy if motherboards started coming with more .m2 slots. I have 2 in my machine and wanted to install a 3rd recently for increased capacity. I had to buy a PCI adapter to do it and those aren't cheap if you need support for multiple drives. In my case it was just a single drive so the cheap adapter I got from Sabrent worked fine but I hope future generations of motherboards address this. I really don't need so many SATA ports anymore and would gladly trade some of them for .m2 slots.

    Leave a comment:


  • pong
    replied
    Originally posted by pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx View Post
    I was planning to wait for Zen 5 or Arrow Lake for my next desktop upgrade, but I got antsy and just built an AM5 / Zen 4 system over the weekend. Last I had read, PCIe 6.0 devices would start shipping sometime in 2024. The bandwidth gains are awesome, but I wish we'd get more sane / useful layouts on consumer devices. E.g. my new motherboard has an x16 PCIe 5.0 slot which sounds nice for future proofing. But I would much rather the equivalent bandwidth from that one slot be delivered by PCIe 4.0 x16 / x8 / x4 / x4 slots.
    Yeah the whole PC platform "architecture" is royally screwed up.

    The apparent model is that a basic PC with CPU+IGPU should be enough for "most anyone" so expansion capability is almost neglected entirely in practice other than by plugging in random slower USB2/3 stuff.

    Then for the "gamers" or "productivity" people, ok, buy a premium motherboard and we'll give you one decent PCIE x16 slot where you can install one GPU and probably have things sort of work mechanically / thermally / electrically.

    Oh, you want more M.2 SSDs, 2-4 GPUs, maybe a couple 10-100 Gb NICs? Several high capability TB / USB4 / type C ports? Too bad for you, you're not getting anywhere near enough PCIE lanes / slots / USBC ports / USB4 ports etc. to basically get away with more than a couple significant peripherals. Maybe if you buy the halo $1200 motherboard you can have another usable slot or two for PCIE.

    So USB4 / newer thunderbolt, newer PCIE4/5/+ are all very nifty things. So is ECC DRAM etc. etc. M.2 NVME SSDs. I'm looking forward to the day when I can actually USE a non-trivial amount (1-2) of such things in a reasonable "prosumer" computer.

    But as the NVIDIA 4090 shows basically the GPU's already just about the size of many motherboards so even if you HAD the slots for more,
    you're not going to have the space mechanically or PSU / cable sanity if you tried.

    Can't we just make PCs scalable again? I remember "easily" being able to get 6-8 ISA or PCI slots on motherboards for modest cost.
    Dual-socket ones also.

    Now the back panel is such a cluster you can't even really see or have room to plug in adjacent USB etc. ports.

    How's this going to work for the next 3-4 desktop PC generations?

    Leave a comment:


  • back2未來
    replied
    [ they prepared mostly always 2 gens of development milestones in advance for display, what makes me curious, what v8.0 and v9.0 (~TB each direction for x16, ~60GB/(s*x1) could keep on doubling bandwidth (PCIe 3.0 ~0.985GB/(s*x1), PCIe 4.0 ~1.97GB/(s*x1), PCIe 7.0 ~15.1GB/(s*x1) each direction lane ) and staying compatible through all versions and 'FEW' (forward error correction) since 6.0; with enabling doubling bw development, they would definitely 'brake records' for bw on consumer devices (for an arriving decade's scale), maybe only challenged by Thunderbolt&USB (~10GB/s(-120Gbps_unidir)_2024)? ]
    Last edited by back2未來; 02 April 2024, 11:33 PM. Reason: adding details

    Leave a comment:


  • vsteel
    replied
    Originally posted by CommunityMember View Post
    The SI issues for PCIe Gen 7 is going to require PCB vendors to shorten traces and add even more layers. It is going to be quite the expensive board (although the server space is not as price sensitive as the consumer market).
    That is why they went to PAM4 encoding. More bits with less frequency, trying to mitigate the high speed signaling issues.

    Leave a comment:


  • CommunityMember
    replied
    The SI issues for PCIe Gen 7 is going to require PCB vendors to shorten traces and add even more layers. It is going to be quite the expensive board (although the server space is not as price sensitive as the consumer market).

    Leave a comment:


  • schmidtbag
    replied
    Crazy how 7.0 x1 is faster than 3.0 x16, when you consider 3.0 is still quite good in most cases.

    Leave a comment:


  • pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx
    replied
    I was planning to wait for Zen 5 or Arrow Lake for my next desktop upgrade, but I got antsy and just built an AM5 / Zen 4 system over the weekend. Last I had read, PCIe 6.0 devices would start shipping sometime in 2024. The bandwidth gains are awesome, but I wish we'd get more sane / useful layouts on consumer devices. E.g. my new motherboard has an x16 PCIe 5.0 slot which sounds nice for future proofing. But I would much rather the equivalent bandwidth from that one slot be delivered by PCIe 4.0 x16 / x8 / x4 / x4 slots.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlq84
    replied
    Originally posted by sobrus View Post
    Still it's better than PCIe 6.1 gen 2 16x16 V202404.5
    This isn't version 0.5 of PCIe 7. It's 0.5 version of the specification for it.. not sure why semver is suddenly frowned upon, since that's what people usually want...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X