- Jan 6, 2008
- 9,531
- 0
- 30,780
PCIe 3.0 Protocol Delayed
- Thread starter exfileme
- Start date
- Status
Gin Fushicho
Distinguished
- Mar 11, 2009
- 1,777
- 0
- 19,790
megamanx00
Splendid
- Sep 3, 2008
- 8,216
- 2
- 31,465
I think that it will be a while before network controllers and such need more than 4x PCI-E 2.0 lanes. I suppose it may make sense on the server side of things though.
The best part about PCIe 3.0 is how much more you'll be able to do with just ONE PCIe lane. Think embedded systems, laptops, etc. where space is a premium. Fewer lanes necessary to do a job means fewer pins on chips, which makes the chips smaller, fewer traces on the motherboard, etc. And the power-savings they mention with PCIe 3.0 are obviously an advantage there as well.
IzzyCraft
Distinguished
- Nov 20, 2008
- 1,438
- 0
- 19,290
[citation][nom]7amood[/nom]PCIe 3.0SATA 6.0 GbpsUSB 3.0enough reasons for me to wait before building my i7...hope prices will go down while waiting.on a second thought... maybe i'll buy and i7 then upgrade my motherboard later.[/citation]
The computer industry is such a pain, there is always something better around the corner it's all a matter of how much better.
The computer industry is such a pain, there is always something better around the corner it's all a matter of how much better.
This is probably a bit of a golden age of computing, with the semiconductor companies expressing doubts about being able to get below 20nm without quantum effects screwing it up, this progress may hit a wall soon... Although when I upgrade to my Phenom III 1060 BE 3.4ghz 12-core, socket AM4+, 22nm codename: "pwnville", I may finally have a truly future-proof computer...
[citation][nom]Its_all_about_PhenomIII[/nom]This is probably a bit of a golden age of computing, with the semiconductor companies expressing doubts about being able to get below 20nm without quantum effects screwing it up, this progress may hit a wall soon... Although when I upgrade to my Phenom III 1060 BE 3.4ghz 12-core, socket AM4+, 22nm codename: "pwnville", I may finally have a truly future-proof computer...[/citation]
And then optical circuits would be right around the corner
And then optical circuits would be right around the corner
nachowarrior
Distinguished
- May 28, 2007
- 885
- 0
- 18,980
[citation][nom]7amood[/nom]PCIe 3.0SATA 6.0 GbpsUSB 3.0enough reasons for me to wait before building my i7...hope prices will go down while waiting.on a second thought... maybe i'll buy and i7 then upgrade my motherboard later.[/citation]
if you're going to wait and want intel they have an i9, specs are floating around the interwebs somwhere.
I remember reading about pci-e before it even came out, it was the first true parallelism on home pc's other than raid for your hdd's. I was pumped about it then, and it's seemed to revolutionize graphics power vs. dollars recently. Take that into consideration along with the fact that graphics cards on the market now kick the crap out of most of the games on the market and for around 100 bucks you can make the assumption that pci-e 3.0 isn't needed quite yet.
having said all of that i'd like to upgrade my machine now, but i think i might end up waiting for usb 3.0, sataIII and pci-e 3.0 since they all seem to be hitting the market around the same time time period.
I HATE WAITING!
if you're going to wait and want intel they have an i9, specs are floating around the interwebs somwhere.
I remember reading about pci-e before it even came out, it was the first true parallelism on home pc's other than raid for your hdd's. I was pumped about it then, and it's seemed to revolutionize graphics power vs. dollars recently. Take that into consideration along with the fact that graphics cards on the market now kick the crap out of most of the games on the market and for around 100 bucks you can make the assumption that pci-e 3.0 isn't needed quite yet.
having said all of that i'd like to upgrade my machine now, but i think i might end up waiting for usb 3.0, sataIII and pci-e 3.0 since they all seem to be hitting the market around the same time time period.
I HATE WAITING!
eddieroolz
Splendid
- Sep 6, 2008
- 7,057
- 0
- 25,860
[citation][nom]cdillon[/nom]The best part about PCIe 3.0 is how much more you'll be able to do with just ONE PCIe lane. Think embedded systems, laptops, etc. where space is a premium. Fewer lanes necessary to do a job means fewer pins on chips, which makes the chips smaller, fewer traces on the motherboard, etc. And the power-savings they mention with PCIe 3.0 are obviously an advantage there as well.[/citation]
Exactly! Thanks for saving me some typing
I just wish that PCI hardware would be dead by than. I'm sick and tired of roaming through dozens of cards that are NOT PCIe (in any version) just to find an odd one from time to time that IS PCIe-based.
Graphics cards are only exceptions, but everything else is still mostly on old PCI bus.
To make it even worse, here are some numbers from local shopping-search which specializes in computer equipment:
- one Gbit ethernet card
- one eSATA controller (one port!!)
.. and I'm already on 60+$ hardware.
So while PCIe 3.0 is nothing but positive, never mind when it comes, if 95% of all add-in boards in 2010 will still be PCI cards - PCIe 3.0 won't be important
Exactly! Thanks for saving me some typing
I just wish that PCI hardware would be dead by than. I'm sick and tired of roaming through dozens of cards that are NOT PCIe (in any version) just to find an odd one from time to time that IS PCIe-based.
Graphics cards are only exceptions, but everything else is still mostly on old PCI bus.
To make it even worse, here are some numbers from local shopping-search which specializes in computer equipment:
- one Gbit ethernet card
- one eSATA controller (one port!!)
.. and I'm already on 60+$ hardware.
So while PCIe 3.0 is nothing but positive, never mind when it comes, if 95% of all add-in boards in 2010 will still be PCI cards - PCIe 3.0 won't be important
jimmysmitty
Champion
- Oct 5, 2007
- 21,605
- 599
- 59,140
[citation][nom]T3kl0rD[/nom]They should take their time to do it right since 2.0 is nowhere close to saturation.[/citation]
Even 1.1 is not saturated by a dual GPU solution such as a GTX295 or even a HD4890. They move so fast.
When PCIe 1.0 came out, AGP was still not fully tapped.
I guess that maybe it will be able to provide more full speed lanes or possibly increase bandwidth and make way for 3 GPUs per PCB......
Even 1.1 is not saturated by a dual GPU solution such as a GTX295 or even a HD4890. They move so fast.
When PCIe 1.0 came out, AGP was still not fully tapped.
I guess that maybe it will be able to provide more full speed lanes or possibly increase bandwidth and make way for 3 GPUs per PCB......
CHRISTLUBAS
Distinguished
- Apr 17, 2009
- 112
- 0
- 18,680
[citation][nom]megamanx00[/nom]I think that it will be a while before network controllers and such need more than 4x PCI-E 2.0 lanes. I suppose it may make sense on the server side of things though.[/citation]
How bout 6 Core Processors(mainstream)and SSDs lots and I5
How bout 6 Core Processors(mainstream)and SSDs lots and I5
hillarymakesmecry
Distinguished
- Feb 24, 2009
- 448
- 0
- 18,780
There's never a point in waiting to build a computer. Just go spend however much you're willing to spend when you're willing to spend it. There's always something better comming out soon.
wiyosaya
Distinguished
- Apr 12, 2006
- 915
- 1
- 18,990
[citation][nom]LuxZg[/nom]...
I just wish that PCI hardware would be dead by than. I'm sick and tired of roaming through dozens of cards that are NOT PCIe (in any version) just to find an odd one from time to time that IS PCIe-based.Graphics cards are only exceptions, but everything else is still mostly on old PCI bus.To make it even worse, here are some numbers from local shopping-search which specializes in computer equipment:- one Gbit ethernet card- one eSATA controller (one port!!).. and I'm already on 60+$ hardware.So while PCIe 3.0 is nothing but positive, never mind when it comes, if 95% of all add-in boards in 2010 will still be PCI cards - PCIe 3.0 won't be important[/citation][citation]
PCIe is a great advance, but most peripherals do not need the extra speed it provides. I think that is why there are not many peripherals that have converted to PCIe, not to mention that there are development and commercialization costs that are likely not justified since the peripheral would not benefit from the increased speed of the PCIe bus.
[nom]cdillon[/nom]The best part about PCIe 3.0 is how much more you'll be able to do with just ONE PCIe lane. Think embedded systems, laptops, etc. where space is a premium. Fewer lanes necessary to do a job means fewer pins on chips, which makes the chips smaller, fewer traces on the motherboard, etc. And the power-savings they mention with PCIe 3.0 are obviously an advantage there as well.[/citation]
Yes, laptops and embedded systems could benefit from the increased throughput of a single-lane 3.0 PCIe spec. These are places where it might make a difference, especially with graphics.
To my point above, though, perhaps other peripherals are not available due to an "anomaly" in the thought process leading up to the actual peripheral. Many companies do things just because they can, not because they have a good reason to. In the case of peripherals that do not need the extra speed this might be a good thing that is keeping costs down for the time being, as well as such peripherals simply might not benefit from the speed.
When PCI was new, people scoffed at putting a sound card on the PCI bus simply because sound cards do not need the speed that the PCI bus affords. It took ISA quite a bit of time to completely disappear from the market. Eventually, sound cards converted to PCI; I imagine that that conversion was more likely driven by the pending death of the ISA bus rather than a sound card's need, or lack of need, of the speed of the PCI bus. Eventually, I imagine that PCI will also disappear from the market. As that time draws nearer, peripherals that do not need PCIe's increased speed will be forced to convert to PCIe. By then, however, the next advance will be on the market. :0
I just wish that PCI hardware would be dead by than. I'm sick and tired of roaming through dozens of cards that are NOT PCIe (in any version) just to find an odd one from time to time that IS PCIe-based.Graphics cards are only exceptions, but everything else is still mostly on old PCI bus.To make it even worse, here are some numbers from local shopping-search which specializes in computer equipment:- one Gbit ethernet card- one eSATA controller (one port!!).. and I'm already on 60+$ hardware.So while PCIe 3.0 is nothing but positive, never mind when it comes, if 95% of all add-in boards in 2010 will still be PCI cards - PCIe 3.0 won't be important[/citation][citation]
PCIe is a great advance, but most peripherals do not need the extra speed it provides. I think that is why there are not many peripherals that have converted to PCIe, not to mention that there are development and commercialization costs that are likely not justified since the peripheral would not benefit from the increased speed of the PCIe bus.
[nom]cdillon[/nom]The best part about PCIe 3.0 is how much more you'll be able to do with just ONE PCIe lane. Think embedded systems, laptops, etc. where space is a premium. Fewer lanes necessary to do a job means fewer pins on chips, which makes the chips smaller, fewer traces on the motherboard, etc. And the power-savings they mention with PCIe 3.0 are obviously an advantage there as well.[/citation]
Yes, laptops and embedded systems could benefit from the increased throughput of a single-lane 3.0 PCIe spec. These are places where it might make a difference, especially with graphics.
To my point above, though, perhaps other peripherals are not available due to an "anomaly"
in the thought process leading up to the actual peripheral. Many companies do things just because they can, not because they have a good reason to. In the case of peripherals that do not need the extra speed this might be a good thing that is keeping costs down for the time being, as well as such peripherals simply might not benefit from the speed.When PCI was new, people scoffed at putting a sound card on the PCI bus simply because sound cards do not need the speed that the PCI bus affords. It took ISA quite a bit of time to completely disappear from the market. Eventually, sound cards converted to PCI; I imagine that that conversion was more likely driven by the pending death of the ISA bus rather than a sound card's need, or lack of need, of the speed of the PCI bus. Eventually, I imagine that PCI will also disappear from the market. As that time draws nearer, peripherals that do not need PCIe's increased speed will be forced to convert to PCIe. By then, however, the next advance will be on the market. :0
aspireonelover
Distinguished
- Jun 16, 2009
- 109
- 0
- 18,680
lol, is it backwards compatible with PCIe 1.1? (sorry, I have an 8600GT lying around waiting to be my PhysX card and I don't wanna trash it away)
Otherwise I have a 9500GT in my comp right now (which is PCIe 2.0)
Otherwise I have a 9500GT in my comp right now
(which is PCIe 2.0)- Status
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram