PCI SIG Preps CopprLink Cables for PCIe 5.0 and PCIe 6.0, Reveals Specs

PCI-SIG
(Image credit: PCI-SIG)

PCI SIG said this week that that it is developing cabling specifications for PCIe 5.0 and PCIe 6.0 interfaces at 32 GT/s and 64 GT/s data transfer rates. The new cable specifications will be release in Q1 2024 and will be branded CopprLink, possibly to avoid any confusion with existing OCuLink cables and also to emphasize their copper nature.

The CopprLink 5.0 and 6.0 specifications are designed for datacenters and servers. They are meant to connect motherboards to backplanes, cards to backplanes, motherboards to expansion cards (e.g., accelerators), racks to racks, boards to boards within a rack, and even chips to chips at PCIe 5.0 (32 GT/s) and PCIe 6.0 (64 GT/s) speeds. The aim is to provide some additional flexibility to cases where typical PCIe links over printed circuit boards are inefficient or cannot be established for some reason. The mentioned cases do not include long-range connections, so we are probably talking about tens of centimeters here.

Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • Amdlova
    Will have small traces... pcie 4.0 and pcie 5.0 it's a nightmare for board design.
    Pcie 6 will be next level of challenge.
    Reply
  • Li Ken-un
    Amdlova said:
    Will have small traces... pcie 4.0 and pcie 5.0 it's a nightmare for board design.
    Pcie 6 will be next level of challenge.
    PCIe 6.0 won’t be any more challenging than PCIe 5.0 with regards to wiring. They have the same reach. PCIe 7.0 on the other hand…
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Li Ken-un said:
    PCIe 6.0 won’t be any more challenging than PCIe 5.0 with regards to wiring. They have the same reach. PCIe 7.0 on the other hand…
    PCIe 6.0 does require a higher signal-to-noise ratio, however. I wouldn't be so dismissive of the challenges, nor the costs of addressing them.
    Reply