Wednesday, August 5th 2009

PCI-Express 3.0 Hits Backwards Compatibility Roadblock, Delayed

PCI-SIG (Special Interest Group), the organisation responsible for development of PCI specifications announced that generation 3 PCI-Express (PCI-E 3.0), is off its target launch time from late-2009 to Q2 2010. Although work on the bus is almost finished, there seems to be problems with implementing backwards-compatibility with older generations of PCI-E. Assuming PCI-E 3.0 is standardised in Q2 2010, one can expect implementing products (motherboards and expansion cards supporting PCI-E 3.0) only by a year later.

PCI-E 3.0 packs features that overcome the bottlenecks of PCI-E 2.0, such as the removal of the 8P/10b encoding scheme that added at least 20% data overhead for the 5 GT/s PCI-E 2.0, reducing it to 4 GT/s effective. At 8 GT/s the new bus will have effectively twice the bandwidth.Source: TechConnect Magazine
Add your own comment

62 Comments on PCI-Express 3.0 Hits Backwards Compatibility Roadblock, Delayed

#1
h3llb3nd4
:ohwell:
we'll get new cards by then
Posted on Reply
#2
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
2.0 still hasn't been used to its fullest. Meh, i'll stick with 1.0/1.1
Posted on Reply
#3
douglatins
by: CDdude55
2.0 still hasn't been used to its fullest. Meh, i'll stick with 1.0/1.1
I would like to see how many headroom a PCI2.0 GTX295 has.
Posted on Reply
#4
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: douglatins
I would like to see how many headroom a PCI2.0 GTX295 has.
A good amount, but i doubt you will see much to any of a performance difference going from 1.0/1.1 GTX 295 to 2.0 GTX 295.

The card still doesn't use 2.0 to its fullest advantage just yet.
Posted on Reply
#5
TheLaughingMan
Science, fixing problems that don't really affect people.

I do have one question. Will the PCIe 3.0 improved multiple GPU card setup performance scaling? Or is that still a software implementation issue?
Posted on Reply
#6
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
by: CDdude55
2.0 still hasn't been used to its fullest. Meh, i'll stick with 1.0/1.1
You want them to start a several year project once the standard is required? It needs to be done before we need it, it's how progress works.
Posted on Reply
#7
a_ump
So when are they ever going to up the power provided to video cards through the slot? i kno that PCI-E 2.0 is spec'd to be able to provide 150watts, but for some reason that i can only assume about, they haven't implemented it with that yet.... That is honestly the only improvement i think PCI-E needs is to be able to provide it's specifications....not 75watts.
Posted on Reply
#8
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
by: a_ump
So when are they ever going to up the power provided to video cards through the slot? i kno that PCI-E 2.0 is spec'd to be able to provide 150watts, but for some reason that i can only assume about, they haven't implemented it with that yet.... That is honestly the only improvement i think PCI-E needs is to be able to provide it's specifications....not 75watts.
When they think the ATX connector could use some additional wires for the extra current.
Posted on Reply
#9
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: DanTheBanjoman
You want them to start a several year project once the standard is required? It needs to be done before we need it, it's how progress works.
Them starting to work on a new project isn't the problem, but considering PC's/video cards aren't in dire need of a PCI-E upgrade, it's almost pointless releasing it that early(its was going to come out late 2009:eek:). But as said thats how progress works.
Posted on Reply
#10
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: a_ump
So when are they ever going to up the power provided to video cards through the slot? i kno that PCI-E 2.0 is spec'd to be able to provide 150watts, but for some reason that i can only assume about, they haven't implemented it with that yet.... That is honestly the only improvement i think PCI-E needs is to be able to provide it's specifications....not 75watts.
A PCI-E 2.0 x16 slot provides 75W (65W 12V, 10W 3.3V), as did older standards. The amount of power a slot provides doesn't change between generations. All that changes are the specifications of the connectors.
Posted on Reply
#11
Flyordie
by: CDdude55
A good amount, but i doubt you will see much to any of a performance difference going from 1.0/1.1 GTX 295 to 2.0 GTX 295.

The card still doesn't use 2.0 to its fullest advantage just yet.
False, sorta...
8x PCIe 2.0 is bottlenecking the HD3870X2's... So PCIe 1.1 x16 is surely at its peak usage with a GTX295.
Posted on Reply
#12
AsRock
TPU addict
by: TheLaughingMan
Science, fixing problems that don't really affect people.

I do have one question. Will the PCIe 3.0 improved multiple GPU card setup performance scaling? Or is that still a software implementation issue?
Don't look like it will it's not as if going from 1.01.1 to 2.0 did any thing noticeable. So why the heck should this. Maybe it does if a computer analyzes the data but to us sweet f all

I just turned in to you TheLaughingMan HA.... My guess any thing REAL special will not happen with PCI-e they will have to bring a totally new slot because thats how money is made.. I guess if it stoped being backward compatible there be a chance but that would only worry people at upgrading time.
Posted on Reply
#14
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
False, sorta...
8x PCIe 2.0 is bottlenecking the HD3870X2's... So PCIe 1.1 x16 is surely at its peak usage with a GTX295.
Well of course, a half speed slot is going to do that to a dual GPU card.

2.0 still has that extra bandwidth left that hasn't been taken advantage of yet, and i don't see how 3.0 would be solving that problem.(adding more bandwidth and a few extra features isn't worth it if the actual cards aren't taking advantage.)

I'll move to 2.0/3.0 when i see a big difference.
Posted on Reply
#15
Flyordie
by: jaydeejohn
This delay may be a blessing in the sky for some
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=4HLMUQGLRVNW2QSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=218900278
Looks like AMD is implementing its final revision to the HT over PCIe idea. The ATI/AMD Chipsets themselves support it but they want to get it into the standard so they can use it over all future chipsets from all companies.

by: CDdude55
Well of course, a half speed slot is going to do that to a dual GPU card.

2.0 still has that extra bandwidth left that hasn't been taken advantage of yet, and i don't see how 3.0 would be solving that problem.(adding more bandwidth and a few extra features isn't worth it if the actual cards aren't taking advantage.)

I'll move to 2.0/3.0 when i see a big difference.
-8x PCIe 2.0 provides the same bandwidth as PCIe x16 1.x
I do not see the point in your post...
The idea is improvement.. You don't see the world traveling with horses and buggies still do you? (Besides the Omish, no pun intended).. Improvement and planning for the future is what it is all about... (and money... )
Posted on Reply
#16
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
Looks like AMD is implementing its final revision to the HT over PCIe idea. The ATI/AMD Chipsets themselves support it but they want to get it into the standard so they can use it over all future chipsets from all companies.



-8x PCIe 2.0 provides the same bandwidth as PCIe x16 1.x
I do not see the point in your post...
The idea is improvement.. You don't see the world traveling with horses and buggies still do you? (Besides the Omish, no pun intended).. Improvement and planning for the future is what it is all about... (and money... )
The point of my post is that theres really no point in releasing a 3.0 when 2.0 is still fresh for the pickin.
You don't see the world traveling with horses and buggies still do you?
Well ya, but when you compare a Car to something like using a horse and buggie you can see a significant difference between the two, seeing the huge advantages of a Car justifies why you should have one.
Posted on Reply
#17
Flyordie
by: CDdude55
The point of my post is that theres really no point in releasing a 3.0 when 2.0 is still fresh for the pickin.


Well ya, but when you compare a Car to something like using a horse and buggie you can see a significant difference between the two, seeing the huge advantages of a Car justifies why you should have one.
Ok, lets go smaller scale...

1985 Toyota Supra vs 1986 Toyota Supra
Same thing, same engine with maybe a minor change in injection amount... but why is it a "New Design"? If the car was released in 1985.. it should remain a "1985 Toyota Supra in 1986...
Posted on Reply
#18
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
Ok, lets go smaller scale...

1985 Toyota Supra vs 1986 Toyota Supra
Same thing, same engine with maybe a minor change in injection amount... but why is it a "New Design"? If the car was released in 1985.. it should remain a "1985 Toyota Supra in 1986...
So then what the point of going with the '86, if theres only minor changes.
Posted on Reply
#19
Flyordie
by: CDdude55
So then what the point of going with the '86, if theres only minor changes.
The small change... the 1mpg better fuel economy... the new radio...||

minor tweaks that will be used by future cards... (and current cards such as the ATI HD2/3/4 cards.. using HT over PCIe (wait for it... wait for it... oh yeah... using 2 HT Lanes to do internal crossfire = WIN.)
Posted on Reply
#20
hat
Maximum Overclocker
PCI-E 3.0 would be nice for SLI/Xfire on boards that don't do the full x16x/16x
Posted on Reply
#21
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
The small change... the 1mpg better fuel economy... the new radio...||

minor tweaks that will be used by future cards... (and current cards such as the ATI HD2/3/4 cards.. using HT over PCIe (wait for it... wait for it... oh yeah... using 2 HT Lanes to do internal crossfire = WIN.)
minor tweaks that will be used by future cards... (and current cards such as the ATI HD2/3/4 cards.. using HT over PCIe
But, im not saying we shouldn't go with the new slot at all. We really need to wait for the cards to truly utilize the slots. Having a new slot with more bandwidth and slightly new features every year or two isn't helping if we still have card finely chugging on an older slot.

Im not saying they aren't going to be useful in the future, but as of now there really isn't a big reason to go crazy about it.
Posted on Reply
#22
Flyordie
by: CDdude55
But, im not saying we shouldn't go with the new slot at all. We really need to wait for the cards to truly utilize the slots. Having a new slot with more bandwidth and slightly new features every year or two isn't helping if we still have card finely chugging on an older slot.

Im not saying they aren't going to be useful in the future, but as of now there really isn't a big reason to go crazy about it.
What if the card already has the features? ;-)
Posted on Reply
#23
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
What if the card already has the features? ;-)
Then alls good, no need for a new slot.
Posted on Reply
#24
Flyordie
by: CDdude55
Then alls good, no need for a new slot.
umm... but the feature isn't being used yet because the SLOT doesn't support it. ... so how is that good?
Posted on Reply
#25
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
by: Flyordie
umm... but the feature isn't being used yet because the SLOT doesn't support it. ... so how is that good?
Well in that case, its fine. If there are cards being flushed out that use new features that require a new slot and offer a performance boost, then that justifies a new slot to come out.

Its good in that we get a nice performance boost because it actually makes a difference.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment