Tuesday, September 20th 2011
Gigabyte Responds to MSI's Bluff Call
A little earlier this month, MSI's PR team dished out a presentation in which they claimed that Gigabyte was misleading buyers into thinking that as many as 40 of its recently-launched motherboards were "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3". MSI tried to make its argument plausible by explaining what exactly goes into making a Gen 3-ready motherboard. The presentation caused quite some drama in the comments. Gigabyte responded with a presentation of its own, in which it counter-claimed that those making the accusations ignored some key details. Details such as "what if the Ivy Bridge CPU is wired to the first PCIe slot (lane switches won't matter)?"
In its short presentation with no more than 5 slides, Gigabyte tried to provide an explanation to its claim that most of its new motherboards are Gen 3-ready. The presentation begins with a diplomatic-sounding message on what is the agenda of the presentation, followed by a disclaimer that three of its recently-launched boards, Z68X-UD7-B3 & P67A-UD7/P67A-UD7-B3, lack Gen 3 readiness. This could be because those boards make use of a Gen 2 NVIDIA nForce 200 bridge chip, even the first PCI-E x16 slot is wired to that chip.
The next slide looks to form the key component of Gigabyte's rebuttal, that in motherboards with just one PCI-E x16 slot, there is no switching circuitry between the CPU's PCI-E root-complex and the slots, and so PCI-E Gen 3 will work.
The following slides explain that in motherboards with more than one PCI-Express x16 slot wired to the CPU, a Gen 3 switch redirects the unused x8 PCIe lanes from the
second slot to the first card slot for full x16 PCIe graphics bandwidth. But then MSI already established that barring the G1.Sniper 2, none of Gigabyte's boards with more than one PCI-E x16 slot has Gen 3 switches.
Likewise, it explained in the following slides about how Gen 3 switches handle cases in which more than one graphics card is wired to the CPU. Again we'd like to mention that barring the G1.Sniper 2, none of Gigabyte's 40 "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" have Gen 3 switches.
The last slide, however, successfully rebuts MSI's argument. Even in motherboards with Gen 2 switches, a Gen 3 graphics card can run in Gen 3 mode, on the first slot, albeit at electrical x8 data rate. Sure, it's not going to give you PCI-Express 3.0 x16, and sure, it's going to only work for one graphics card, but it adequately validates Gigabyte's "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" claim from a purely logical point of view.
Now that Gigabyte entered the debate, the onus on Gigabyte will now be to also clarify that apart from the switching argument, all its "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" have Gen 3-compliant electrical components, which MSI claimed Gigabyte's boards lack in this slide.
The next slide looks to form the key component of Gigabyte's rebuttal, that in motherboards with just one PCI-E x16 slot, there is no switching circuitry between the CPU's PCI-E root-complex and the slots, and so PCI-E Gen 3 will work.
The following slides explain that in motherboards with more than one PCI-Express x16 slot wired to the CPU, a Gen 3 switch redirects the unused x8 PCIe lanes from the
second slot to the first card slot for full x16 PCIe graphics bandwidth. But then MSI already established that barring the G1.Sniper 2, none of Gigabyte's boards with more than one PCI-E x16 slot has Gen 3 switches.
Likewise, it explained in the following slides about how Gen 3 switches handle cases in which more than one graphics card is wired to the CPU. Again we'd like to mention that barring the G1.Sniper 2, none of Gigabyte's 40 "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" have Gen 3 switches.
The last slide, however, successfully rebuts MSI's argument. Even in motherboards with Gen 2 switches, a Gen 3 graphics card can run in Gen 3 mode, on the first slot, albeit at electrical x8 data rate. Sure, it's not going to give you PCI-Express 3.0 x16, and sure, it's going to only work for one graphics card, but it adequately validates Gigabyte's "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" claim from a purely logical point of view.
Now that Gigabyte entered the debate, the onus on Gigabyte will now be to also clarify that apart from the switching argument, all its "Ready for Native PCIe Gen.3" have Gen 3-compliant electrical components, which MSI claimed Gigabyte's boards lack in this slide.
64 Comments on Gigabyte Responds to MSI's Bluff Call
I am pretty sure that situations like this is why companies don't comment on unreleased products. This is one situation where they feel justified to comment on PCIe 3.0, because the products are "out", but really, there is not one complete PCIe 3.0 solution, from CPU/Controller, to board, to PCIe 3.0 device.
All we have is boards. And everyone can't seem to agree what makes up PCIe 3.0...33% of any problem does not make for a good answer..only 33% of an answer.
If they cannot agree, then what does this mean for compaitbiltiy with PCIe 3.0 devices for the consumer?
Is there differing PCIe 3.0 specifications? BEcuase this stuff seems to hint there may be, or, in the very least, since OEMs cannot agree what PCIe 3.0 is, board-wise, does any such specification even exist?
I mean, OK, i know PCI-SIG as said it's piece already. But because most info isn't public domain, this is almost like these guys are commenting on stuff not out yet.
I dunno WTF to think...realyl what i want to do is ask each and every one of thees companies for thier PCIe 3.0 boards, and do a big round up of what each OEM calls PCIe 3.0, and what the real physical differences are.I do not agree with your synopsis of what went down, but I do agree with the sentiment.
As a matter of fact I know Gigabytes department is full of them. They stole my TPU BC2 logo.
Besides, it doesn't matter. Nobody actually wrote about that.
Where else could you go for so much knowledge and entertainment at the same time? It like college all over again. Isn't the internet just the greatest! What would we be doing without it? Thanks. Al Gore and his college budies for inventing the world wide web!!!! :roll:
I take issue with Gigabytes use of the phrase "PCIe graphics slot" when in fact, they are not limited to graphic cards! Your marketing is bunk, bunk I say!
Is it just me or is Gigabytes defense rather...weak? MSI's call on bluff still pretty much holds as far as I'm concerned, not that I'm pro-either company, but either I read the news wrongly, or there seems to be pretty little truth in Gigabytes PCI-E 3.0 ready claim, it doesnt fully support it.
I want Bulldozer,for months on,and its gets delayed,delayed,delayed... like airplane flights during a snowstorm.
This stresses me out already..... and then some trivial people try to promote some (currently) trivial technology, and cry and shake their fingers in the air over each other,dramatizing each other,
as they are all histrionic liars.
Give me Fire, and give me Ammo, please.
I shall end it.:banghead:
Bulldozer is a plague already, maybe AMD intended that...:D
some do that just to say 'im the 1st one and you follow me' and its about prestige that we lead other follow :shadedshu