1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

ASUS Unveils World's First PCI-Express 3.0 Motherboard for AMD Processors

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Jan 9, 2013.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,678 (11.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,418
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    ASUS did the unthinkable yet simple, by innovating the first AMD platform motherboard that features PCI-Express 3.0 x16 slots, the Sabertooth 990FX/GEN3.0 R2.0. Long naming aside, the board provides you a couple of gen 3.0 slots by using PLX-made 48-lane PCI-Express Gen 3.0 bridge chip.

    While the board features four PCI-Express x16 slots, only two similarly-colored slots can be used at a time, of which two are PCI-Express 2.0 x16, wired to the 990FX northbridge, and two slots being x16/NC or x8/x8-capable, being wired to a PLX 48-lane PCI-Express Gen 3.0 switch, which in turn takes two PCI-Express 2.0 x16 links from the northbridge.

    [​IMG]

    Apart from this unique feature the socket AM3+ Sabertooth 990FX/GEN3.0 R2.0 features AMD SB950 southbridge, eight SATA 6 Gb/s ports, two eSATA 6 Gb/s, 8-channel HD audio, six USB 3.0 ports, and a zesty ASUS-exclusive feature-set. The new board could be released to the market very soon.
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2013
    nt300, adulaamin and cadaveca say thanks.
  2. Prima.Vera

    Prima.Vera

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    2,010 (2.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    259
    To be honest I didn't know that AMD can't do PCIex 3.0...Or this is what I am understanding from article..
  3. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,678 (11.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,418
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    My explanation of the PCIe clusterfoo on this board.

    [​IMG]
    Chevalr1c, nt300, radusorin and 6 others say thanks.
  4. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    I'll just wait for the new LGA platforms next year from AMD with native PCI-E 3.0.
  5. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    According to the manual, the first and third PCIe are 3.0 x16, the third switches to x8/x8 with the fourth, and the second is 2.0 x16. It may not exactly be as Tarun diagrammed but it's still some kind of voodoo. I think they just used a single 2.0 x16 link from northbridge to the switch, and the rest is just marketing.

    [​IMG]
  6. Sasqui

    Sasqui

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    7,277 (2.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Manchester, NH
  7. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,678 (11.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,418
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    In that case it's a supermassive marketing fail. Just one 2.0 x16 link between the NB and x48 bridge.
  8. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    It is the same for Intel, supermassive marketing fail. How dare ASUS use Intel tech on AMD boards. :roll:

    Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge = 1 x PCI-E 2.0 x16 lane to a 48-lane PCI-E 2.0/3.0 switch.
  9. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Ivy Bridge is native 3.0, so 3.0 x16 to 48 lane switch.
  10. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    Actually, if you read into the fine print the PCI-E lanes in Ivy Bridge are 2.0 lanes.

    There is a reason why Ivy Bridge is only 200 MB/s faster than 990FX with a 680 GTX in bandwidth.
  11. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Actually if you read the datasheet, any review, any Z77 motherboard manual or spec sheet, any news site, and any Internet site anywhere with any info on Ivy Bridge, yes, they are indeed 3.0.
  12. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    Nope.
    [​IMG]

    The IC on the motherboard is PCI-E 3.0 but Ivy Bridge is indeed PCI-E 2.0 connected to PCI-E 3.0. How you can tell actual native PCI-E 3.0 from fake PCI-E 3.0, PLX Switches.
  13. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    That chart doesn't mean anything in the context of this discussion. That simply shows that the Revodrive 3 X2 they were using for that specific test maxes out at about 1640MB/s with the parameters they tested it with. That card is PCIe 2.0. It is in no way going to show any dramatic difference when connected to a PCIe 3.0 host.
    okidna says thanks.
  14. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    That is a 680 GTX. You have the right to believe anything you want...though. It doesn't mean sound will move faster than light anytime soon.
  15. Maban

    Maban

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299 (1.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    No it's not. If you go back one page to the Test System and Methodology, it quite clearly states that a Revodrive 3 X2 was used for that test.
    okidna and cadaveca say thanks.
  16. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397 (4.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,475
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Intel SAYS:

    [​IMG]






    BTW, it's not just the switches, SLI support in BIOS also plays a role in PCIe 3.0 support. Boards without SLI, all support PCIe 3.0; P67, H67, Z68, Z75, H77, Z77 all inclusive.
  17. Jizzler

    Jizzler

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,271 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    597
    Location:
    Geneva, FL, USA
    Asus, this is just silly and wasteful. Go sit in the corner and think about what you've done.
    Maban says thanks.
  18. neliz

    neliz MSI Rep

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    321 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    Actually, SLI doesn't have too much to do with this.

    If there are no PCIe switches between the CPU and the card, the card will run at it's maximum speed, in that case GEN3.

    I think you're referring to the fact that SLI NEEDS switches on 1155 to operate (it requires x8 traffic, for both GEN2 and GEN3), otherwise you'd be stuck with a fixed configuration 8x8 board. The switches are there to redirect the traffic to the first card in case the clockgen in the PCH doesn't detect a card in the second slot.
    cadaveca says thanks.
  19. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397 (4.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,475
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Seems to be some Crossfire-only boards that run 3.0 on 2.0 bridges(Biostar). WTF is going on or why, whatever, I am not sure.

    It's like when adding IVB support to BIOS, something weird happened.

    I almost want to say that AMD allows PCIe 3.0 for VGA on PCIe 2.0 bus, regardless of bridges or what have you. If it's just encoding or whatever, I don't know. X79 is why I want to say that..you get PCIe 3.0 with AMD on any X79, NVidia on X79..not so much.

    Don't forget x16/x4 boards, too.(support Crossfire, but not SLi, no bridges)

    Not MSi products, but as you know, I've used very few MSi boards. ;)

    Thanks very much for the input though, when it comes to MSi, of course your word is king. ;)
  20. neliz

    neliz MSI Rep

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    321 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    Are they running Full x16? in case of Gen2 switches, the card can run GEN3 x8 (bypassing the switches) or GEN2 x16. In that case there's a minimal difference in latency and bandwidth that would prefer GEN3 x8 over GEN2 x16 when initializing.

    I can't bend Intel's rules :p

    In this case the first slot is routed straight to the CPU and it will always init in x16, the x4 traffic will come from the PCH.
    cadaveca says thanks.
  21. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397 (4.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,475
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta

    I know, but as you know already, this has been something that has played out very weird on P67/Z68.

    None of you OEMs really agree as to what's what, so I can only hold you to MSi products.
    neliz says thanks.
  22. neliz

    neliz MSI Rep

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    321 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    the straight facts became too cluttered with marketing FUD with everyone falling over another to support "GEN3".

    Just some brands wanted you to believe that x8 GEN3 is the same as X16 GEN3 (saves a lot of money on the PCI Express switches!) :p
    That's why I said, Intel is leading in this. Follow Intel's guidelines and you're good, skimp on them and you're bad. I just wish there was a mandatory certification for GEN3 :(
    cadaveca says thanks.
  23. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397 (4.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,475
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Ah, but otherwise, I got this PCIe 3.0 thing down right?
  24. neliz

    neliz MSI Rep

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    321 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    205
    cadaveca says thanks.
  25. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,397 (4.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,475
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    We've had a few users now wondering about PCIe 3.0 on P67/Z68, and sometimes when using SB CPUs. This has not helped with the confusion. :roll:


    And yes, a real standard would be great. :p

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page