PCIe 4.0 Specs Revealed: 16GTps Rate and Not Just For Graphics Cards Anymore (tomshardware.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PCIe 4.0 Specs Revealed: 16GTps Rate and Not Just For Graphics Cards Anymore (tomshardware.com)

Posted by msmash on Thursday October 26, 2017 @09:25AM from the up-next dept.

Freshly Exhumed writes: PCI-SIG has released the specifications for version 4.0 of the PCIe (Peripheral Component Interconnect Express) bus, which, according to Chairman Al Yanes, promises data transfer rates of 16GTps, extended tags and credits for service devices, reduced system latency, lane margining, superior RAS capabilities, scalability for added lanes and bandwidth, improved I/O virtualization and platform integration. Tom's Hardware has posted a slide deck of the new version's specifications.

62 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 09:28 · Score: 0

16 giga-tera-poops a second?
1. Re:16GTps? by AvitarX · 2017-10-26 09:32 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Giga Transfers, double version 3
  
  --
  Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
2. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 09:32 · Score: 0
  
  Gigabytes per second
  Specifically; 16 GT/s (8 GB/s total for Ã--4 lanes)
3. Re:16GTps? by belg4mit · 2017-10-26 09:36 · Score: 2
  
  The press release used this too, but the second slide indicates that this is equivalent to 65 GB/s
  
  --
  Were that I say, pancakes?
4. Re:16GTps? by belg4mit · 2017-10-26 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  Gah, 64 of course.
  
  --
  Were that I say, pancakes?
5. Re:16GTps? by Lord+Crc · 2017-10-26 09:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  GigaTransfers per second, essentially the clock speed of the bus. The bandwidth can then be found by multiplying the number of transfers per second with the bus width, and adjust for the encoding overhead (8/10 for PCIe 2.0 and earlier, 128/130 for PCIe 3.0 and above).
  So, 4x (lane) PCIe 4.0 can do 16 * 4 * 128 / 130 = ~63Gb/s or ~7.9GB/s.
  Wikipedia got a nice table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express#History_and_revisions.
6. Re: 16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 09:55 · Score: 0
  
  And not GB/s but Gb/s
7. Re:16GTps? by sexconker · 2017-10-26 11:11 · Score: 2
  
  16,000,000,000 transfers per second * 1 bit per lane (in each direction) = 16,000,000,000 bits per second per lane (in each direction).
  16,000,000,000 bits per second per lane (in each direction) / 130 bits per datagram =123,076,923.07692307692307692307692 datagrams per second per lane (in each direction).
  123,076,923.07692307692307692307692 datagrams per second per lane (in each direction) * 128 bites payload data per datagram = 15,753,846,153.846153846153846153846 payload bits per second per lane (in each direction).
  15,753,846,153.846153846153846153846 payload bits per second per lane (in each direction) / 8 bits per byte / 1024 bytes per kilobyte / 1024 kilobytes per megabyte / 1024 megabytes per gigabyte = 1.8339890700120192307692307692308 gigabytes payload data per second per lane (in each direction).
8. Re: 16GTps? by belg4mit · 2017-10-26 11:23 · Score: 2
  
  The second slide clearly shows a capital B, and the figures match those on wikipedia e.;g 133 MB/s for the original PCI spec.
  
  --
  Were that I say, pancakes?
9. Re:16GTps? by DontBeAMoran · 2017-10-26 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  ... anyone got a Tylenol?
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
10. Re:16GTps? by GrumpySteen · 2017-10-26 11:57 · Score: 2
  
  I have a bottle of TylenoI capsules I bought in Chicago in 1982. I'm sure it'll be fine.
11. Re:16GTps? by xushi · 2017-10-26 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  16 giga-tera-phaps per second. Nearing my average too.
12. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 12:06 · Score: 0
  
  Not a fan of significant figures?
13. Re:16GTps? by sexconker · 2017-10-26 13:45 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not a fan of fucking the existing definition of kilobit/kilobyte/megabit/megabyte/etc., or approximating discrete things unnecessarily.
14. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 15:41 · Score: 0
  
  They don't make Extra Strength Tylenide like they used to.
15. Re: 16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 19:20 · Score: 0
  
  Imaginary tabloid headline (after a tabloid journalist got a tech to explain stuff to him):
  It is measured in bits per second, so it is only 1/8 as good as the original PCI, that is measured in bytes per second ;-) ;-)
16. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 19:29 · Score: 1
  
  a solid state drive connected directly to a 16x PCIe 4.0 would be sweet, assuming that the SSD could transfer up to 7.9 GB/s x4 =31,6 GB/s
  that would be faster than DDR4 SDRAM that transfers at 17066.67 MB/s or approx 17.06667 GB/s
  DDR5
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR5_SDRAM
  is estimated to arrive in 2020
  even 8x PCIe 4.0 or perhaps as low as 4x PCIe 4.0, might be sufficient for HP's "the machine" dream to really take off
17. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 22:32 · Score: 0
  
  Damn, I was hoping for 16 GigaTera pixels per second.
18. Re: 16GTps? by Xhris · 2017-10-26 22:55 · Score: 2
  
  It is definitely GBytes, not Gbits. I have benchmarked CPU Memory->GPU transfers of > 100 Gbps with PCI-E 3.0
19. Re:16GTps? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-27 01:52 · Score: 0
  
  [...]15,753,846,153.846153846153846153846 payload bits per second per lane (in each direction) / 8 bits per byte / 1024 bytes per kilobyte / 1024 kilobytes per megabyte / 1024 megabytes per gigabyte = 1.8339890700120192307692307692308 gigabytes payload data per second per lane (in each direction).
  Then subtract 20% because PCIe uses 8b/10b encoding (unless 4.0 is doing something else, I didn't look at the spec)
20. Re:16GTps? by BronsCon · 2017-10-27 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  PCIe 2.0 and older... PCIe 3.0 and newer do, indeed, use something different.
  
  --
  APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
21. Re: 16GTps? by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  The demand for Tylenol and Tide together just wasn't there to support it.
Don't worry, systemd et al will bog it down by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 09:31 · Score: 0, Troll

By the time PCIe 4.0 is actually available, the software bloat will be even more uncontrollable.
We NEED Moore's Law to compete with software bloat, umm, improved user experiences. Yeah, that's it.
Need for speed... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 09:39 · Score: 2, Funny

You can now buy motherboards with 19 PCIe slots for crypto currency mining.
1. Re:Need for speed... by mikael · 2017-10-26 11:05 · Score: 1
  
  But you have to dangle your GPU's out in a rack rather than being in a single case.
  
  --
  Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
2. Re:Need for speed... by slew · 2017-10-26 11:10 · Score: 2
  
  You can now buy motherboards with 19 x1 PCIe slots for crypto currency mining.
  Need for slots w/o need for speed...
I love hearing about improvements! apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 10:24 · Score: 0

See subject: It makes me know my next machine will, as usual, probably @ least TRIPLE my current system's performance is why!
* I only buy every 10++ yrs. or so now & that's what I see nearly every time, especially in CPU/Graphics! HUGE boosts...
(Nice to see they're REALLY working on the interconnect datapath highways now too though...)
APK
P.S.=> Last I bought was 2014, so if everything "stays on schedule" here? I'll have one HECK of a machine in 2019 or so (& be able to use Windows 7, hopefully (except for Intel shit supposedly NOT running it anymore I've heard tell - so what? I go AMD then - their "threadripper" setups look GOOD so far!))... apk
1. Re:I love hearing about improvements! apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  I only buy every 10++ yrs.
  
  Last I bought was 2014
  
  I'll have one HECK of a machine in 2019
2. Re:I love hearing about improvements! apk by viperidaenz · 2017-10-26 10:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Don't worry, Microsoft will make sure new AMD CPU's aren't compatible with Windows 7, just like Intel CPU's
  AMD officially don't support Windows 7 for Ryzen or Threadripper CPU's.
  It's going to get harder and harder to get drivers for Windows 7 for either platform.
3. Re:I love hearing about improvements! apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 10:53 · Score: 0
  
  It's going to get harder and harder to get drivers for Windows 7 for either platform.
  Hell, I'd be perfectly happy to use the CPU drivers included on the installer DVD.
  Alas, it is a windows update pushed out that string matches your CPU model and halts the OS, not a lack of drivers.
4. Re: I love hearing about improvements! apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 13:34 · Score: 0
  
  Think of all the shitposts about host files heâ(TM)ll be able to do with a PCI 4 spec machine!
5. Re: I love hearing about improvements! apk by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:34 · Score: 1
  
  That's par for the course for apk logic. The guy is fucking dense and has very poor critical thinking skills.
6. Re: I love hearing about improvements! apk by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:38 · Score: 1
  
  Either you don't know how drivers work, or you think CPU's ship with an installer disc.
"not just for graphics cards anymore" by viperidaenz · 2017-10-26 10:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

It was never just for graphics cards. It's a replacement for the PCI bus. It just happened to also replace AGP, which was a dedicated graphics port.
It's commonly used for network cards, audio cards, storage (NVMe is PCIe), etc.
Thunderbolt is PCIe + DisplayPort
1. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by sexconker · 2017-10-26 11:19 · Score: 2
  
  NVMe is not PCIe.
  NVMe is implemented over PCIe. It doesn't have to be. PCIe is a physical and electrical bus with logical controllers. NVMe is a logical interface that runs over PCIe. It could run on whatever.
2. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by viperidaenz · 2017-10-26 13:23 · Score: 1
  
  I suppose so...
  
  NVM Express (NVMe) is an interface that allows host software to communicate with a non-volatile memory
  subsystem. This interface is optimized for Enterprise and Client solid state drives, typically attached as a
  register level interface to the PCI Express interface.
3. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by viperidaenz · 2017-10-26 14:18 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  After actually reading the NVMe spec, it's specifically designed to be used over PCI Express. Other transports look to be an afterthought. NVMe over Fabrics is a separate specification for using NVMe over non-PCI* interfaces.
  NVMe 1.2 was only intended to be used over PCI type interfaces, primarily PCI Express, but also PCI and PCI-X.
4. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by williamyf · 2017-10-26 15:12 · Score: 0
  
  It was never just for graphics cards. It's a replacement for the PCI bus. It just happened to also replace AGP, which was a dedicated graphics port.
  It's commonly used for network cards, audio cards, storage (NVMe is PCIe), etc.
  Thunderbolt is PCIe + DisplayPort
  Amen to that viperidaenz... And that's on yer punny desktops and Laptops.
  Please do not get me started on what can be done with PCIe on my servers, including but not limited to 40G and 100G Eth cards, 32G Fibrechannel cards, 50Gbps infiniband cards, SAS RAID Cards for booting, and mezzanine cards Galore in Blade servers....
  
  --
  *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
5. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by jabuzz · 2017-10-26 21:03 · Score: 1
  
  Where did you get 50Gbps Infiniband cards? Valid Infiniband speeds are SDR at 10Gbps, DDR at 20Gbps, QDR at 40Gbps, FDR at 56Gbps, EDR at 100Gbps and HDR at 200Gbps.
6. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-27 01:09 · Score: 0
  
  Still waiting for a cheapo PCIe 1x 2.0 SSD. I have a free slot or two, not enough SATA and I wouldn't want to go through the crappy old SATA controller.
  It would need an option ROM so it can be booted (I'm on BIOS!) tho I guess I could use some /boot partition on 2GB SD card or old 512MB USB stick.
  Well, even in the early 00s I guess someone would have made it. Late stage capitalism sucks, there are only a handful companies that make anything and nothing out of the utter mainstream is ever made. (2342 smartphone vendors but they only piece things together, there's even one in North Korea)
7. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-27 04:38 · Score: 0
  
  Obviously it's an EDR card that sends every bit twice just to be sure... or maybe an HDR card that sends each bit 4 times.
8. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by tlhIngan · 2017-10-27 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  It was never just for graphics cards. It's a replacement for the PCI bus. It just happened to also replace AGP, which was a dedicated graphics port.
  It's commonly used for network cards, audio cards, storage (NVMe is PCIe), etc.
  Thunderbolt is PCIe + DisplayPort
  AGP is a modified form of PCI - the only real difference is it's optimized for data transfers from the computer to the card (since video cards are output devices, there's not as much need to have a truly bidirectional, link). The other difference is it can run a lot faster than the 33-MHz 32-bit PCI bus. There were attempts to try to get it to 66MHz and 64-bit but a lot of PCI cards didn't like it. So AGP allowed the video card to use a faster bus without running into limitations caused by legacy PCI hardware. Remember PCI is a shared bus topology, so you can only run as fast as the slowest device.
  From a software perspective, AGP looked just like another PCI bus in the system.
  You have to remember PCI was from the 90s, and PCI video cards replaced VLB and ISA video cards. But it wasn't too long before the plethora of PCI devices forced video out because of bandwidth.
  It's not as likely to happen with PCIe since PCIe isn't a shared bus. It consists of multiple links called lanes, and each lane can be assigned to either an individual card, or aggregated with other lanes to offer more bandwidth.
  With dedicated links, slow devices will simply run its link at slower speeds, while faster devices can run faster since they have dedicated links.
9. Re:"not just for graphics cards anymore" by williamyf · 2017-10-30 23:38 · Score: 1
  
  It wasan FDR card, and I got the speed wrong. Since the error is close (but not exactly) 10%, is withing acceptable range ;-) :-P
  
  --
  *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
Yes, but w/ boosts like this? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 10:45 · Score: 0

I'll buy a wee bit early (that's my point pretty much). I think we're hitting what silicon based CPU's can do on top-end, not sure on GPU, but bus speed boosts like this will "open up the motor" the way that better intake manifolds & headers do on automobile engines...
* I'll buy early when this tech comes out & the bugs shake out...
(Should be RIGHT AROUND 2020 tops I imagine (& I hope that Intel "chills out" & let's Win7 run on their hardware again - as again, I have heard tell they don't anymore, only Win10 on (dumb - I do NOT like what I see 'going on' in 10) + by then, Win7 will be @ 'support's end' from MS, but hopefully patched really, Really, REALLY well too!))
APK
P.S.=> But, on Intel/Win7, if not? Once again also, AMD's "threadripper" tech looks great!... apk
M$ wants to destroy themself? Fine... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 10:58 · Score: 0

See subject: They keep this crap up (the bs in Win10 & 7 not running on newer cpu/boards by Intel), they're going down - then, you'll see ME on Linux, permanently, most likely...
* I'm NOT joking either!
(MS & others are making GIGANTIC business mistakes - you HAVE to give folks what they WANT (not what they do NOT want)).
APK
P.S.=> They do that.? I am DONE w/ MS... apk
1. Re:M$ wants to destroy themself? Fine... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 21:24 · Score: 0
  
  Get a Ryzen7 and 2 GPUs on a mobo that already has the IOMMU groups sorted out and just run Windows 7 in a virtual environment on Linux with it's own dedicated GPU.
2. Re: M$ wants to destroy themself? Fine... apk by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  Someone at Microsoft just filed a feature request titled, "how we can get rid of apk". Resources have been assigned.
Speaking of PCI... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-26 12:18 · Score: 0

You know what else isn't just for graphics cards anymore? Linux on the desktop!
AMIRIGHT?
more lanes are needed as 3.0 hardware will not by Joe_Dragon · 2017-10-26 13:52 · Score: 1

more lanes are needed as 3.0 hardware will not run at the same speed in a half as wide 4.0 slot then a 3.0 slot. Unless they add switchers to take 4.0 and split out 3.0 lanes.
still need cpus to add 4.0 and that will take time.
will amd and intel skip the 4.0 and go 5.0 by Joe_Dragon · 2017-10-26 13:58 · Score: 2

see how amd will not have an new socket till 2019-2020 any ways AMD is the king of PCI-e right now and they really don't need 4.0 or 5.0 right away.
Now intel is low on lanes and if there idea of 4.0 is just the same number of lanes then it will not really do much.
1. Re: will amd and intel skip the 4.0 and go 5.0 by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  Intel: "Fuck it, we're going to 5 blades".
Was it ever ? by polyp2000 · 2017-10-26 22:54 · Score: 1

Was it ever "just for graphics cards" though ?

--
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Re:Was it ever ? by swb · 2017-10-26 23:22 · Score: 1

No, but there's a whole universe of people involved with computers who got started on the gaming track and for whom the x86 platform is defined by the parts involved in gaming. Their reference point for PCIe slots is graphic cards because on most desktops in the last 10 years every other interface was integrated into the motherboard. For those people, the only apparent purpose of PCIe slots was graphics cards.
They don't remember the old days of ISA/EISA based boards where there was literally nothing integrated into the motherboard and everything from serial ports to parallel ports to network interfaces and disk drives of all types (in addition to graphics cards) required a card and a slot.
Our registered user /. peers disagree w/ you by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-27 03:29 · Score: 0

I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine. Your software is well written, functional. The Host File Engine performs exactly as promised by mmell

his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant

his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg

(APK's) work, I've flat out said it's good by BronsCon

I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works by bmo

APK your posts on this & the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error &/or bad advice by BlueStrat

Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising & malvertising is quite valid by JazzLad

I like your host file system by Karmashock

(NEED MORE? Ask!)
* Hosted by Malwarebytes' hpHosts!
APK
P.S.=> You've done BETTER? No since you tried downmod hiding this last time I posted it https://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11279643&cid=55441641/ ... apk
Re:Was it ever ? by DarthVain · 2017-10-27 04:21 · Score: 1

I fail to see how it still isn't just for graphic cards.
Technically you are right, it is used by just about everything, not just graphic cards. However only GPU really have any limitations on any existing bus systems in the modern past. Everything else that is attached to it is too slow to care, and is more influenced by timings and scheduling anyway. I mean I/O on even a high end SSD isn't going to really improve no matter how fast a bus you buckle it to... Although the summary does mention some other things I guess that make it more relevant to other things (latency, RAS, and lane merging (whatever that is, but it sounds like timing/scheduling) etc...), however little of that has to do with the 16GTFSDJJ^@$ of whatever speed it supposedly is capable of... I guess I kinda just argued myself wrong... whatever...
PCIe was never just for Graphics Cards by naris · 2017-10-27 05:42 · Score: 1

There have always been PCIe RAID cards, storage cards, network cards, sound cards, etc...
Re: Was it ever ? by Brockmire · 2017-10-27 08:49 · Score: 1

I should have stopped after your first two sentences, but whatever. There's RAID and network cards that use full x16 bandwidth. Not consumer shit.
I've gotten rid of you before easily quagmire by Anonymous Coward · 2017-10-28 04:24 · Score: 0

I've gotten rid of you before easily quagmire: It was easy making you EAT YOUR WORDS -> https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10557875&cid=54347839/
* Tell us: How did eating your words taste?
(A bit like your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming those lies of yours back down your chicken-neck throat, washed down by the bitter taste of SELF-defeat, perhaps? LMAO!)
Keep EATING YOUR WORDS - you'll die of malnutrition - as eating your words != GOOD nutrition, fool... lol!
APK
P.S.=> Puny "ne'er-do-well" Brockmire behind his FAKE NAME for his FAKE LIE OF A LIFE tried projecting his own failure onto me in the post parent to the link above only to do his usual "FINE DINING" (lol) vs. "yours truly" - Hahahahaha, classic & PRICELESS... apk