MSI Calls Bluff on Gigabyte's PCIe Gen 3 Ready Claim

[buggalugs]

Seems as though Gigabyte is silent and is backpeddling from this issue. Gigabyte havent made any comment on their website...

 

[Maban]

Y'all should step outside and settle this like men. That's right, water balloon fight.

 

[tallyhoe]

Neliz, when did you start working at MSI? It seems your Neliz accounts at various forum sites were made long ago. As a rep though, you really shouldn't be bashing other forums users the way you are. You don't come across as a professional. You're giving MSI a bad name with that attitude. Learn to make a point without having to attack a person's character.

I love MSI video cards but if I knew the majority of MSI employees acted the way you do I would think twice about buying from them again.

No-one can prove 100% without a doubt that their motherboard(s) as today can work with PCI Express 3.0 cards, as there are no cards.

Manufacturers have access to early engineering samples before the public does. MSI/ASUS/Gigabyte are already working on the upcoming X79 boards and each manufacture their own PCBs for graphics cards so they likely have PCIe 3.0 sample cards as well. Intel also has to share engineering samples with the manufacturers in order for boards to be available at launch.

 

[neliz]

Neliz, when did you start working at MSI? It seems your Neliz accounts at various forum sites were made long ago. As a rep though, you really shouldn't be bashing other forums users the way you are. You don't come across as a professional. You're giving MSI a bad name with that attitude. Learn to make a point without having to attack a person's character.

I love MSI video cards but if I knew the majority of MSI employees acted the way you do I would think twice about buying from them again.

Ask that on PM not to leave more mud here.

 

[sneekypeet]

Ask that on PM not to leave more mud here.

You mean the whole reason you are here in this thread to begin with? To sling mud at gigabyte, damn hypocrites

 

[n-ster]

Ask that on PM not to leave more mud here.

I dont mind the mud...

What I do mind is that in the 11 pages of comments I have read, NONE of your posts helped me at all. I guess, as many have said, we just gotta wait and see

 

[pr0n Inspector]

I ran out of popcorn.

 

[heky]

You mean the whole reason you are here in this thread to begin with? To sling mud at gigabyte, damn hypocrites

What i read on these 11 pages, only makes neliz and MSI 100% right, and prooves Gigabyte makeing false statements.

And what you have done is not even worthy of being called a moderator. Going off-topic in every single post.

Also comparing MSI fan-design statement with Gigabytes fake statements about Gen3 PCI-Ex in just Apples to Oranges. Since MSI doesnt advertise something that doesnt work or simply isnt even possible like Gigabyte does.

Neliz isnt slinging mud at Gigabyte, Gigabyte is slinging mud at all the potential customers, scamming them!

 

[entropy13]

I agree that the MSI fan-design is irrelevant in this case. There aren't any "fan design standards" that have to be followed, while there's a PCI-E 3.0 standard, and there are only certain hardware that can "follow" that standard.

A similar situation would be making USB 2.0 slots as "USB 3.0 ready" with just a BIOS update or something.

 

[Mussels]

USB 3.0 devices work in USB2.0 ports, so the ports are 'usb 3.0 ready!' - at least to marketing, they are.

 

[neliz]

USB 3.0 devices work in USB2.0 ports, so the ports are 'usb 3.0 ready!' - at least to marketing, they are.

But they don't make claims to work at maximum data bandwidth :0

But the values of these words are sketchy (compatible, supported, ready etc.) when there is no technical reference.

By installing the latest BIOS for their 6 series motherboards today, users can be assured they are ready to take advantage of all the performance enhancements tomorrow's technologies have to offer.

With Gen3 cards on those 40 odd gigabyte boards, there are is "enjoy performance enhancements" for users, that's my point.

 

[n-ster]

What i read on these 11 pages, only makes neliz and MSI 100% right, and prooves Gigabyte makeing false statements.

And what you have done is not even worthy of being called a moderator. Going off-topic in every single post.

Also comparing MSI fan-design statement with Gigabytes fake statements about Gen3 PCI-Ex in just Apples to Oranges. Since MSI doesnt advertise something that doesnt work or simply isnt even possible like Gigabyte does.

Neliz isnt slinging mud at Gigabyte, Gigabyte is slinging mud at all the potential customers, scamming them!

You don't know that. MSI MIGHT know that, but YOU don't. You are just taking MSI's word over GB's word.

But they don't make claims to work at maximum data bandwidth :0

But the values of these words are sketchy (compatible, supported, ready etc.) when there is no technical reference.



With Gen3 cards on those 40 odd gigabyte boards, there are is "enjoy performance enhancements" for users, that's my point.

I still don't see "native support for full speed PCI-E 3.0"... PCI-E 3.0 isn't merely more bandwidth, there are also "performance enhancements" as stated @ wikipedia as:

New features for the PCIe 3.0 specification include a number of optimizations for enhanced signaling and data integrity, including transmitter and receiver equalization, PLL improvements, clock data recovery, and channel enhancements for currently supported topologies

One thing that doesn't look good for GB is their silence. They are losing sales because of this and for them not to say anything may indicate MSI might be right to some extent

 

[neliz]

I still don't see "native support for full speed PCI-E 3.0"... PCI-E 3.0 isn't merely more bandwidth, there are also "performance enhancements" as stated @ wikipedia as:

First off, don't trust Wikipedia.

And second, as far as the tests go, the boards without the necessary components will NOT have the CPU switch to Gen3.

 

[CDdude55]

First off, don't trust Wikipedia.

I can never understand why everybody says that, sure anyone can edit it, but if it's incorrect it gets corrected by mods all the time if it's not factual.

 

[heky]

You don't know that. MSI MIGHT know that, but YOU don't. You are just taking MSI's word over GB's word.

No i am not taking MSI`s word over Gigabyte`s, its a fact! PCIEX GEN3 has to meet certain standards(not made up by MSI), and motherboards have to have certain components to be able to be GEN3 certified, and the Gigabyte boards(apart for a couple of models) dont have them. Simple as that!

 

[neliz]

I can never understand why everybody says that, sure anyone can edit it, but if it's incorrect it gets corrected by mods all the time if it's not factual.

Example regarding PCI Express 3.0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express
According to Wikipedia, you need a 32 lane PCI Express connector to reach 16GB/s on PCI Express 2.0 .. right, okay...

While PCI-SIG is clearly stating that they can do nearly 32GB/s with PCI Express Gen3 x16
http://www.pcisig.com/news_room/November_18_2010_Press_Release/

So. Gen3 suddenly QUADRUPLED bandwidth? No, it's an end-user interpretation of bandwidth and not what is being "marketed" by PCI-SIG for instance.

Then Gigabyte tried to use Wiki ahem "facts" on our FB page

I have checked this info in wikipedia. PCI Gen 3.0 have only 16GBps for Transfer, not 32 Gbps. ... PCIe Gen 3.0 says 1GBPs per lane! You see is not a bluff!

now PCI-SIG:

it is possible for products designed to the PCIe 3.0 architecture to achieve bandwidth near 1 gigabyte per second (GB/s) in one direction on a single-lane (x1) configuration and scale to an aggregate approaching 32 GB/s on a sixteen-lane (x16) configuration.

And since every tech site out there has it right (Really nice article from Anandtech) why doesn't Wikipedia?

Unless everyone wants all their PCI express cards running Simplex, I'm all for following PCI-SIG and ignoring Wikipedia.

 

[n-ster]

No i am not taking MSI`s word over Gigabyte`s, its a fact! PCIEX GEN3 has to meet certain standards(not made up by MSI), and motherboards have to have certain components to be able to be GEN3 certified, and the Gigabyte boards(apart for a couple of models) dont have them. Simple as that!

Unless you know exactly what is needed for PCI-E 3.0 to work, you are taking MSI's word that the chip in the GB mobo will not work for PCI-E 3.0. You cannot have any CERTAINTY whatsoever about this unless you know what you are talking about, and neither you, nor I, and apparently most of the others from the forum have any experience with this kind of stuff.

I'm not saying what MSI is saying is FALSE, I'm saying it isn't necessarily TRUE. Until we have more info, we really can't judge.

I just wanted to throw this in here for all GB haters (I'll be talking lga 1366 as that's the only boards I know): Which board is better, Gigabyte's X58A-UD3R or a similarly priced X58 MSI board? I think the GB is the clear winner. So no, not all GB boards are garbage, just as not all MSI boards are garbage. Have some respect for both brands, don't just suddenly say: oh MSI godly GB garbage.

@ neliz

yes I know wiki can be wrong, but in this case wiki is right so it doesn't matter for the matter at hand

 

[heky]

I just wanted to throw this in here for all GB haters (I'll be talking lga 1366 as that's the only boards I know): Which board is better, Gigabyte's X58A-UD3R or a similarly priced X58 MSI board? I think the GB is the clear winner. So no, not all GB boards are garbage, just as not all MSI boards are garbage. Have some respect for both brands, don't just suddenly say: oh MSI godly GB garbage.

I am not a GB hater, even though i now own a MSI board, i used to have a GB x48-ds5 mobo for my 775 rig. It has notthing to do with the brand, it has to do with the fact they are cheating people into buying something that doesnt even have the feature they advertise!

 

[neliz]

yes I know wiki can be wrong, but in this case wiki is right so it doesn't matter for the matter at hand

Sure it is if you intentionally leave out half of the equation

Also, maybe I'm wrong here, but that wiki page is littered with "PCI Express bus." There is no such thing as a PCI Express bus. So no kids, don't just trust Wikipedia.

 

[Maban]

Sure it is if you intentionally leave out half of the equation

Also, maybe I'm wrong here, but that wiki page is littered with "PCI Express bus." There is no such thing as a PCI Express bus. So no kids, don't just trust Wikipedia.

That's interesting, because I just spent 30 seconds searching PCI-SIG's site and I found them mention PCI Express bus.

Nothing against you, but damn, I wish I could get paid to argue on a forum.

 

[neliz]

That's interesting, because I just spent 30 seconds searching PCI-SIG's site and I found them mention PCI Express bus.

PCI Express is a point to point link, so it's not a bus, but that misconception is easily made, I agree

(and yes, you can find "bus" and "PCI Express" related to eachother on the MSI website as well, I'll try to get that fixed ASAP.

Nothing against you, but damn, I wish I could get paid to argue on a forum.

This is in my free time, like I've been doing for the past 10 years.

Getting paid to argue on forums (be it in money or hardware) is not worth it imho.
You would NEED to support something that's not your personal opinion.

 

[neliz]

(and yes, you can find "bus" and "PCI Express" related to eachother on the MSI website as well, I'll try to get that fixed ASAP.

Fixed!

It's now "Interface" instead of "Bus Standard"

http://www.msi.com/product/vga/N580GTX-Lightning.html#?div=Specification

 

[Suhidu]

Woah! What a necro-bump, I still remember when we were all so confused on this PCI-E 3.0 stuff .

Anyway, nice fix, it should make it more clear to people.

 

[RejZoR]

"bus" was sort of term used for pretty much all IO slots like PCI, AGP, ISA etc etc. The term sticked like so many others from the past...

 

[neliz]

"bus" was sort of term used for pretty much all IO slots like PCI, AGP, ISA etc etc. The term sticked like so many others from the past...

because ISA & PCI are actually a bus.
for AGP it is accepted because it runs on top of the PCI bus, so it was common to reference to AGP as a bus as well.

But in the end it's just a small detail.