Intel Raptor Lake-S CPU-attached NVMe Storage Remains on PCIe Gen4

[ghazi]

So Intel made a big deal about being first to PCIe 5 but AMD will be first to support an actual consumer PCIe 5 device. The one place you could actually use the higher transfer speeds is on storage. WTF is the point? Oh, I guess if you plan to buy an RX 8500 XT in a few years on PCIe 5.0 x2 you won't lose 30% perf like the X570 users will.

 

[Why_Me]

Classic Intel:cheaping out. long live the quad intel core.

Link to an AMD retail board with PCIe 5 and DDR5 please.

 

[Crackong]

There are literally 0 pro-AMD comments in the first few replies.
Yet the 'AMD fayboy' thing still came out at #5.

It is so funny to see Intel Fanboys had to 'Preemptive defend' against their "imaginary AMD fanboys" .

 

[TechLurker]

While we're all debating about the value of PCIe 5.0, I'd like to remind everyone about the minor marketing panic that was caused with AMD supporting PCIe 4.0 and GPU makers marking their boxes as PCIe 4.0 ready, while Intel was still stuck on 3.0 because there were issues in validating their CPUs for 4.0 capability, which also pissed off mobo makers who were all but ready to slap PCIe 4.0 on their Intel mobos. Basically, the minor panic in whether or not the average buyer could safely install a PCIe 4.0 ready GPU into an older PCIe 3.0 slot, and Intel having to do a social media offensive to say "yes, it's perfectly fine, there will be no performance loss", since they were now being seen as "inferior" to AMD's latest just because of box numbers and marketing.

It seems like Intel wanted to pre-empt that with PCIe 5.0 on their next-gen mobo, but only targeted the average buyer of GPUs, while forgetting about average users focused on storage. AMD at least targeted both at the same time, more out of coincidence, given the way they design their chiplets and lane assignment guidance.

And hilariously enough, we already have early reports of PCIe 7.0 in the works, targeted for 2025. I wonder if we'll see PCIe 6.0 in 2024-2026, then PCIe 7.0 in 2027 onwards until PCIe 8.0 is standardized.

 

[Minus Infinity]

Just LOL, who gives a fig newton about PCI-E 5.0 SSD's at this stage. By the time they are a thing PCI-E 6.0 will be released. PCI-E 4.0 has barely made a difference to real world experience, still stuck with crap random performance, run hotter, throttle more, cost more. PCI-E 5 will magnify those issues further.

 

[Crackong]

While we're all debating about the value of PCIe 5.0, I'd like to remind everyone about the minor marketing panic that was caused with AMD supporting PCIe 4.0 and GPU makers marking their boxes as PCIe 4.0 ready, while Intel was still stuck on 3.0 because there were issues in validating their CPUs for 4.0 capability, which also pissed off mobo makers who were all but ready to slap PCIe 4.0 on their Intel mobos. Basically, the minor panic in whether or not the average buyer could safely install a PCIe 4.0 ready GPU into an older PCIe 3.0 slot, and Intel having to do a social media offensive to say "yes, it's perfectly fine, there will be no performance loss", since they were now being seen as "inferior" to AMD's latest just because of box numbers and marketing.

It seems like Intel wanted to pre-empt that with PCIe 5.0 on their next-gen mobo, but only targeted the average buyer of GPUs, while forgetting about average users focused on storage. AMD at least targeted both at the same time, more out of coincidence, given the way they design their chiplets and lane assignment guidance.

And hilariously enough, we already have early reports of PCIe 7.0 in the works, targeted for 2025. I wonder if we'll see PCIe 6.0 in 2024-2026, then PCIe 7.0 in 2027 onwards until PCIe 8.0 is standardized.

Yes it is the PCI-E 4.0 drama again.
The marketing machine fires up and ready to denounce everything in their way.

 

[steen]

AMD had the advantage of launching the first PCIe 4.0 platform at the same time as launching the first PCIe 4.0 graphics card.
Intel are playing chicken-and-egg with PCIe 5.0. There's nothing to really put in a PCIe 5.0 slot, but nobody else will make a consumer PCIe 5.0 device unless the slot is already released to the consumer market.

Intel didn't want a repeat of AMD as the validation platform for PCIE 5.0 as happened with PCIE 4.0.

Edit: missed TechLurker's post above. Also note the fun with SAM/ReBAR that ensued.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

They don't have much else at their disposal when their chips are once again well behind core-for-core. They might get closer with Zen4 vs. Raptor Lake, but next year's Meteor Lake is what I'm expecting to be a very painful blow...

Too bad meteor lake is already being reported as being late, and is looking like it's going against Zen5, so a painful blow, but for intel. Besides, I have a feeling Zen4 will sell better.

How is it cheaping out? because AMD will have near useless PCIe 5 GPU slot and storage control when there will be no PCIe 5 video cards and maybe only very few and very expensive PCIe 5 NVME's. well done AMD

I've got a feeling that if AMD was in Intel's place, you'd be levying the same criticism against AMD instead. Besides, did we NOT just see how long the AM4 socket was around and how you could plug a 5000 series in an X370 board? We can basically guarantee that the B650/X670 boards will support far more CPU generations than intel and be relevant far longer, so it makes all the sense in the world for AMD to have their motherboards/chipsets as forward thinking as possible...this is not so much the case with Intel as you're literally lucky to get a single CPU generation and an iteration out of a socket.

There are literally 0 pro-AMD comments in the first few replies.
Yet the 'AMD fayboy' thing still came out at #5.

It is so funny to see Intel Fanboys had to 'Preemptive defend' against their "imaginary AMD fanboys" .

I always thought it peculiar to cheer for a company with every advantage, that uses a monopolistic position to hinder competition and was literally fine with ushering in complete stagnation just a few years ago. Isn't it much more rewarding to cheer for the underdog that without we'd literally be wallowing in 4 core stagnation and 5% performance uplifts generation over generation? How can you cheer for that? It's the disruptive, smaller companies to which we owe the true innovative push and progress...In that sense I don't cheer for AMD's brand, just the position AMD happens to be in at the moment....but, that why I never understood the point of cheering for Intel or Nvidia, because if they were to "win", these fun little exercises in comparing products and arguing about them would essentially be over and we'd be more or less in the "end of history" with respect to rapid consumer evolution in the PC space.

 

[Why_Me]

Too bad meteor lake is already being reported as being late, and is looking like it's going against Zen5, so a painful blow, but for intel. Besides, I have a feeling Zen4 will sell better.

Is that due to the low cost of DDR5?

Intel Raptor Lake CPU presentation confirms DDR4 RAM support

A presentation has confirmed that Intel Raptor Lake CPUs will support DDR4 and DDR5 RAM, but it also sparks concern over its PCIe 5.0 limitations

www.pcgamesn.com

 

[Crackong]

I always thought it peculiar to cheer for a company with every advantage, that uses a monopolistic position to hinder competition and was literally fine with ushering in complete stagnation just a few years ago. Isn't it much more rewarding to cheer for the underdog that without we'd literally be wallowing in 4 core stagnation and 5% performance uplifts generation over generation? How can you cheer for that? It's the disruptive, smaller companies to which we owe the true innovative push and progress...In that sense I don't cheer for AMD's brand, just the position AMD happens to be in at the moment....but, that why I never understood the point of cheering for Intel or Nvidia, because if they were to "win", these fun little exercises in comparing products and arguing about them would essentially be over and we'd be more or less in the "end of history" with respect to rapid consumer evolution in the PC space.

I don't really mind watching the drama.
But watching these "imaginary AMD fanboys" thing is like, watching a man fighting his his left hand with his right hand, and pretended to be " the left hand's fault".

It is just utterly pointless and boring.

 

[Why_Me]

I don't really mind watching the drama.
But watching these "imaginary AMD fanboys" thing is like, watching a man fighting his his left hand with his right hand, and pretended to be " the left hand's fault".

It is just utterly pointless and boring.

Yet here you are.

 

[Crackong]

Yet here you are.

Why not?

 

[trsttte]

And hilariously enough, we already have early reports of PCIe 7.0 in the works, targeted for 2025. I wonder if we'll see PCIe 6.0 in 2024-2026, then PCIe 7.0 in 2027 onwards until PCIe 8.0 is standardized.

Doubt it, PCIe 4.0 was unsually short because it was also very delayed, so much so that there talks about it being "skipped" (as main interface at least) before it entered the market (Intel could almost have done so since they also only got gen4 on rocket lake which was also very short lived)

 

[Steevo]

Sure there is enough here to get the AMD fans hooting and jeering at Intel as usual now on TPU. I'm looking forward to trying one of these in my 690 board.

Nah, the performance loss that might occur is in the theoretical percent that is within the margin of error. It's been a long time since they were on top and they took quite a lot of flack in good fun.

 

[SL2]

Sure there is enough here to get the AMD fans hooting and jeering at Intel as usual now on TPU.

This isn't helping anyone.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

This isn't helping anyone.

Usual now though, just stating the fact.

 

[Mussels]

My B450 ITX board did this for its second slot, which wasnt great - but i still had the primary NVME slot working with the GPU at 16x

I'd definitely prefer a chipset 4.0 slot over losing 8x 5.0 from a GPU to get 4x 5.0

What happens in that situation when you use your second PCI-E slot? Does it run at 4x, or get disabled?

 

[Tek-Check]

My B450 ITX board did this for its second slot, which wasnt great - but i still had the primary NVME slot working with the GPU at 16x

I'd definitely prefer a chipset 4.0 slot over losing 8x 5.0 from a GPU to get 4x 5.0

What happens in that situation when you use your second PCI-E slot? Does it run at 4x, or get disabled?

Eventually, all future bords will run 5.0 from CPU and lane allocation will be more flexible as there is more bandwidth to play with.
First two GPU slots run x8 PCIe 5.0 with bifurcation on in BIOS.
New GPUs this year from AMD will come out with PCIe 5.0 in x16, x8 and x4 electrical wiring, depending on tier.

Besides, PCIe 5.0 will be great on laptops too. As laptops always have less lanes, moving to 5.0 will allow more bandwidth and flexibility with less lanes from CPU or chipset. For example, instead of x8 for mGPU, x4 will be fine, another two x4 NVMe slots and perhaps x4 for Thunderbolt 5. Vendors will also be able to instal 5.0 x2 and x1 slots for XFMexpress NVMe removable flash storage and other peripherals.

 

[lexluthermiester]

NVMe lanes should never be taken away from GPU lanes.

 

[Mussels]

NVMe lanes should never be taken away from GPU lanes.

I dont mind it as a backup option for giving us more than the chipset normally offers - but it certainly should never be the plan for a primary slot

Ex: My ITX board gives you two NVME slots, which is rare for ITX. Great option to have

I just want PCI-E 5.0 from the CPU/chipset spread over more 4.0 lanes. Gimme 2x 4.0 NVME (or 4x 3.0!) instead of 1x 5.0. Imagine if that could be part of the standards, so the newer PCI-E generations actually let us use more of existing hardware instead of being useless for a while