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

Intel Core Ultra "Arrow Lake" Desktop Platform Map Leaked: Two CPU-attached M.2 Slots

Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
368 (0.07/day)
System Name Very old, but all I've got ®
Processor So old, you don't wanna know... Really!
32 lanes is yet... not much. But that is a stretch. It's rather x20 PCIE 5.0, and x12 of PCIE 4.0.

Saddly though, that doesn't translate to more of older gen lanes from the PCIE5.0. I mean Bifurcation from e.g. x8 PCIE 5.0 to x16 PCIE 4.0.

There are no more Gen 3-only lanes from the PCH
Does it mean the PCH will still be backward compatible with older PCIE generations?
With modern motherboards looking more like microATX boards in an ATX form, do we really need PCIe lanes for anything else than M.2 SSDs?
I mean, this is my old AM3+ board
View attachment 353538
7 expansion slots, the two main PCIe slots having the option to play x8 + x8 for SLi/CrossFire for a total of 42 PCIe 2.0 lanes and here is a modern example of an ATX board
View attachment 353537
More or less, empty PCB with extra room for M.2 SSDs.
I would take the first variant, without doubts. Streamlined design, no BS, no RGB, plenty of PCIE slots (would prefer all of them being X16, even if they wouldn't be fully accessible due to lanes limit). I would prefer the PCIE card for couple bucks to put the M.2 vertically, rather than put it down on motherboard, with no airflow, whatsoever. I don't know, who in right mind would put PCIE 4.0, let alone PCIE 5.0 furnace SSD under the same furnace hot VGA. I don't even mention accessibility. It takes only one screw to undo, in case of addon card, while the onboard slots require to disassemple half of the motherboard, just to gain access to the single SSD.
But actually having both is more reasonable, for different case scenarios. The middle ground, with a single or couple M.2 slots, and the rest of the slots being usual PCIE. For the price the MB asking, there can be easilly have a couple of addon cards for M.2, that cost couple bucks.
There is no good reason for PCIe slots and M.2 slots to be an "either/or". Manufacturers should offer motherboards with multiple PCIe slots and M.2 drive access should be provided by an add-in PCIe card bundled with said motherboard. That way the consumer can choose to use the PCIe lanes that they paid for in the way that they choose - for example if they want to install two GPUs instead of a bunch of M.2s.

The current trend of putting more and more M.2 slots on motherboards, consuming more and more PCIe lanes forcing those lanes to either be used by M.2s or essentially not exist, is anti-consumer and anti-choice and has only come about because manufacturers are looking for every possible way to cut down on every expense (it's not as if a PCIe add-in card for M.2 drives costs a billion bucks anyway, but MUH PROFIT MARGINS). Yet consumers have bought into this because the manufacturers claim it's "more convenient"... yeah, it's so more convenient to have less choice. Even the so-called workstation motherboards suffer from this same idiotic plague.

There is, of course, nothing stopping manufacturers including both ordinary PCIe slots and M.2 slots on their boards, and switching bandwidth between them as one or the other is used. Except of course the manufacturers don't do that because, again, "it's expensive" - while having consumers roll over and take it in the ass is free.
Indeed. The usual PCIE slot, even at X8, would suit the storage much better. No need for the Aluminium slabs covering the entire MB surface. Just put the hot SSD on AIC, and the in-take fans would do their job. But then it would require for MB makers to actually invest in better design... However, the empty space under the second and third PCIE-slots make sense, since that is dead zone, that can't really be used for anything, including delicate SSD.
I also prefer having PCIe slots instead of M2 connectors. The former take up less space and an M2 on an add-in-card can have much better cooling.
Just one or two M2 slots is enough for most users (with SSD's you can have many threads accessing the same disk without problems unlike HDD's).

MB's these days only cater to gamers and overclockers which also adds costs. There are lot's of users that don't need these 'features'.
Compare this with an X13SAE MB and you will see that the power-supply section can be much smaller.
By the way: this is the only MB I found that comes close to what I would prefer.

As written this virus now also affects WS boards and these are the boards where you need extra slot's the most.
They are often used for a long time and you want to be able to upgrade in the future. E.g. to 10Gbit or 25Gbit.
Having the extra slots means you should be able to use the MB for a much longer time which lowers your TCO.

I would say there is a market for MB's with more slots but manufacturers do not produce them because it's not to their advantage to bring out MB's that can be used for a long time...
Planned obsolesence.

The reason the additional PCIe lanes from the processor are only v4 might be that it's difficult to have 2 M2 slot's close to the processor.
The graphics card also needs to be close or you need redrivers/retimers which is expensive.
Using v4 you can place that 2nd M2 slot a bit further away without incurring extra costs.
Exaclty! The more well-thought motherboards, can be in service, for much longer periods. I dare to say, a decade, easilly (especially, when the decent ATX board costs half a grand). And having the lot of PCIE slots, extend that vastly. But this seems works against the MB vendor plans.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
3,600 (0.68/day)
Location
Portugal
System Name LenovoⓇ ThinkPad™ T430
Processor IntelⓇ Core™ i5-3210M processor (2 cores, 2.50GHz, 3MB cache), Intel Turbo Boost™ 2.0 (3.10GHz), HT™
Motherboard Lenovo 2344 (Mobile Intel QM77 Express Chipset)
Cooling Single-pipe heatsink + Delta fan
Memory 2x 8GB KingstonⓇ HyperX™ Impact 2133MHz DDR3L SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) Intel HD Graphics™ 4000 (GPU clk: 1100MHz, vRAM clk: 1066MHz)
Storage SamsungⓇ 860 EVO mSATA (250GB) + 850 EVO (500GB) SATA
Display(s) 14.0" (355mm) HD (1366x768) color, anti-glare, LED backlight, 200 nits, 16:9 aspect ratio, 300:1 co
Case ThinkPad Roll Cage (one-piece magnesium frame)
Audio Device(s) HD Audio, RealtekⓇ ALC3202 codec, DolbyⓇ Advanced Audio™ v2 / stereo speakers, 1W x 2
Power Supply ThinkPad 65W AC Adapter + ThinkPad Battery 70++ (9-cell)
Mouse TrackPointⓇ pointing device + UltraNav™, wide touchpad below keyboard + ThinkLight™
Keyboard 6-row, 84-key, ThinkVantage button, spill-resistant, multimedia Fn keys, LED backlight (PT Layout)
Software MicrosoftⓇ WindowsⓇ 10 x86-64 (22H2)
"Intel is expected to increase both the native- and overclocked memory speeds for this platform, and we might even see DDR5 memory kits with XMP 3.0 profiles for 10000 MT/s or more"

While AMD languishes away on "possibly" supporting a whopping 6400... :D
I thought you were referring to the M.2 dedicated lanes, hence what I replied. Oops. :laugh:
 
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
912 (0.47/day)
Given the shift towards rear connectors, and cases with increasingly open-backed/skeletal motherboard mounts to allow access for airflow or installation convenience, lower power M2 slots should be on the back of the mobo (PCIe 4.0 and earlier), while keeping PCIe slots on the front, and just include a plastic shroud broken up into sections that can slot into the unused PCIe slots as protective+decorative covers.

Maybe even offer the ability for choosing between a front PCIe slot or an M2 slot behind, similar to how using an M2 drive in one slot disables a SATA port or two, or decreases the speed due to alternating data between both the M2 and SATA drives (varies by motherboard; some disable, others just reduce data speeds).
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,325 (0.81/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 32GB - 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600+16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB JUHOR / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes/ NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe boot(Clover), SATA storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
I would prefer the PCIE card for couple bucks to put the M.2 vertically, rather than put it down on motherboard, with no airflow, whatsoever. I don't know, who in right mind would put PCIE 4.0, let alone PCIE 5.0 furnace SSD under the same furnace hot VGA. I don't even mention accessibility. It takes only one screw to undo, in case of addon card, while the onboard slots require to disassemple half of the motherboard, just to gain access to the single SSD.
But actually having both is more reasonable, for different case scenarios. The middle ground, with a single or couple M.2 slots, and the rest of the slots being usual PCIE.
Something like this?
1719897993205.png

The fifth NVMe is moved in a temporary(permanent?) position, with the help of a PCIe riser extension cable, so I could use that PCIe slot that was covered by the graphics card. The motherboard is the X470 GAMING PLUS MAX. Obviously some NVMe's are connected through PCIe X1, but even that way they are a better option than a typical SATA SSD.

For the price the MB asking, there can be easilly have a couple of addon cards for M.2, that cost pennies.
It's more like 3+ euros than less than 1. I think that price is for new members. Of course that doesn't change the fact that a PCIe slot can house an NVMe SSD perfectly with a very small extra cost, a cost that the motherboard manufacturer could cover considering the prices of modern motherboards.

And of course having an extra X16 slot, means that something like this can also be used
PCIe X16 To X8+X4+X4 Splitter Card Adaptor M.2 NVMEx2 Input Ports Adapter Card Expansion Card Support 2280/2260/2242/2230 SSD

No need for the Aluminium slabs covering the entire MB surface.
They are needed to make the motherboard look expensive and good looking. Remove them and the truth reveals itself. An empty PCB. Who would pay 400 euros/dollars for a big empty PCB?
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
3,540 (0.56/day)
Location
Terra
System Name :)
Processor Intel 13700k
Motherboard Gigabyte z790 UD AC
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 64GB GSKILL DDR5
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 4090 Gaming OC
Storage 960GB Optane 905P U.2 SSD + 4TB PCIe4 U.2 SSD
Display(s) Alienware AW3423DW 175Hz QD-OLED + Nixeus 27" IPS 1440p 144Hz
Case Fractal Design Torrent
Audio Device(s) MOTU M4 - JBL 305P MKII w/2x JL Audio 10 Sealed --- X-Fi Titanium HD - Presonus Eris E5 - JBL 4412
Power Supply Silverstone 1000W
Mouse Roccat Kain 122 AIMO
Keyboard KBD67 Lite / Mammoth75
VR HMD Reverb G2 V2
Software Win 11 Pro
Yeah I'd prefer more PCIe slots.
I personally run multiple PCIe expansion cards (sound card, HBA, NIC, etc).
Thankfully my NVMe U.2 drives come with cables for m.2 slots.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
1,169 (0.99/day)
With modern motherboards looking more like microATX boards in an ATX form, do we really need PCIe lanes for anything else than M.2 SSDs?
I mean, this is my old AM3+ board
7 expansion slots, the two main PCIe slots having the option to play x8 + x8 for SLi/CrossFire for a total of 42 PCIe 2.0 lanes and here is a modern example of an ATX board
More or less, empty PCB with extra room for M.2 SSDs.
There are boards with a good balance between PCIe slots (4) and M.2 drives (4), for example Asrock PG Lightning.
It's all down to which interfaces individual users need more.
Screenshot 2024-07-02 at 19-05-40 ASRock X670E PG Lightning.png
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,325 (0.81/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 32GB - 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600+16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB JUHOR / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes/ NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe boot(Clover), SATA storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
There are boards with a good balance between PCIe slots (4) and M.2 drives (4), for example Asrock PG Lightning.
It's all down to which interfaces individual users need more.
View attachment 353711

The 990X Gigabyte in my first example had a cost of about 100 euros 14 years ago. I guess it would cost around 200 today because it was using the second best chipset(not the 990FX). And it was offering 2 PCIe X16 slots connected to the north bridge with 16 lanes being able to work as x8 + x8 if two pcie cards where connected to them(SLi support also had royalty costs).
The X470 MSI that I am using costed me 90 euros. But it was a very good price to be fair. Let's say it's standard cost was 120 euros 5 years ago, so probably less than 200 today. Two PCIe x16 slots connected to the CPU with the option to work as x8 + x8.

The ASRock in the above example only connects one PCIe slots to the CPU. The other 3 slots are connected to the chipset and only one of the PCIe x16s is X4, the other is X1. And the price in Greece for the ASRock is around 260 euros. We pay more, we get less. There are options but all feel - from my perspective at least - like scams. That's why I am describing those as "microATX boards in ATX form", because they look like being designed as microATX boards and then manufacturers just add a little more PCB for a couple of X1 slots or M.2 slots while also doubling the final price of the product.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
12,337 (5.79/day)
Location
Midlands, UK
System Name Nebulon B
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard MSi PRO B650M-A WiFi
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock 4
Memory 2x 24 GB Corsair Vengeance DDR5-4800
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT 12 GB
Storage 2 TB Corsair MP600 GS, 2 TB Corsair MP600 R2
Display(s) Dell S3422DWG, 7" Waveshare touchscreen
Case Kolink Citadel Mesh black
Audio Device(s) Logitech Z333 2.1 speakers, AKG Y50 headphones
Power Supply Seasonic Prime GX-750
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G413 SE
Software Bazzite (Fedora Linux) KDE
PEG, display, and two m.2 connect to the CPU, everything else to the chipset. This can be said about any modern platform, more or less, so how is this in any way newsworthy?
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
1,169 (0.99/day)
The ASRock in the above example only connects one PCIe slots to the CPU. The other 3 slots are connected to the chipset and only one of the PCIe x16s is X4, the other is X1. And the price in Greece for the ASRock is around 260 euros. We pay more, we get less. There are options but all feel - from my perspective at least - like scams. That's why I am describing those as "microATX boards in ATX form", because they look like being designed as microATX boards and then manufacturers just add a little more PCB for a couple of X1 slots or M.2 slots while also doubling the final price of the product.
- you are splitting hair in half now. The initial point was more PCIe slots
- there are such boards, even with two Gen5 slots, despite the fact that no one in the world can make any meaningful use of two Gen5 slots
- if I was motherboard vendor, I would not be offering two Gen5 slots and other chipset slots either; waste of material
- you can blame Intel and AMD pushing for PCIe 5.0 adoption three years too early, when we would not have Gen5 GPUs until next year
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
3,325 (0.81/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 32GB - 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600+16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB JUHOR / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, ONLY NVMes/ NVMes, SATA Storage / NVMe boot(Clover), SATA storage
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / CoolerMaster Elite 361 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / CoolerMaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10&Windows 11 / Windows 10
- you are splitting hair in half now. The initial point was more PCIe slots
I am seeing and pointing at this behavior in motherboards from the day the X570 came out and it was the reason I stayed with the X470. I didn't suddenly started splitting hairs. More PCIe slots are good when they are also useful as they where in the past. Having 7 PCIe X16 slots for example and 6 of them being X1 on the chipset isn't really a gift because of their limited bandwidth.
- there are such boards, even with two Gen5 slots, despite the fact that no one in the world can make any meaningful use of two Gen5 slots
- if I was motherboard vendor, I would not be offering two Gen5 slots and other chipset slots either; waste of material
- you can blame Intel and AMD pushing for PCIe 5.0 adoption three years too early, when we would not have Gen5 GPUs until next year
Yeah, usually much more expensive. There are use cases like second graphics card, fast network as already said in one of the first posts, or other hardware that needs bandwidth. Even an adapter housing two M.2 slots that could use that second x8 slot to add faster gen 5.0 NVMes when usually there is only one PCIe 5.0 M.2 slot on the motherboard. But I do agree that the trend today isn't more PCIe expansion cards/adapters, because most people don't really need them and manufacturers prefer to over charge for motherboards that are mostly empty in their half area.
 

DutchTraveller

New Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2023
Messages
10 (0.02/day)
- there are such boards, even with two Gen5 slots, despite the fact that no one in the world can make any meaningful use of two Gen5 slots
I don't need 2 Gen5 slots but I would like to have 2 slots (2x x8) or even 3 (x8, x4, x4) from the processor. I would be happy if they were just Gen4 or even Gen3.
That is because the 10Gbit card I use on my desktop systems is a X520-DA1 which is a Gen2 card with 8 lanes. Having a slot with 4 lanes of Gen2+ would be fast enough.
These cards are pretty inexpensive and very well supported in all OS-es because they date from 2011. Never had issues with them. And they low-power too.
Intels cards have less issues and better support than Aquantia (especially since they were taken over by Marvell).

Most controllercards available today are still Gen2 & Gen3 and that is changing only very slowly.

An example of why I feel I need extra slots (preferably some with 4 lanes besides slots with just 1 or 2 lanes).
In future I might (need to) add an NPU card. The latest processors have a dedicated npu even though they have graphics on board.
And since AI is developing very fast I might need to upgrade it to a faster version that needs a wider and faster slot.

I do agree that a basic desktop system for the average user, based on an apu or laptop processor doesn't need many slots.
Being able to add 2 M2's and 1 or 2 cards is probably enough for that use-case.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
773 (0.18/day)
Location
Poland
System Name THU
Processor Intel Core i5-13600KF
Motherboard ASUS PRIME Z790-P D4
Cooling SilentiumPC Fortis 3 v2 + Arctic Cooling MX-2
Memory Crucial Ballistix 2x16 GB DDR4-3600 CL16 (dual rank)
Video Card(s) MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Ventus 3X OC 12 GB GDDR6X (2610/21000 @ 0.91 V)
Storage Lexar NM790 2 TB + Corsair MP510 960 GB + PNY XLR8 CS3030 500 GB + Toshiba E300 3 TB
Display(s) LG OLED C8 55" + ASUS VP229Q
Case Fractal Design Define R6
Audio Device(s) Yamaha RX-V381 + Monitor Audio Bronze 6 + Bronze FX | FiiO E10K-TC + Sony MDR-7506
Power Supply Corsair RM650
Mouse Logitech M705 Marathon
Keyboard Corsair K55 RGB PRO
Software Windows 10 Home
Benchmark Scores Benchmarks in 2024?
Nope, all we need is the bottom example.

One top PCI-E 16x slot for the GPU and one full sized PCI-E 1x slot at the very bottom for an expansion card.

Three m.2 slots should be a minimum these days.

While I do mainly care about M.2 slots (I need a minimum of three), a mobo can be designed in a way to incorporate both M.2 and PCI-E slots.

Just have a look at the mobo I chose. Three M.2 slots and three extra PCI-E x16 slots (x4 electrically). All of these are Gen4 and you can use them all at the same time!
ASUS Z790-P D4.png
 
Top