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

PCIe Gen5 "12VHPWR" Connector to Deliver Up to 600 Watts of Power for Next-Generation Graphics Cards

Signal wires = very low power usually...
Not the same gauge as the signal wires are not carrying any significant power.

your both missing that's nothing different. PCI_SIG specs are signal wires can be jumpered to a ground. (just look at your psu) those long thin wires are totally unnecessary. the design reeks of thumbing their nose to nvidia; which they can do.
 
It's not carrying power, it's just for signaling using a thicker wire would just cause/add unnecessary cost issues.
yeah, look up. (the last post.)
 
yeah, look up. (the last post.)

Did you look at the article? Because PCIe gen 5 uses double the freq, and to my knowledge when it comes to signaling thicker wires = worse. I don't know why you are bring up current PSUs, because when those beging designed how would Gen 5 considerations be made? I'm pretty sure that's expressly why this isn't backwards compatible. And why would you want to jumper off of ground if you don't have to? I mean shit dude, not only would the noise on the PCIe have to be dealt with add all the noise coming of the ground too for shit and giggles? Anyway, besides that at the end of the day THICKER wire costs MORE.
 
Last edited:
Did you look at the article? Because PCIe gen 5 uses double the freq, and to my knowledge when it comes to signaling thicker wires = worse. I don't know why you are bring up current PSUs, because when those beging designed how would Gen 5 considerations be made? I'm pretty sure that's expressly why this isn't backwards compatible. And why would you want to jumper off of ground if you don't have to? I mean shit dude, not only would the noise on the PCIe have to be dealt with add all the noise coming of the ground too for shit and giggles?
wait wut?
i don't know what article you read but this is the power connector to add in cards. there is 12v and ground; any signal is a simple open/closed circuit. closed/connection at one/two sensor(s) is 75/150 watts additional power. (

section 4 explains most of it and fwiw, pci-sig standards are backwards compatible - its all over their documentation..
 

Attachments

wait wut?
i don't know what article you read but this is the power connector to add in cards. there is 12v and ground; any signal is a simple open/closed circuit. closed/connection at one/two sensor(s) is 75/150 watts additional power. (

section 4 explains most of it and fwiw, pci-sig standards are backwards compatible - its all over their documentation..

The doc you linked is for a 300W spec from 15years ago.
 
and that was the last change. :slap:

really? according to pcisig there have been 4 additonal changes since then, meaning we're on Rev. 5.0 not Rev. 1.0, and the last one was dated June 18, 2021
 
really? according to pcisig there have been 4 additonal changes since then and the last one was dated June 18, 2021
ok mr. smarty pants. tell me how any of those are add in power specs?

all those deal with data signaling as you were yapping aboput before. the 12v power specs are entirely different; and gets refereed to in those docs.

do some reading before judging buddy. this is not my first rodeo, though serves me right for saying something related to PSUs; because there is always that special person . .
 
so this is not the same as that new standard Nvidia is trying to push?

and also....great....lets just embrace gpu's using more and more power....

It is.

It's the same 12-pin part, with a +4 added to the bottom for additional sense wires. The FE's 12-pin fits in this 12+4-pin. The rub is if the GPU manufacturer pushes that 450W limit and requires the sense pin to "prove" that a "approved" connector is in play. That's when you can no longer use the 12-pin.
 
View attachment 220310

ick. why not the same gauge? - yeah whatever; this needs to die.

there is time.
Because it's a signal pin carrying no more than 1A?

Then we have different sorts of reading comprehension, because what I'm reading in the quoted post is "Mining and playing games both use energy, so if you want to regulate mining, you need to regulate everything else that uses energy, including things that serve the purpose of having fun / playing"

Which is an utterly ridiculous train of thought, underlined by my link up there.
"Go play outside" is an easy counter.

The point is legislating what people do with energy for their own personal use is folly.
 
Last edited:
What does VHPWR stand for? Very High Power?
The successor will be VHSPWRFTW, VeryHighSuperPowerFTW
 
What does VHPWR stand for? Very High Power?
The successor will be VHSPWRFTW, VeryHighSuperPowerFTW
I think it stands for 12V High Power, but if you disregard the 12, I guess you could make it stand for anything...
 
Because it's a signal pin carrying no more than 1A?
it maybe rated for 1 amp but it carries no load. afaik it not a signal (mis-label in the manufacturer's spec sheet?) as much as a sensor that jumpered to ground.
page 31 of the pci-e specs i attached in a previous post:
Capture.PNG


when it comes down to it pci-sig needs to update the power - anything with more that two 6 pin OR one 8 pin and one 6 pin is outta spec and won't be pci-e certified. yes, that means anything with two 8 pins are not.

imo, 600 watts for one connector is overkill; the 450 watts connector nvidia tried out is much more appropriate - not because it was nvidia but that would be 75/150/450 instead of 75/150/600 - which leaves a big gap.
 
Low quality post by Vayra86
"Go play outside" is an easy counter.

The point is legislating what people do with energy for their own personal use is folly.
I think we're rapidly moving to an age where every carbon emission and energy bill is going to get calculated differently, economically. Its the only way to save capitalism - pricing needs to align with a sustainable planet and lifestyle because the cost of not doing so is so much higher, nobody will want to go there.

We're in fact calculating that very principle right now as the expense and frequency of natural disasters is increasing. It will kill our current economical model, and it has in fact already done so, we just fail to realize it and keep jumping to bandaids to hide it, with the end result of even more ecological, social and economical long term damage. But it gets impossible to hide when first world countries simply get surprised by things all the time; a pandemic now, mass flooding a few months ago, all events that were either predicted and not listened to, or surpass every prediction we could model thus far. We have no excuse for it, no explanation, but the public does demand one. After all, as the most wealthy and advanced countries in the world, if we can't handle and predict that proper, why would anyone else? This is the train of thought we're on, for understandable reasons as we democratically said we trust our governments to prevent those disasters.

We like money, but what we like a lot less, is insecurity and getting surprised by things out of our control. The latter is quickly gaining the upper hand.

Also... we already legislate what people do with their energy. This is reflected in tax on energy in different ways. The fact that flying halfway across the world is relatively cheap, is another way, albeit the wrong way, of stimulating more use of energy. The rules surrounding crypto and its decentralised character is another way of enabling more use of energy for no apparent purpose. So you say its folly, but we have in fact been using such policy for decades now, just the other way around. Packaged under the monikor of 'freedom' but in reality, it serves the purpose of funneling money to happy few. What's happening now in younger generations and activism is the realization that the 'freedom' of rampant energy use is in fact killing the freedoms of future generations. Our freedom is another one's prison.

This movement is growing the world over:
 
Last edited:
Low quality post by cst1992
It will kill our current economical model, and it has in fact already done so, we just fail to realize it and keep jumping to bandaids to hide it
This is nothing new. It's similar to how companies are now required to give a warning of "Smoking kills" on cigarette packets when earlier in the 50s they could sell tobacco products with no restrictions. Then suddenly smoking became a health hazard and no longer the "cool" thing to do.
 
Low quality post by R-T-B
Then suddenly smoking became a health hazard
Smoking was always a health hazard. Somehow, at least stateside, it retains it's "cool" properties, if a bit diminished. Weird, I know.

/OT
 
Grateful if we can slip back to the topic in hand ...... thank you.
 
CPU power increasing while energy requirement decreasing, why are GPUs getting more power hungry ?
 
CPU power increasing while energy requirement decreasing, why are GPUs getting more power hungry ?
It's a race between performance targets and fab improvements. A few years ago the fabs were winning, but now they aren't. And they shouldn't - you can only make a transistor so small. We're already at the 3nm point - I'll bet in only a few years we'll reach the point of "that's it, we can't make the manufacturing any smaller than that".
 
It's a race between performance targets and fab improvements. A few years ago the fabs were winning, but now they aren't. And they shouldn't - you can only make a transistor so small. We're already at the 3nm point - I'll bet in only a few years we'll reach the point of "that's it, we can't make the manufacturing any smaller than that".
We'll see how much truth there is in it, but Intel, publicly, and other companies less publically, have 'angstrom-scale' lithography process nodes on 'roadmap'.
I expect photonics and/or spintronics to start being 'hybridized' into the 'classical' computing architectures we use today.
Please correct my ignorance if so, but I'm pretty sure the science(s) associated with spintronics are already being factored today to mitigate Electron Migration and other (near)quantum-scale engineering challenges.
 
If they're indeed talking about literally the angstrom scale, then we're talking about components made out of individual atoms. Like the seven-atom transistor that was made back in 2010. Even if you reach that scale, will it be possible to make components that behave correctly at reasonable cost? I doubt it. Either the components will be very expensive, or have defects that can't be easily fixed, or take a long time to make.
 
Back
Top