PeterK reacted to mariushm in S-ATA 4 ? the future of mass storage .
This is strictly CPU. x470 chipsets make it possible to split the x16 into two x8 slots, to use two cards in SLI or Crossfire.
In theory you could install an adapter card with a M.2 connector in the 2nd pci-e x8 card and then your video card would be downgraded to pci-e x8.
You probably (90% sure) can't put 2 M.2 connectors on the pci-e x8 slot, because AM4 board don't support further splitting that x8 into 2 x4. That splitting of lanes without any circuitry is called "bifurcation"
The Threadripper supports bifurcation, which is where you can use those adapter cards with 4 m.2 connectors.
You have 4 pci-e lanes in each connector, so you could could have pci-e 2.0 x4 = 2 GB/s
Or you could have 4 M.2 connectors each with 2 lanes, for 1 GB/s per connector.
However, a few of those lanes are typically used by onboard devices.
AM4 is not meant to be a workstation platform, a single video card or two plus a few pci-e slots is enough.
If you need more, you have workstation boards, Threadripper, etc
What I was saying is that if they get rid of SATA ports and the controller, they could add more pci-e lanes in the chipset.
PeterK reacted to mariushm in S-ATA 4 ? the future of mass storage .
It's true chipsets have a limited number of pci-e lanes, but if the sata controller is removed from the chipset, the space on the die can be repurposed for pci-e lanes.
The problem is sata was designed from the start to be cheap ... the connectors are cheap, the cables are cheap, it's very easy to put in laptops. The sata controller inside a chipset connects to everything else using the equivalent of 1..4 pci-e lanes, typically just one or two lanes are used. So the 6 sata ports in total may only have 1-2 GB/s connection to the CPU. If you go with pci-e lanes for each drive, you have at least one pci-e lane for each drive.
Going with pci-e lanes means more precise made cables and connectors - you can see how much more expensive usb type-c connectors and cables are, and how you have some fancy pants usb type c headers for the front panel connectors on some boards.
Also, the problem is pci-e controllers use more power, and they have to use more power if you go with pci-e 4.0 - you can see how AMD had to go back to using a fan on the chipset because the pci-e 4.0 controller uses more power than pci-e 3.0
So yeah, they can add more pci-e lanes, but there are costs with that and disadvantages, and in some cases they're just not worth it.
See for example companies like backblaze or 45drives which just need to put 36-45 hard drives in a case and store data, not care about the actual speed.
SATA has its place, as SAS has, for some applications the 560 MB/s limitation is not a problem.
PeterK got a reaction from gill2k in What was your first computer?
Welll , ok .
My first pc i ever modified was some dirt cheap low end crap (even in ~2005) :
Asrock motherboard (something kn..8.....upgrade.... i don't know)
AMD Semprom something... 1.81GHz (single core)
Ram unknown 256mb DDR1 400MHz , yes it's not typo
GPU nVidia FX 5200 from Palit , 128mb ram
15gb hdd .......Maxtor
Genius 5.1 poor quality soundcard
Optical : dvd burner asus
some shit deluxe case with a weak delux psu - 450w
generic mouse with 2 button and no scroll wheel , also with BALL , PS2
generic a4 tech keyboard , PS2
Monitor : unknown CRT 1024*768@72Hz , or 1152*864@60Hz
At a point dunno when probably 2007 , hdd failed , (the hdd was in use since 2001) , and i replaced it with a 80gb refurbished. - needless to say i was excited , This was my first modification.
A few months later i added 1gb ram Kingmax DDR1 400MHz - this gave me a significant boost
+1 weak tv tuner
In 2008 maybe... i added a case fan.....Arctic cooling .....92mm.
at some point i had a 160gb hdd... really can't remember - it was WD.
My first pc i ever built was in mid 2009 , after my 15th bithday with a budget of ~550$ , i build it in a way too meet the requirements of CRYSIS - medium-high settings , kinda... (little did i knew )) )
Motherboard : Biostar tp45hp , it looked good , it was crap , but worked for almost 5 years - I know that in one the pictures is a GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARD box but IT CAME DEAD ON ARRIVAL
CPU : Intel Core2Quad Q8400 @2,66 GHz , it turned out to be an overkill but it still had mojo for a GTX660
GPU: Gainward nVidia 9600GT 1gb , base clock 650mhz , oc'ed to 725mhz , died in 2013-may , replaced with a GTX660
RAM: Kingmax 2x2Gb DDR2 1066mhz , running at 800mhz cause the mobo was too weak....
HDD: Samsung 100...uj...something 1tb - it's failing now (2015-july) it has close to 15000 work yours , and the 80gb hdd from before - remowed in 2012 because of failing....
Optical : the same DVD burner - died in late 2014.
PSU: Chieftec cft-140 something... 700W 80+ (simple , not bronze) still in use .
Case: the same shit deluxe case
Generic mouse , same keyboard since 2001
Monitor same , upgraded in 2011 or 2012 ... to a 1080p benq
+1 the same tv tuner , i had to remove it after i left windows xp in ~2010 .
+some fans , hdd coolers-bad decision...
Some notes'''''' : - the jump from fx5200 with 1.81ghz cpu +1.25gb ram to qore2quad with 9600gt and 4gb ram was huuge ;
but the upgrade from this to a fx-6300 with 8gb ram + gtx660 was noticeable but not a big difference honestly ,...in gaming of course i got 3x the fps with the gtx660 , but in everyday usage ...it was almost the same until i got an ssd . Only then i started to see improvements in everyday use .
-i plan to upgrade my gpu and monitor but it's not necessary yet , and it would cost me a lot (display 550$ , gpu 450$ [where i live] ) to see improvements , maybe i'll upgrade in late 2016 or 2017 , maybe i will be forced to upgrade sooner if monitor dies (i hope not) . In any case i WILL not upgade this gpu until i see 14/16nm chips , and with affordable prices .
- i also plan to add a 3-4tb hdd in early 2016
PeterK reacted to Tedster in What areas are overclocking best for
Okay, so you generally overclock CPUs and GPUs to get more operations per second, and maybe RAM to get faster speeds.
More CPU power means that you can do any CPU-based task quicker, while more GPU power will generally mean that you can run games at a higher framerate, among other things.
PeterK reacted to Botasky in Should LinusTech upload videos in 1440p or 2160p ?
Their FS700 can shoot at 2160, so why not.
PeterK reacted to felixthemaster1 in Should LinusTech upload videos in 1440p or 2160p ?
I can't understand why people deliberately watch it in a small area rather than fullscreen.
PeterK got a reaction from Speedbird in Worst names in Tech Products
XFX , Evga , fuck that means ? and thoose things when the refresh has the same "name" but a different codename , shit is confusing . There are some who ask:
-Yo wich htc is that?
-WAATTT i tought they only released the ONE
That shitty ATI graphics is also frustrating..
Why can't you have a classification letter + model number....
Like Nokia A(entry level)-1000(the lowest) ,X(top tier)-xxxx(something).
PeterK got a reaction from enthalpy in 23 Noctua fans? Well... yeaa! [Upgraded to 18 Cores]
OH fudge.... :-amazed , well you can always make it push pull $$ .