• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

FRONTPAGE MSI Calls Gigabyte's PCIe Gen3 Support "Fake"

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Automata

Destroyer of Empires and Use
Joined
May 15, 2006
MSI seems to have pulled the files from the website. Guess they didn't want this to get out! Oops!

I don't think Gigabyte will like being called out like this.,
 

SuperDave1685

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Location
USMC.. OoRah!!
Very interesting. Surprising to see MSI get so specific with the part numbers on those PCI-# 3.0 chips. However, I don't quite follow their logic on the BIOS slide. What does the F5 BIOS have to do with anything?
 

David

Forums Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Interesting... I can't help but feel that there must be more to this ...
 

Archer0915

"The Expert"
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
I see they have something about Intel specifications. As far as PCIe Intel can say all they want but the fact is PCI-sig sets the standard not Intel alone. From the article I would say MSi is confused because they don't even know where the spec comes from.

I am not saying that those specs are not correct just that calling it Intel Gen3 specification is wrong and those specs may differ.

EDIT: http://www.pcisig.com/news_room/faqs/pcie3.0_faq/#EQ1 Some information.

EDIT 2: http://www.pcisig.com/developers/ma...c_id=2d3f06d33264c8a919556787ef8ce09ce7d9479a

EDIT 3: Pericom is not the only manufacturer of the signal conditioning retimer chips (the chip that is highlighted). I really don't want to pull my GB board to see exactly what chip is used but IDT also makes the chips. Hell I am curious though.
 
Last edited:

neliz

New Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
The article hasn't been pulled, the URL has been copy-pasted wrong:

Correct URL: http://media.msi.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=68762

I see they have something about Intel specifications. As far as PCIe Intel can say all they want but the fact is PCI-sig sets the standard not Intel alone. From the article I would say MSi is confused because they don't even know where the spec comes from.

I am not saying that those specs are not correct just that calling it Intel Gen3 specification is wrong and those specs may differ.
[/url]

We know very well where the specs are coming from, but before claiming "Gen3 enabled" on your products, you must first pass verification from Intel for its future 22nm CPUs.

If it was written in text on the slide it would say something like: "Intel requires a certain number of components before a mainboard can comply with the PCI express Gen3 standard, here is what Intel needs for socket 1155 boards"

That's also the factual basis on which we can claim that other boards will not comply since they simple don't meet the specs&requirements .
 

Archer0915

"The Expert"
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
I have some gen 2 chips on my board (I checked). I am looking at the sig information but there again this could have simply been a marketing move by GB because the sig is so stringent on backward compatability. I think all boards with PCIe X.X will support a native 3.0 card just not at 3.0 speeds.
 

Archer0915

"The Expert"
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
The article hasn't been pulled, the URL has been copy-pasted wrong:

Correct URL: http://media.msi.com/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=68762

We know very well where the specs are coming from, but before claiming "Gen3 enabled" on your products, you must first pass verification from Intel for its future 22nm CPUs.

If it was written in text on the slide it would say something like: "Intel requires a certain number of components before a mainboard can comply with the PCI express Gen3 standard, here is what Intel needs for socket 1155 boards"

That's also the factual basis on which we can claim that other boards will not comply since they simple don't meet the specs&requirements .

But there are two completely diffrent things going on here.

Are the GB boards capable of supporting a Gen3 card? Well they should but only at gen 2 speeds. So yes they have gen 3 native support. They may not have the gen 3 speeds though.

I have one of those boards and I bought it before the announcement of native gen 3 support but if I had bought it because I thought it had the support I would be peed.

I dont call it fraud but there is a marketing issue here and I expect they will be getting some boards back. I also do my own investigating and reach my own conclusions. I dont really see MSi as being anything but truthful at this point.

EDIT: Are you saying that even if they perform at gen 3 speeds and meet all of the SIG requirments it is not gen 3 because Intel does not say so? Perhaps I should say it can not be 3.0 because "Intel requires a certain number of components before a mainboard can comply with the PCI express Gen3 standard, here is what Intel needs for socket 1155 boards"? The SIG is not Intel. The Sig sets the standards not Intel or MSi. Are they in full compliance with the 3.0 standard for all ports? It does not look like it at this point.

That is a matter of semantics though because to me it is not 3.0 if it does not support the speeds.
So you must work for msi then :welcome:
 
Last edited:

Bobnova

Senior Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
It's dubious marketing on both sides, really.
MSI as they don't mention that gbt's first 8x really will (most likely) work at full PCIe3.0), gigabyte for claiming full compliance.
 

neliz

New Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
It's dubious marketing on both sides, really.
MSI as they don't mention that gbt's first 8x really will (most likely) work at full PCIe3.0), gigabyte for claiming full compliance.

Since x8 Gen3 has less bandwidth than x16 Gen2, in most (if not all) situations it will stay at x16 Gen2.
At least tested on boards using Gen2 switches, the CPU will stay in Gen2 mode (and then there's those cases it will fall back to Gen1 :p)

EDIT: Are you saying that even if they perform at gen 3 speeds and meet all of the SIG requirments it is not gen 3 because Intel does not say so? Perhaps I should say it can not be 3.0 because "Intel requires a certain number of components before a mainboard can comply with the PCI express Gen3 standard, here is what Intel needs for socket 1155 boards"? The SIG is not Intel. The Sig sets the standards not Intel or MSi.

Long story short SIG controls all requirements there, no doubt about it. Intel sets the requirements for running Gen3 on their 1155 boards.
We specially adjusted our (G3) boards to comply with Intel's requirements for Gen3 support.

Are they in full compliance with the 3.0 standard for all ports? It does not look like it at this point.
Who? what ports etc?[/quote]

So you must work for msi then :welcome:
I guess so:p and thanks.
 
Last edited:

Archer0915

"The Expert"
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Who? what ports etc?


GB PCIe ports/slots.

I am personally looking forward to the much needed 3.0 spec. With all the lane sharing and switching and potential bottle necks for some of us who use more than the x16 slot and are rather heavy on the SATA and USB use.
 

neliz

New Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
GB PCIe ports/slots.

Right now, from what I can gather from both the evidence and technical descriptions, no they don't except for the G1.sniper2

I am personally looking forward to the much needed 3.0 spec. With all the lane sharing and switching and potential bottle necks for some of us who use more than the x16 slot and are rather heavy on the SATA and USB use.

Yeah, the first (and most unexpected) performance benefits came for PCI Express based SSD controllers like the Photofast PowerDrive LSI which increased read/write performance by about 10%
Mind you that is a current PCIe2.0 card on our Gen3 boards.

Also plenty of GPGPU applications are going to benefit as bandwidth in the scientific world though today's games are built on the restraints of current tech. The only game engine that seems to scale well with bandwidth is the Id engines used in games like the Call of Duty series.

I'm really looking forward to benching the new games and see how they respond :)
 

bing

Low Profile Senior
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Location
Indonesia
Just heard from our local gigabyte's representative that GB HQ is planning to launch a legal action soon.
 

bing

Low Profile Senior
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Location
Indonesia
Rather than us going through the head-ache using google translation, why not help us what is that all about ?

Just the summary.