MSI Calls Gigabyte's PCIe Gen3 Support "Fake"

Add Your Comments

Courtesy: PCIsig.com

Courtesy: PCIsig.com

Dennis Achterberg with MSI’s Product Marketing is calling out Gigabyte on their claim that all of the Gigabyte 6 series boards support native PCIe Gen3. While MSI’s website doesn’t contain any official press release, their marketing department has released a set of slides that can be found all over the web. The slides get rather granular, referencing the spec requirements for Gen3 switch chips, capacitors and resistors. Impressively, they even go as far to reference part numbers for the Pericom switch chips on the motherboard.

Basically, MSI is saying that Gigabyte’s claim is false, with the exception of their G1.Sniper2 motherboard. If what MSI claims is true, then none of Gigabyte’s motherboards are PCIe Gen3 ready, except for one. Gigabyte’s initial claim was made around the same time as the G1.Sniper2 announcement.

Let’s take a peek at some of the slides that MSI released:

True Vs. Fake (Courtesy MSI)

True Vs. Fake (Courtesy MSI)

Intel Gen3 Specifications

Intel Gen3 Specifications (Courtesy MSI)

True Gen3 Switches

MSI: True Gen3 Switches (Courtesy MSI)

Notice that they are being extremely specific about the differences between their product offering and Gigabyte’s product line, specifically where it pertains to PCI3 Gen3. Let’s close with a few more slides, shown below. The entire deck of slides is available directly from MSI’s site.

Gigabyte Fake Gen3 BIOS (Courtesy MSI)

Gigabyte Fake Gen3 BIOS (Courtesy MSI)

Gigabyte's True Gen3 Model (Courtesy MSI)

Gigabyte's True Gen3 Models (Courtesy MSI)

As we mentioned previously in the G1.Sniper 2 announcement, it looks like top manufacturers are in a heated “arms race” to be the first to market with this technology. With no devices currently taking advantage of PCI3, this is just a battle of marketing departments. It will however, be interesting to follow this story as it continues to unfold. At this time, Gigabyte has not released a statement, but we will keep an eye out for further information.

– John Tyra (Jmtyra)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Discussion
  1. 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.,
    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?
    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/main/training_materials/get_document?doc_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.
    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.
    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 .
    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.
    neliz
    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"
    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:
    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.
    Bobnova
    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)
    Archer0915

    EDIT: 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?
    So you must work for msi then :welcome:

    I guess so:p and thanks.
    neliz
    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.
    Archer0915
    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 :)
    Rather than us going through the head-ache using google translation, why not help us what is that all about ?
    Just the summary.