PCI Express 2

[waheed]

Forget PCI Express, it's time for PCI Express 2

WHILE A LOT of people haven't got themselves fangled up for PCI Express yet, and AGP cards are still selling well, Intel told developers last week to be ready for PCI Express 2.

Ajay Bhatt and Ramin Neshati, who work at the Intel Corporation, divulged architectural extensions for PCIe II, with products expected in 2007-2008.

Features for PCI Express II include better formance at 5GHz PHY, device virtualisation, trusted platforms, and different sizes - or form factors as the jargon goes.

Luckily, you won't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater, because PCIe II will be compatible with PCIe 1.x, using the same power budget and the same clocking architecture. But the silicon cost will be cheaper, and so will the clocks.

A new form factor, or size as it's called in AmerenglishIntel discovered that systems are constrained by jitter and not voltage margins, and hitting the "jitter budget" is a fundamental requirement for version 2.0.

Five GHz devices have to operate at 2.5GT/s or 5.0GT/s. and the transmitter, receiver, reference clock and channel must all be 5GHz capable to get to that kind of performance.

The virtualisation feature will allow multiple OSes to run simultaneously and share the platform hardware resources, effectively sharing PCI Express devices.

OS improvements can lead to increased IO attacks on systems, so PCIe II will try and include better trusted computing. There will be a trusted configuration space, and a trusted configuration access mechanism will be included with modifications to the trusted platform module (TPM) to enable that.

Different sizes of devices will be included for wireless radios in the notebook lid. PCIe II may also include two distinct types of connector assemblies.

Source: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25774

[lumis]

Luckily, you won't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater

who the hell actually uses that phrase? this guy, apparently.

[Gregg]

Not playing games makes life much more easier.

[lumis]

thats why i buy gaming consoles.

you can still enjoy good games, without worrying about having to upgrade your hardware every 6 months.

[lordsmurf]

thats why i buy gaming consoles.
you can still enjoy good games, without worrying about having to upgrade your hardware every 6 months.

I can still play my Nintendo from 1985, just as easily as I can turn on the PS1 or XBOX.

But I cannot play hardly any of my 1985 computer games. Computer games suck on many levels. Their window of life is too shortlived, hardware and software obsolete them in too quick a time.

[satviewer2000]

Why don't you just use your circa 1985 computer to play your 1985 games?

[whitejremiah]

i play a LOT of games, both pc and console....console is definately better, for the most part.....the controllers are generally better suited for the games (though thats changed quite a bit in the past few years) as far as hardware.....well...basically if you upgrade your computer every few years, thats GENERALLY enough as long as when you do upgrade it, you upgrade it with relatively higher end type eqipment...particularly video card wise and ram wise...the processor.....well, yes it matters, but processor requirements tend to go up rather slowly......there are still some VERY recent games that only require in the range of 1.0-1.5ghz...i dont even know WHERE to find a 1.0ghz processor other than ebay or something like that......the other factor though...and this is a pretty big one.....is that console games dont generally require harddrive space (okay, i will give the xbox the exception to the rule on this one...and just playing games on it, and doing nothing else, its dang near impossible to fill the drive...even updating all the games you have) they may require memory cards...but as far as like the ps2, you can find them relatively cheap..and in the case of a gamecube, you can find them EXCESSIVELY cheap.....20 bux will buy you enough memory to save probably half the gamecube games in existance to it......console gaming IS generally cheaper, however, i do notice that pc game prices tend to drop a GREAT deal faster than console games (i'll take this as a rather extreme case...but around 2 weeks ago, at a local store - target for those that live in the USA, i bought a clearanced copy of splinter cell chaos theory for 12.50) but some pc games hit the ten dollar mark within a matter of like six months after they come out, while the console counterparts take around a year generally to hit the 20 dollar mark.....

[lordsmurf]

Why don't you just use your circa 1985 computer to play your 1985 games?

You're kidding, right?

Computers die too fast, especially ones from the 80s and 90s. Floppy drives, hard drives ... dead. CPUs and RAM burn out too. Power supplies. And then replacement parts are pretty much impossible.

And don't forget most of these problems were pre-eBay or even pre-Internet, so there was no easy marketplace to get extras. You were just screwed, and the smart option was to chunk it and buy another.

Never would you have considered technological "advances" have forced hardware and software into a fully obsolete status. Those kinds of things were just not thought of back then.

[SatStorm]

Emulators.... I love emulators.
I have many games from the 80s for my ZX Spectrum 128K (the original Sinclair model from 1986). Those games were on tape (yeap, tape, cassetes....). I convert them to digital files (.tzx) and now I'm able to play those games for ever on my PC.

Most java games, or games for your mobile phone, are based on those same 80s games. Those games had what use to call "gameplay". Today games are like the new hollywood movies: You watch them once and when finished, never look back.

[ROF]

This is great news. While PCI-x has been an excellent addition, I always look forward to the next gen graphics architecture. That's something you just can't get with a console system. Your stuck with what the manufacturer gives you and what they give you is usually several years old by the time the console is released. A shame too considering they charge you a premium for their legacy hardware that's non-upgradeable. When X-Box was released, quite a few people were hoping for interchangeable parts. Unfortunately, it's the same consoles we've had since the 70's. Once you buy it, you're stuck with it. With that type of mentality, they can keep their consoles. I'd rather buy something I can add to or replace parts as needed.

Another bad thing about consoles is the games are all written for the ancient hardware contained within. The console gaming companies can not innovate like PC game corps. Some would say that's a good thing, but for me I like to watch my games increase in capacity without having to "throw the baby out with the bath water" and have to buy an entire new setup just to see a difference in my display.

[smearbrick1]

Yes, gotta agree with SatStorm... love those emulators. I have SNES, NES, and Genesis emulators for both PC and Xbox. Plus, with DOS emulators and Windows compatibility mode, I haven't had much of an issue playing too many older games. Of course, my oldest game is the original Quake.

[igalan]

[...]Features for PCI Express II include better formance at 5GHz PHY, device virtualisation, trusted platforms, and different sizes - or form factors as the jargon goes.[...]

Source: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25774

That's a scary word. Trusted platforms, what does that mean? More DRM stuff to control what we can do or can't do with our hardware and software??? .

[Cornucopia]

This is great news. While PCI-x has been an excellent addition, I always look forward to the next gen graphics architecture. That's something you just can't get with a console system. Your stuck with what the manufacturer gives you and what they give you is usually several years old by the time the console is released. A shame too considering they charge you a premium for their legacy hardware that's non-upgradeable. When X-Box was released, quite a few people were hoping for interchangeable parts. Unfortunately, it's the same consoles we've had since the 70's. Once you buy it, you're stuck with it. With that type of mentality, they can keep their consoles. I'd rather buy something I can add to or replace parts as needed.

Another bad thing about consoles is the games are all written for the ancient hardware contained within. The console gaming companies can not innovate like PC game corps. Some would say that's a good thing, but for me I like to watch my games increase in capacity without having to "throw the baby out with the bath water" and have to buy an entire new setup just to see a difference in my display.

I wouldn't call boxes based on the CELL architecture to be "ancient" by any stretch of the imagination (IIRC, Sony's PS3 is). Sure, there are always some stock pieces that will bottleneck a "mind-blowing", future-proofed experience, but you've still got stuff like that on regular PC's as well. Look how long it took for floppy drives and ISA slots to go away.
Also, I like the idea of settops giving developers and users a stable (hopefully reliable) platform and guarantee of at least a certain minimum standard of quality/playability while still leaving room for improvement in authoring/encoding features (much like AudioCD and DVD player improvements over the years). Stability is usually a good thing.

Scott

[ROF]

I wouldn't call boxes based on the CELL architecture to be "ancient" by any stretch of the imagination (IIRC, Sony's PS3 is). Sure, there are always some stock pieces that will bottleneck a "mind-blowing", future-proofed experience, but you've still got stuff like that on regular PC's as well. Look how long it took for floppy drives and ISA slots to go away.
Also, I like the idea of settops giving developers and users a stable (hopefully reliable) platform and guarantee of at least a certain minimum standard of quality/playability while still leaving room for improvement in authoring/encoding features (much like AudioCD and DVD player improvements over the years). Stability is usually a good thing.

Scott

Too true, but isn't one of the current consoles experiencing problems with games that need to be patched? I could have swore I read that somewhere, at least I remember laughing when I did. Right now the biggest bottleneck for PCs is the slow as dirt hard drive interfaces. There have been improvements, but that's the biggest bottleneck today. RAM is also causing issues, but nothing compared to the spinning mechanical drives. Solid State is too expensive in large capacities to make it a feasible use in PC Hard drives, but that is also slowly changing.

Is the PS3 available today? Nope, but when it is released it will be a marvel of technology, yet it will quickly become dated. What's going to make it perform well is that it's RAM Clock is almost a third faster than it's GPU clock which means there is zero bottleneck there. Another feature or features I should say is the connectivity of that entertainment system. the PS3 will also be using next-gen BD-Rom discs, which means to those who like to play games from backups, you will be able to backup your media and play from those and thus saving your originals from the scratches and wear and tear game discs incur. not to mention the Cell Processor you discussed which quite frankly at 3.2Ghz and P4 specs rivals most gaming PC out there today.

The down side is, what will the PS3 be when it's released next year in relation to where the mid-range PC is at? How about 6 months after release date? A year later? Consoles are good, but there lack of upgradeability without an engineering degree or at the very least no fear of a soldering gun makes them a no sale to most PC gamers.

[lumis]

i think the game you're referring to was the GTA san andreas.. and it was just overhyped bs.. some animated pixelated computer nudity, big f'ing deal.

i only upgrade my computer once every 2 or 3 years (cpu/mobo/memory/video card), same with my consoles.. the pc is great for everything except gaming in my opinion, the cost associated with playing recent games is ridiculous.. it is great for retro gaming though