3 ms·
> That's the equivalent of 160 3.0 PCIe lanes PCIe lanes don't work like that, lanes are the unit of allocation, a lane is a lane regardless of the speed it r
by paulmd 7y ago
> That's the equivalent of 160 3.0 PCIe lanes
PCIe lanes don't work like that, lanes are the unit of allocation, a lane is a lane regardless of the speed it runs at.
But yes, you can put more bandwidth down a 4.0 lane... if your device supports it. Most of the devices you will be putting on a budget home system don't support it.
It would, hypothetically, be more desirable to have 160 PCIe 3.0 lanes than 80 4.0 lanes. Of course there is no system with that many, but I'd take 128 3.0 lanes over 80 4.0 lanes for sure.
- Robotbeat 7y agoDual socket Epyc 2 systems provide up to 160 PCIe lanes (and they’re PCIe gen4, too).
- Dylan16807 7y ago> PCIe lanes don't work like that, lanes are the unit of allocation, a lane is a lane regardless of the speed it runs at. There's no need to be pedantic here. Just about nothing uses a single 3.0 lane, especially not in a system where you care about having a big count. For anything that was using 2-16 lanes, doubling the speed is basically the same as doubling the number of lanes. Except for the extra benefit that the max allocation goes up. > I'd take 128 3.0 lanes over 80 4.0 lanes for sure Maybe you'd take that today. In a few years when more devices support 4.0 that's not a great tradeoff. Especially when you can put switch chips in front of your 3.0 devices to keep all your lanes saturated.