PCI Express 2.0 is nearing completetion.

This is an absord and needless upgrade of the PCI-E (1.0) interface, other then the power issue, where u wont need an extra 6-pin connector for each graphics card. PCI-E x16 is only using what, 6 lanes now with the 7950 GX2? There was no reason to upgrade AGP x8 and there is no reason to upgrade PCI-E x16, unless the power issue is far more problematic then i would have thought.

huh? only using 6 lanes? what on earth are you talking about?

Motherboard interfaces for graphics cards have done a good job of staying ahead of the curve and never being a bottleneck, and I'm happy to see that trend continuing with PCI-E 2.0.

Sure, but WAY ahead. Do u seriously think that we needed 16 lanes back in 2003 when PCI-E x16 was created when today we are only using 6-8 lanes? You dont we use only 6 lanes? how else is there no difference in performance beetween the 7600 GT in AGP x8 and PCI-E x16. I read that the 7950 GX2 takes only 6-8 lanes, so obviously it was total overkill in 2003 and its overkill today with PCI-E 2.0. They should have made PCI-E 1.0 today, but then they would have lost money from 2003 up until today, because for some reason making PCI-E with 16 lanes costs less then AGP with 8 lanes.

Track, I don't even know what to say. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. What in the world makes you think that you know more about microprocessor chipsets than intel?

Sorry Mike but I kind of have to agree with Track here. If there was no difference between the AGP 8X Bus and the PCI-E X16 1.0 Bus YET PCI-E has twice the bandwidth of AGP. What good will PCI-E 2.0 bring? Having a look at the two main graphic card vendors ATI and Nvidia id say they've reached a limit as to what they can do with graphics. So why would they want to bother making PCI-E 2.0 cards?

ATI is going bust as we know which is why AMD is buying them out. Nvidia could make PCI-E 2.0 cards but from what i've heard their Quadro cards aren't even fully supported yet! This is overkill in my opinion.

What I think PCI-E 2.0 is getting ready for is DX-10.

Wow, so much disinformation, I'm not sure where to start...There's a HUGE difference between AGP 8x and PCI-E 1.0. Without PCI-E we'd have no SLi or CrossFire, no TurboCache or HyperMemory. PCI-E 2 is just another bump in the framework for ATi and nVidia to build more technologies on top of. Also, ATi is not going bust...and whatever you heard about Quadro cards is probably just wrong as well. PCI-E 2.0 is a good thing. Just because it's not going to make your computer twice as fast the day it comes out, doesn't make it useless.

Mike, i agree with u abt the features. SLI and Crossfire are good enough reasons to create a whole new interface for graphics cards. But what im saying is that even current graphics cards dont use the 16 lanes that PCI-E x16 has had since 2003. So why did they not make PCI-E x8 instead of PCI-E x16? Maybe they needed it to look different then AGP x8, to make it look like the next generation. In any case, u have to agree that modern graphics cards do not use even half of the PCI-E x16 slot's bandwidth, and if u were to make a 7950 GX2 for AGP x8 (bandwitdth comparison only), it would run almost or exactly the same, performance wise. That because PCI-E x8 = AGP x8. Now, because PCI-E was a whole new interface, there was room for new features such as SLI and Crossfire, but this isnt a whole new interface, its just PCI-E.. 2 and the only different that i can see beetween them is bandwidth and power. So what kind of new features could they possibly add to an interface that exactly the same, but has more bandwidth?

Maybe so superboss, what you said sounds about right to me but people aren't prepared to change their entire PC system to make way everytime they change the graphics bus slot. Many people have just recently upgraded from agp to pci-e. only the super nerds or people willing to waste time will get a pci-e 2.0 mobo.

Hey Mike, I wouldn't list turbocache as a virtue of PCIe. ;)
And bandwidth....AGP8x was never saturated, let's be truthful on that count. SLI/Crossfie standards also have varied widely. Some boards support only PCIe8x and some others 16x. The big jump will be to this 2.0 standard. PCIe 1.0 owners will be left "holding the bag" after spending countless $$$$ over the past few years.

@Track: Sure they don't use the bandwidth, but that's not the point. Whenever you create a platform like PCI-E you want to give it as much room to grow as possible at the time. So if it wasn't that hard to do, and it wasn't that expensive to produce, why not make it twice as fast as you need? Because we all know at some point we'll find a use for all that bandwidth. And they did, SLi and CrossFire use that bandwidth.

@Nick: Nobody is saying you should run out and upgrade to PCI-E 2.0 when it comes out...I certainly won't...and you can bet it'll be backwards compatible with PCI-E 1.0.

Right, AT SOME POINT, but that point has not come to be and already we are seeing PCI-E 2.0 with EVEN MORE bandwidth, so what was the point of making ppl like me buy a PCI-E x16 motherboard just because my AGP x8 was costing them more money to make? PCI-E 1.0 should have been created NOW! What do u mean SLI and CrossFire use that bandwidth? Each card in each slot uses the same bandwidth that a single GPU setup would use. And SLI and CrossFire arent that good either.. they dont have a 2x increase in performance but a 2x increase in price, defenitely not price/performance material.

Oh, and i understand they making PCI-E 2.0, but making PCI-E 2.0 cards?? Why cant PCI-E 1.0 cards be used in PCI-E 2.0 slots? Are they really going to make "PCI-E 2.0 cards"? I mean its the same interface, its not like AGP to PCI-E, there is no need to make different cards, just that these cards would have more leg room. So i dont know what u mean "backwards compatible".

Mike will pci-e 2 be a slot change or will it be the same slot but higher speeds?

@Track Nobody made you buy anything. PCI-E is a great thing, whether you can understand it or not. And the fact that they are continuing to develop it is also a good thing. Just because you don't understand why they feel the need to release things when they do doesn't mean they are all idiots trying to fuck you over. Your personal upgrade schedule is of absolutely no consequence to the motherboard chipset industry. I'm done talking about this.

@Track Do AGP 8X cards work in AGP 4X slots? Yes, yes they do. So rest assured the same will be true of PCI-E 1.0 and 2.0.

@david From what I've read they're just doubling the bandwidth per pin. To me that says it'll be the exact same slot, just with support for higher speeds.

Thank you. But if they double bandwith per pin then that means that pci-e 32x will become standard right?

I never say anyone is an "idiot". There may be good reason to introduce a 16 lane interface when u only need 4, but i doubt they deserve the ammount of credit u give them.

And i KNOW its backwards compaitble, i actually read ur posts. its wether they will make "PCIe 2.0 cards", as in will they make a new kind of card type for PCIe 2.0 or just use the same type of cards to better extent. As in, will cards released after PCIe 2.0 work on PCIe 1.0? If so, no user who didnt need the extra power would buy them because the bandwidth u dont need.

Track if its gonna be pci-e 2 then it's gonna be like agp; same slot, lower volts, and faster different speed.

and yet it will still mean a new mobo upgrade to partake of this wonderful advancement in video card technology! Everyone is leapfrogging around, Joe-gamer jsut spent $$$ scrapping his old 939mobo for a brand spanking new AM@ mobo and now he has to spend more $$$ to get the PCIe2 mobo for his AM2 CPU ...brilliant!!! ditto for the Conroe fans out there!

@ David. When u move from an 8 lane slot to a 16 lane slot, there must be a change of cards. But here we are still using 16 lanes, so there is no reason to make a different card.

Yeah, I wish progress would just stop altogether, that way I wouldn't have to ever spend any more money on computers ever again.

@Track true but if it's anything like agp then it should require less volt's right? Mike back me up on this. Oh and if progress stopped then i guess i would'nt be playing bf2 on my pc right now while writing this would I?
Btw Mach i'm guessing you bought an am2 mobo and now your mad at amd right?

@David If you just take a look, the power needs of GPUs have gone up, not down. PCIe card GPU designs need additional power. Why do you think the new Nvidia 8 series is calling for 400 watt PSUs for single and 800 watt PSUs for SLI? This new 2.0 standard will at least double the juice carried by the slot to the card. Somehow, Intel and AMD both found a way to reduce power consumption for their top-line CPUs, but somehow Nvidia and ATI GPUs can't do the same???

Simple Mach people always blame the cpu for power drain not the gpu, And when we're talking about cpu power drain people mostly think it's laptop's so long story real short intel/amd both got the blame for power consumption in pc's since the cpu is the main part that holds it together ati/nvidia don't care since the more powerfull a card is the more power it should drain and "enthusiasts" won't mind, Is probably their train of thought on such matters but i think your right there should be gpu's that take the same amount of power as their cpu counterparts. Also i was talking about voltage not wattage about pci-e 2.

Yes, I would agree with you that Laptop GPU power consumption has been a major limition, I really haven't heard that complaint for desktops CPUs. It has always been complaints of rising power needs of video cards. First the added molex power connection (on the end of the card) and now finding a way to provide additonal power directly via the slot itself. As to voltage/wattage...I really don't think that is the issue. Isn't 3.3v the current level for video cards? It is the rising ampere levels which is increasing, but seen as just increasing the PSU wattage.

No i think its 1.5v with pci-e and 2. something with agp. And yes if both nvidia and ati could make a gpu with the same performance as their current flagship and only take around the same power as a core duo it would sell like hotcakes and solve the gpu issue on laptops

3.3? No i think it's less, And yes it seems that nvidia and ati dont care about our power bills anymore. It's enthusiusts wont mind the power consumption because its fast! So what if the card is fast i dont wanna have to use an 800watt psu for an 8800gtx in sli when there are slight performance gains.
Am i right?

800w? is that for 15 cards?

As to power requirements. I thought I read somewhere back that the core ran on 3.3v if it's less, depending on AGP or PCIe, then that's all well and good. This issue arises over the additional molex connection now needed for most mid and upper level video cards. Currently I see a spec of 12v with 18 amp for the molex connection, which mandates a fairly powerful PSU with sustainable amperage.
To Track: Yes, 800 Watts is Nvidia's own PSU recommendation for the 8800GTX SLI mode.

Hmm? So if i get a G80 i'll be paying a hell lot mor eon my powerbill? Damn i hope nvida does witt the 8-series with what they did with the 7-series.(7800gtx to 7900gtx)

I agree with Track and Mike we dont even use the whole agp 8x bus. Pci express is just a total over kill on bandwith and Theoreticaly bandwith only helps to a certain point. If you want more speed with your graphics card oc it a bit. Ya PCIe 2.0 is only going to give the bus more power so you dont have to use the 6 pin PCIe connector but other then that maby a few new featuers like i dont know sli 6 witch will allow users to run 6 cards in sli. I personally dont think its worth the money from PCIe 16x unless your upgrading from Agp 8x so you can get a sli or crossfire system going.