| Bofferbrauer2 said: I think the PCIe x8 is simply due to the chip's mobile origins. Bristol Ridge, Raven Ridge and Picasso all only had PCIe x8 to cut down the size of the chips since their main usage is mobile. And it's 64GBit/s should still be enough for bigger GPUs, especially the Max-Q variants. Of course, considering how powerful the CPU is, it's a bit of a bummer, especially for their Desktop counterparts. So I hope they go bigger next time - though the jump the PCIe 4 will already help a lot even if it stays at x8. For myself, it doesn't change too much, I'm only interested into a 4600G for a light gaming PC (for my wife) which would get transplanted later on into a home server. |
Correct. PCI-E x8 is because of it's mobile roots.
It's not so much to keep chip size reigned in though... It's actually mostly to do with power consumption.
Still, x8 PCI-E 4.0 lanes is equivalent to x16 PCI-E 3.0 lanes, so plenty of bandwidth for the fastest of GPU's except for a few edge-case scenarios like compute or sharing with multiple nvme drives... But by extension those same users shouldn't be buying an APU if they intend to run a discreet high-end GPU with a heap of SSD's in Raid, it can be done, just not optimally.
| JEMC said: You missed Chris Hems... Thor. But he's on another level:
|
How to be Australian with one picture. We just don't care.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
