Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by zepmck 1902 days ago
In terms of PCI lanes efficiency, there is no competition between Intel and AMD. Intel is much ahead wrt AMD. Don't not be impressed about number of lanes available on the board.
4 comments

> Don't not be impressed about number of lanes available on the board.

When you configure the system full-out with GPUs & HBAs, the number of lanes becomes a matter of necessity rather than a spec which you drool over.

A PCIe lane is a PCIe lane. Its capacity, latency and speed is fixed, and you need these with minimum number of PCIe switches to saturate the devices and servers you have, at least in our scenario.

I can only assume you're referring to Intel's Rocket Lake storage demonstration they tweeted out. This was using PCMark 10's Quick Storage Benchmark which is more CPU bound than anything else.

All of the other benchmarks in the PCMark test suite push the bottleneck down to the storage device.

One would think Intel might want to build a storage array that could stress the PCIe lanes but then that might show an entirely different picture than the one Intel is portraying.

Either put up the real reason to be impressed by Intel's much, much delayed PCIe 4, or stop shilling for them.

PCIe efficiency is such buzz-none-word.

What is PCI lane efficiency? I thought they were fixed speed and bandwidth.