Current Events > eGPUs would be actually viable if there was a better connection standard

Topic List	Page List: 1
DarkRoast 07/01/20 4:30:49 PM #1:	Getting a 20% performance hit due to data transfer limits via thunderbolt/USB 3.0 makes eGPUs not worth it, but if they could come up with a better connection solution, it'd be amazing to have a laptop (or even ultrabook!) with a maxed-out GPU that you could take anywhere and upgrade at will. Plus, separating the GPU from the CPU would significantly improve thermals. --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941535204] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Getting a 20% performance hit due to data transfer limits via thunderbolt/USB 3.0 makes eGPUs not worth it, but if they could come up with a better connection solution, it'd be amazing to have a laptop (or even ultrabook!) with a maxed-out GPU that you could take anywhere and upgrade at will. Plus, separating the GPU from the CPU would significantly improve thermals. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
brotrrwinner 07/01/20 4:32:29 PM #2:	Have you tried parallel? --- September 21st, 2008 Never forget <cite>brotrrwinner posted [p:941535271] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Have you tried parallel? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 4:36:01 PM #3:	brotrrwinner posted... Have you tried parallel? I haven't really bothered with eGPU solutions yet, because I got my Razer Blade with an RTX 2080 Max-Q, which is a pretty good GPU overall (roughly in-between an RTX 2060 and RTX 2070 desktop). --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941535417] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>brotrrwinner posted... </cite> <quote>Have you tried parallel?</quote> I haven't really bothered with eGPU solutions yet, because I got my Razer Blade with an RTX 2080 Max-Q, which is a pretty good GPU overall (roughly in-between an RTX 2060 and RTX 2070 desktop). </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 07/01/20 4:39:26 PM #4:	Some sort of ExpressCard successor needs to exist. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:941535575] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Some sort of ExpressCard successor needs to exist. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 4:40:37 PM #5:	Questionmarktarius posted... Some sort of ExpressCard successor needs to exist. Honestly, at least in the case of GPUs, something fully external would be preferable because it would allow for better cooling. --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941535634] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>Some sort of ExpressCard successor needs to exist.</quote> Honestly, at least in the case of GPUs, something fully external would be preferable because it would allow for better cooling. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 07/01/20 4:44:46 PM #6:	DarkRoast posted... Honestly, at least in the case of GPUs, something fully external would be preferable because it would allow for better cooling. Exprescard successor as the physical interface, with the actual hardware remaining external. It's probably not viable to cram a decent GPU into the tiny expresscard form factor. The bottlenecks with USB/Firewire/etc just come down to not enough pins. A PCIe/PC-Card type interface with 25-50 pins would have much better bandwidth. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:941535832] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>DarkRoast posted... </cite> <quote>Honestly, at least in the case of GPUs, something fully external would be preferable because it would allow for better cooling.</quote>Exprescard successor as the physical interface, with the actual hardware remaining external. It's probably not viable to cram a decent GPU into the tiny expresscard form factor. The bottlenecks with USB/Firewire/etc just come down to not enough pins. A PCIe/PC-Card type interface with 25-50 pins would have much better bandwidth. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 4:46:37 PM #7:	Questionmarktarius posted... Exprescard successor as the physical interface, with the actual hardware remaining external. It's probably not viable to cram a decent GPU into the tiny expresscard form factor. The bottlenecks with USB/Firewire/etc just come down to not enough pins. A PCIe/PC-Card type interface with 25-50 pins would have much better bandwidth. I see what you mean. Yeah, I agree. I wonder if there's something akin to NVMe that could be utilized as well. --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941535907] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>Exprescard successor as the physical interface, with the actual hardware remaining external. It's probably not viable to cram a decent GPU into the tiny expresscard form factor. The bottlenecks with USB/Firewire/etc just come down to not enough pins. A PCIe/PC-Card type interface with 25-50 pins would have much better bandwidth.</quote> I see what you mean. Yeah, I agree. I wonder if there's something akin to NVMe that could be utilized as well. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 07/01/20 4:56:41 PM #8:	DarkRoast posted... I see what you mean. Yeah, I agree. I wonder if there's something akin to NVMe that could be utilized as well. Why not resurrect IEEE 1284? <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:941536355] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>DarkRoast posted... </cite> <quote>I see what you mean. Yeah, I agree. I wonder if there's something akin to NVMe that could be utilized as well.</quote>Why not resurrect IEEE 1284? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 5:00:04 PM #9:	Questionmarktarius posted... Why not resurrect IEEE 1284? 2 retro 4 me But USB 3.0 is 20 MB/sec, while IEEE 1284 at peak performance was 4 MB/sec --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941536509] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Questionmarktarius posted... </cite> <quote>Why not resurrect IEEE 1284?</quote> 2 retro 4 me But USB 3.0 is 20 MB/sec, while IEEE 1284 at peak performance was 4 MB/sec </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Questionmarktarius 07/01/20 5:02:25 PM #10:	DarkRoast posted... But USB 3.0 is 20 MB/sec, while IEEE 1284 at peak performance was 4 MB/sec 1284 interfaces also haven't really been used for a decade or two. Even BNC coax has gotten faster in the meantime, because of where it's hooked in and the controllers involved. <cite>Questionmarktarius posted [p:941536621] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>DarkRoast posted... </cite> <quote>But USB 3.0 is 20 MB/sec, while IEEE 1284 at peak performance was 4 MB/sec</quote>1284 interfaces also haven't really been used for a decade or two. Even BNC coax has gotten faster in the meantime, because of where it's hooked in and the controllers involved. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KamenRiderBlade 07/01/20 6:43:16 PM #11:	Email Intel, tell them to stop holding back ThunderBolt in 4.0 spec. They say TB4 will be the same speeds as TB3 which is stuck at 40 Gbps on 2x lanes of throughput. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Thunderbolt_4 That's utter horse crap. Do what some alternative modes do and deprecate USB 2.0 support and reuse those wires for an extra set of lanes and bump up TB4 to at least 60 Gbps. It's UTTER BS that there is no speed improvement, yet they want to increase the TB version to match USB4 The ABSOLUTE minimum work would be for USB4 & TB4 to unite on deprecating USB 2.0 support from the Type-C port and replace it with High Speed Lane number 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Receptacles -_- --- Are you a MexiCAN or a MexiCAN'T - Johnny Depp '*Once Upon A Time in Mexico*' <cite>KamenRiderBlade posted [p:941541120] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>Email Intel, tell them to stop holding back ThunderBolt in 4.0 spec. They say TB4 will be the same speeds as TB3 which is stuck at 40 Gbps on 2x lanes of throughput. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Thunderbolt_4 That's utter horse crap. Do what some alternative modes do and deprecate USB 2.0 support and reuse those wires for an extra set of lanes and bump up TB4 to at least 60 Gbps. It's UTTER BS that there is no speed improvement, yet they want to increase the TB version to match USB4 The ABSOLUTE minimum work would be for USB4 & TB4 to unite on deprecating USB 2.0 support from the Type-C port and replace it with High Speed Lane number 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Receptacles -_- </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 6:59:49 PM #12:	KamenRiderBlade posted... Email Intel, tell them to stop holding back ThunderBolt in 4.0 spec. They say TB4 will be the same speeds as TB3 which is stuck at 40 Gbps on 2x lanes of throughput. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Thunderbolt_4 That's utter horse crap. Do what some alternative modes do and deprecate USB 2.0 support and reuse those wires for an extra set of lanes and bump up TB4 to at least 60 Gbps. It's UTTER BS that there is no speed improvement, yet they want to increase the TB version to match USB4 The ABSOLUTE minimum work would be for USB4 & TB4 to unite on deprecating USB 2.0 support from the Type-C port and replace it with High Speed Lane number 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Receptacles -_- Intel needs to quit dicking around. If you're going to be top of the heap, at least be like Nvidia and continue to make the best stuff, even if it's overpriced. And I say this as someone who used to be a huge ATI fan. --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941541780] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>KamenRiderBlade posted... </cite> <quote>Email Intel, tell them to stop holding back ThunderBolt in 4.0 spec. They say TB4 will be the same speeds as TB3 which is stuck at 40 Gbps on 2x lanes of throughput. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Thunderbolt_4 That's utter horse crap. Do what some alternative modes do and deprecate USB 2.0 support and reuse those wires for an extra set of lanes and bump up TB4 to at least 60 Gbps. It's UTTER BS that there is no speed improvement, yet they want to increase the TB version to match USB4 The ABSOLUTE minimum work would be for USB4 & TB4 to unite on deprecating USB 2.0 support from the Type-C port and replace it with High Speed Lane number 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Receptacles -_-</quote> Intel needs to quit dicking around. If you're going to be top of the heap, at least be like Nvidia and continue to make the best stuff, even if it's overpriced. And I say this as someone who used to be a huge ATI fan. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KamenRiderBlade 07/01/20 7:10:39 PM #13:	DarkRoast posted... Intel needs to quit dicking around. If you're going to be top of the heap, at least be like Nvidia and continue to make the best stuff, even if it's overpriced. And I say this as someone who used to be a huge ATI fan. I don't understand why speed isn't improving at all with TB4? Why increment the version # if you're not going faster? Even 50% speed increase is SOMETHING. 0% speed increase, why the eff are you even talking about TB4 at that point? --- Are you a MexiCAN or a MexiCAN'T - Johnny Depp '*Once Upon A Time in Mexico*' <cite>KamenRiderBlade posted [p:941542195] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>DarkRoast posted... </cite> <quote>Intel needs to quit dicking around. If you're going to be top of the heap, at least be like Nvidia and continue to make the best stuff, even if it's overpriced. And I say this as someone who used to be a huge ATI fan.</quote>I don't understand why speed isn't improving at all with TB4? Why increment the version # if you're not going faster? Even 50% speed increase is SOMETHING. 0% speed increase, why the eff are you even talking about TB4 at that point? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkRoast 07/01/20 7:11:14 PM #14:	KamenRiderBlade posted... I don't understand why speed isn't improving at all with TB4? Why increment the version # if you're not going faster? Even 50% speed increase is SOMETHING. 0% speed increase, why the eff are you even talking about TB4 at that point? Speed seems to be the point of making a new format, not sure what the point is otherwise --- Well allons-y, Alonso! <cite>DarkRoast posted [p:941542222] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>KamenRiderBlade posted... </cite> <quote>I don't understand why speed isn't improving at all with TB4? Why increment the version # if you're not going faster? Even 50% speed increase is SOMETHING. 0% speed increase, why the eff are you even talking about TB4 at that point?</quote> Speed seems to be the point of making a new format, not sure what the point is otherwise </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KamenRiderBlade 07/01/20 7:15:49 PM #15:	DarkRoast posted... Speed seems to be the point of making a new format, not sure what the point is otherwise Intel has lost their way since ever since Bob Swan has taken over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Swan Bob Swan is MBA in "Business Administration" graduate. What does he know about tech in any way shape and form? He seems like a corporate Bean Counter type. At least the last CEO, Brian Krzanich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Krzanich had a bachelor's degree in chemistry. He worked in Intel's Fab's and worked up the ranks until he became CEO. He understands manufacturing. The new guy seems to have taken over and made ALOT of bad decisions IMO. --- Are you a MexiCAN or a MexiCAN'T - Johnny Depp '*Once Upon A Time in Mexico*' <cite>KamenRiderBlade posted [p:941542388] in eGPUs woul... [t:78817431]...</cite> <quote>DarkRoast posted... </cite> <quote>Speed seems to be the point of making a new format, not sure what the point is otherwise</quote>Intel has lost their way since ever since Bob Swan has taken over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Swan Bob Swan is MBA in "Business Administration" graduate. What does he know about tech in any way shape and form? He seems like a corporate Bean Counter type. At least the last CEO, Brian Krzanich https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Krzanich had a bachelor's degree in chemistry. He worked in Intel's Fab's and worked up the ranks until he became CEO. He understands manufacturing. The new guy seems to have taken over and made ALOT of bad decisions IMO. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1

Current Events > eGPUs would be actually viable if there was a better connection standard (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > eGPUs would be actually viable if there was a better connection standard