Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

erikmcclure.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 362 posts

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#101

Post by bradleybuda »

spartanatreyu wrote: post #62
zaptheimpaler wrote: post #36

How about we move to external only GPUs with huge connectors? If GPUs are half the size, power consumption and price of a PC now, they might as well be a separate device. As a bonus the rest of the motherboard & PCs actually get much smaller. A PC without any spinning disks could conceivably just be the size of a NUC by default, something you can travel with when you don't need the beefy GPU.

The most expensive part of GPU operation (power-wise) isn't computation, it's actually moving information around. Moving the GPU further away from the CPU and storage is going to lead to worse latency and power requirements. Over the next 10-15 years, we'll probably see CPU+GPU packages become mainstream instead of CPU (with basic integrated graphics) and a separate GPU.

But home PC users / high end GPU buyers (rightly or wrongly) are fanatical about modularity. The server market will likely (has already?) shifted.

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#102

Post by sfmike »

cyanydeez wrote: post #96
dragontamer wrote: post #7

1. While I agree we're beginning to reach absurd proportions, lets really analyze the situation and think about it. 2. Are there any GPUs that actually have performed physical damage on a motherboard slot? 3. GPUs are already 2-wide by default, and some are 3-wide. 4-wide GPUs will have more support from the chassis. This seems like the simpler solution, especially since most people rarely have a 2nd add in card at a…

In reality, there is no reason GPUs should be add-ons. Just star designing motherboards with integrated GPUs of sufficient size. Case closed.

With mini cube PCs growing in popularity the future will probably be this, a mini PC with every part a USB type modularity for any ram or GPU or hd into that stock cube PC.

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#103

Post by lstodd »

All you have to do is put an aluminum I-bar on top of the card if the cooler itself doesn't provide adequate rigidity, which I doubt.

I'd guess if excessive stress on the PCIe slot was a problem, it'd be solved by combining a good 2-3 slot mount on the back side and enough aluminium+plastic to hold the rest.

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#104

Post by topspin »

dragontamer wrote: post #7

1. While I agree we're beginning to reach absurd proportions, lets really analyze the situation and think about it. 2. Are there any GPUs that actually have performed physical damage on a motherboard slot? 3. GPUs are already 2-wide by default, and some are 3-wide. 4-wide GPUs will have more support from the chassis. This seems like the simpler solution, especially since most people rarely have a 2nd add in card at a…

> 2. Are there any GPUs that actually have performed physical damage on a motherboard slot?

Yes. I've seen both a heavy GPU and an HSM card damage a slot. One happened when a machine was shipped by a commercial shipper. The other happened when the machine was moved between residences. It doesn't occur to people that the mass of a card swinging around is a problem when the case is moved.

The HSM one was remarkable in that it was a full length card with a proper case support on both ends.

Also, this isn't just about damaging the PCI-E slot. Heavy cards bend PCBs (both the MB and the dangling card) and bending PCBs is a bad idea: surface mount devices can crack, especially MLCCs, and solder joints aren't flexible either. No telling how many unanalyzed failures happen due to this.

If you have a big GPU don't let it dangle. Support it somehow.

Another area where the conventional layout is struggling is NVME. They keep getting hotter and so the heatsinks keep getting larger. Motherboard designers are squeezing in NVME slots wherever they can, often where there is little to no airflow...

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#105

Post by willis936 »

luminiferous wrote: post #72
jrockway wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have one of these for a much smaller card, mostly so that cold airflow from the floor intake fans actually has a path to get up to the RAM and VRMs. This is a workaround for a case that doesn't have front intake, which is preferable in my opinion. It does look a little cool, but I always worry a little about the reliability of the cable itself. Does it REALLY meet the signal integrity specifications for PCI-E? Prob…

LTT has a video where they tried to see how many PCIe riser cables they could string together before it stopped working.[1] They got to several meters. Maybe you could argue that it's worse inside a PC case since there's more EMI, but it seems like your PCIe riser cable would have to be very out of spec before you'd notice anything. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5xvwPa3r7M

>2017

The 650 Ti is PCIe 3.0. PCIe 4.0 doubles the bandwidth. PCIe 5.0 doubles the bandwidth again. The RTX 40 series GPUs still use PCIe 4.0, which have commonly available conformant riser cables. I suspect the story for PCIe 5.0 will be different.

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#106

Post by willis936 »

msbarnett wrote: post #48
Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a typo? The 4090 official TDP is 450W.

Could be. But the pre-launch rumours also claimed the 4080 was a 450 W product, and the 4090 is so niche (basically it’s the old Titan line) that it’s not worth handwringing about because it’s not targeted at normal consumers (for “I’d buy a > $1000 GPU for gaming” values of “normal”).

Nvidia is attempting to increase sales on the high-end by positioning the 4080 and 4070 (aka 4080 12 GB) at a much higher price point than the market demands while giving good value to the 4090 (60% more performance than the 3090 Ti which launched at $2000).

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#107

Post by wruza »

cyanydeez wrote: post #96
dragontamer wrote: post #7

1. While I agree we're beginning to reach absurd proportions, lets really analyze the situation and think about it. 2. Are there any GPUs that actually have performed physical damage on a motherboard slot? 3. GPUs are already 2-wide by default, and some are 3-wide. 4-wide GPUs will have more support from the chassis. This seems like the simpler solution, especially since most people rarely have a 2nd add in card at a…

In reality, there is no reason GPUs should be add-ons. Just star designing motherboards with integrated GPUs of sufficient size. Case closed.

The main reason is that CPUs get old much slower than GPUs, but “current” socket generations change quickly. Another reason is a combinatorial explosion of mobo x graphics card features, which is already hard.

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#109

Post by intrasight »

It's the IBM PC legacy. The won and we've lived with that form-factor now for 40 years. A new PC looks very much like that of 1982. Back in '82 when I started in robotics tech, we mostly used VME. A super-robust interconnect platform. There is no "motherboard" with VME and similar bus architectures. There is a backplane. Why can't we have the benefits of a physical platform like VME but with the electrical form-factor of PCIe?

Re: We Need New Motherboards Before GPUs Collapse Under Their Own Gravity

#110

Post by dragontamer »

intrasight wrote: post #109

It's the IBM PC legacy. The won and we've lived with that form-factor now for 40 years. A new PC looks very much like that of 1982. Back in '82 when I started in robotics tech, we mostly used VME. A super-robust interconnect platform. There is no "motherboard" with VME and similar bus architectures. There is a backplane. Why can't we have the benefits of a physical platform like VME but with the electrical form-facto…

I had a professor talk about those old systems once.

Weren't those systems a bus architecture? Like the backplane wires all shared the same wires so it was possible to keep stringing them along?

Modern PCIe, and even USB3, are star networks. Everything directly connects to the northbridge like an Ethernet cable star network connects to a switch.

-------

PCIe slots communicate the idea well. There are only so many dedicated wires the northbridge exposes to USB3 or PCIe.

This, it makes sense to have those limited wires in the form of PCIe slots or USB3 connectors.

Post reply on HN