News - Intel Thunderbolt 3 doubles bandwidth and shrinks connector

Quote:

---

The new controller also cuts power consumption by 50 per cent.

---

Read more.

If they don't put it in the chipset, it ain't gonna be on many motherboards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gagaga

If they don't put it in the chipset, it ain't gonna be on many motherboards.

---

Not necessarily - USB3 appeared on motherboards using third-party controllers before it was integrated into desktop chipsets. But of course, getting a 'free' Thunderbolt controller integrated in a chipset would definitely boost its adoption. What would boost it most though, would be the use of Thunderbolt connected external GPUs, but that's something Intel has resisted so far.

I beg to differ. Its already out there and offering those sort of speeds will no doubt be widely taken up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Thunderbolt-compatible_devices

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gh0sty

I beg to differ. Its already out there and offering those sort of speeds will no doubt be widely taken up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...atible_devices

---

I don't doubt that there are lots of compatible devices, but according to that list, it's only on 24 motherboards, excluding Apple. That's a pretty tiny proportion of the PC motherboard market.

Laptop w/Thunderbolt 3 > External GPU (a la MSI GUS II) = Profit. I'm really not sure who's paying big bucks to stop this from happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlackDwarf

Laptop w/Thunderbolt 3 > External GPU (a la MSI GUS II) = Profit. I'm really not sure who's paying big bucks to stop this from happening.

---

iirc apple got a 1 year exclusive on thunderbolt....

I'm kind of waiting on it being put onto a mitx motherboards, it would be ideal for adding an additional gpu for 3d rendering, assuming the case for the gpu isn't a rip off

Surprised/Disappointed to see it will only support USB 3.0 as one of the modes, instead of the new USB3.1

The problem is it's an expensive technology. The ports sit rather unused on my iMac and macbook. I'd rather have more USB 3.0 ports. Yes you could run an external graphics card but the percentage of people wanting to do this is tiny and yes some people have done it and it works pretty well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walibe

The problem is it's an expensive technology. The ports sit rather unused on my iMac and macbook. I'd rather have more USB 3.0 ports. Yes you could run an external graphics card but the percentage of people wanting to do this is tiny and yes some people have done it and it works pretty well.

---

I disagree. I reckon a lot of people would like the option to have ultra portable mega battery life for on the go, but an external GPU box for when at home/long work trips away etc. Think about it, slim lappy with 13" 1080p screen, 90WHr battery and only say a 850M onboard, then get home and have the option to wack in a full fat 290 or 880 for some real grunt and hook up to a 27inch ultra screen. What's not to like about that? Ability to work on the plane, but also game in the home/hotel. :) Also as things move on your laptop can keep pace for a while longer via the external box. Now granted, not everyone wants to game, but there are other reasons why people might want more in the GPU department than just gaming.

Who would lose out? Potentially
1) Mobo makers - if folks stop buying desktop in addition to laptop. but then new market for external GPU boards and enclosures
2) CPU makers and chipset makers for the same reason
3) Potentially mobile GPU sales - which do fetch a premium. But if you make it dependent on having at least a certain benchmark of mobile chip eg 850M min then you still get those sales. And the 850M can divert to physX duties alongside the external GPU unit.

Who would it be good for?
1) consumers
2) thunderbolt cable manufacturers
3) the environment
4) case/enclosure manufacturers - new product lines

For desktop GPU manufacturers it would be no change, or potentially more sales, if desktop enthusiasts still keep a high powered static machine too.

Could it move us into the territory of portable laptop CPU powerhouse connecting to docking station with GPU, optical drive, extra storage and external screens? Quite possibly. If intel doesn't kill it off/discourage innovation in unintended directions, again. The death of the mainstream desktop? Perhaps, though probably not entirely,... A market for desktops will remain for that, but become more and more niche.

Now, if it got to the point where a laptop manufacturer really teamed up with a mobo manufacturer to start offering socketed (ie user swappable) mobile mobo and full access to diy cooling inside the chassis then things might start to look really interesting, but this could impact on laptop size and appearance. I can see trying to get a standard internal size etc agreed being difficult to say the least!

5GB/s bandwidth of thunderbolt3 = 4GB/s (PCIe2 1x8) + 1GB/s spare for data and display (if two directional) or just data if display then run off external card. Which unit would be responsible for the network connection? Would it need to use the laptop's GB network port as well? And then have a separate LAN port on the external box? So much to think about

The real problem with the external box presumably is whether you want it to be able to hot-swap. Making provision for that would be a real task. If it was just a requirement to be able to boot into and out of that external configuration then it would be much easier. But if hot swap how do you get the data that the external (more capable) GPU is using off it and onto the (less capable) onboard quickly enough to not cause problems? If the cable is pulled out then for the lappy to auto-take-over it needs either to
1) ditch the application that was using the external GPU (doable, but process killed and loss of data?) and just go back to desktop + other applications, or
2) somehow have a handle on what the external GPU was doing and be able to leap in to save the day... but that would presumably require a beefy allocation of accessible GDDR in the laptop mobo and extra bandwidth in the connection for the two-way data flow so the laptop could have a cache ready for access at the drop of a hat. But then the size of external card GDDR would be limited in use to that onboard on the laptop - so hardly a GPU boost, other than clockspeed and cooling, provided the onboard GDDR could keep pace. Lots of synch issues and latency to resolve I imagine.

Love to work on developing this - lots of challenge lies therein. Be quite rewarding to work through all that. (sighs and wishes he had won the lottery to have the necessary funds.... :rolleyes:)