Nvidia announces Tesla P100 GPU with Pascal architecture

[scaryjim]

So basically what you're saying is that after almost 70 posts you agree with my original statement "that it will eventually come with a PCIe connection (that it's capable of using PCIe)"?

Seriously? That's what you took from my statement?

The P100 already has a PCIe connection. It may or may not, at some point in the future, be placed on a PCIe x16 card. But right now, the P100 has a PCIe connection. That is my position. That has always been my position.

There's nothing straw man about that ...

No, but it does contain a number of other falacious argument techniques, that are every bit as dubious as using strawmen. Which, incidentally, I haven't done. Not once. I've included all the available context every time I've quoted you. You simply didn't communicate what you intended to when this whole argument started, and you've since refused to acknowledge that, which means you keep repeating the incorrect statement.

... you claimed that someone could connect to the PCIe signal on a P100 card if only they could source a motherboard with an appropriate mezzanine connector for PCIe, or adapter board, or a PCIe x16 flat-cable riser card, separate all the wires and manually connect them, but unless you can show me a motherboard or adapter board that converts the NVLink connector to a PCIe connector they can't as the P100 card only come with NVLink connectors.

There's no such thing an an NVLink connector. Even nvidia don't refer to an NVLink connector. They refer to a Mezzanine connector. Once again you're conflating connection and connector, and doing it wrong. I even explained to you how the dictionary definition of connection that you quoted at me supports my position, not yours. I've even explained to you how everything you say agrees with everything I say. The only reason this argument is continuing at all is because you apparently cannot accept that a PCIe connection is different to a PCIe connector.

It's like saying you could plug a TV that you bought in France into a UK socket when hypothetically there's no French sockets in your house, you hypothetically don't have an adapter, and hypothetically you're not capable or rewiring the plug.

It's nothing like that at all. If you want to run with that analogy, this argument essentially goes:

Corky: This TV has no power connection.
Scary: Yes it does, it's just carried through a european power plug not a UK one.
Corky: Well, yes, it's got a connection that power flows through, but it doesn't have a power connection because it doesn't use a specific connector for its power.
Scary: *sigh*

See the difference? The French TV has a power connection, but it uses a different connector to the UK standard one. But there are ways to resolve that problem: you could install a euro power socket in your house (or move to a house with one already installed), you could source an adapter that converted the euro power socket to a UK one, or you could cut the Euro plug off and wire a UK one on instead. That fact that you need to do one of those things to use it doesn't stop the French TV having a power connection, and if you took it to a French house you could plug it in no problem. Which is exactly the same as the P100, because if you put it in a DGX-1 it'll have a PCIe connection.

No-one is claiming that you can just plug a P100 straight into a consumer motherboard. That's because it doesn't have the right connector, which we're agreed on. However, there are ways that you could run a P100 on a consumer motherboard, because it does have a suitable connection. This appears to be the bit you're struggling with.

[Corky34]

The P100 already has a PCIe connection. It may or may not, at some point in the future, be placed on a PCIe x16 card. But right now, the P100 has a PCIe connection. That is my position. That has always been my position.

Then show me where i as an end-user would make that PCIe connection.

No, but it does contain a number of other falacious argument techniques, that are every bit as dubious as using strawmen. Which, incidentally, I haven't done. Not once. I've included all the available context every time I've quoted you. You simply didn't communicate what you intended to when this whole argument started, and you've since refused to acknowledge that, which means you keep repeating the incorrect statement.

I beg your pardon, are you really saying that you included all the available context every time you quoted me, because all of these posts by you say otherwise.

If it's incorrect then show me where i as an end-user can make a PCIe connection with the P100 board, show me something other than Nvidia's hybrid cube mesh that i could use to make a PCIe connection to the P100 card.

There's no such thing an an NVLink connector. Even nvidia don't refer to an NVLink connector. They refer to a Mezzanine connector. Once again you're conflating connection and connector, and doing it wrong. I even explained to you how the dictionary definition of connection that you quoted at me supports my position, not yours. I've even explained to you how everything you say agrees with everything I say. The only reason this argument is continuing at all is because you apparently cannot accept that a PCIe connection is different to a PCIe connector.

The following link disagrees with you, as does this one when they say "NVIDIA's pictures also confirm that this is using their new mezzanine connector, with flat boards no longer on perpendicular cards." but then you already knew that as I've already provided information on that.

It's nothing like that at all. If you want to run with that analogy, this argument essentially goes:

Corky: This TV has no power connection.
Scary: Yes it does, it's just carried through a european power plug not a UK one.
Corky: Well, yes, it's got a connection that power flows through, but it doesn't have a power connection because it doesn't use a specific connector for its power.
Scary: *sigh*

See the difference? The French TV has a power connection, but it uses a different connector to the UK standard one. But there are ways to resolve that problem: you could install a euro power socket in your house (or move to a house with one already installed), you could source an adapter that converted the euro power socket to a UK one, or you could cut the Euro plug off and wire a UK one on instead. That fact that you need to do one of those things to use it doesn't stop the French TV having a power connection, and if you took it to a French house you could plug it in no problem. Which is exactly the same as the P100, because if you put it in a DGX-1 it'll have a PCIe connection.

No-one is claiming that you can just plug a P100 straight into a consumer motherboard. That's because it doesn't have the right connector, which we're agreed on. However, there are ways that you could run a P100 on a consumer motherboard, because it does have a suitable connection. This appears to be the bit you're struggling with.

It doesn't go like that at all, it goes like this
Corky: This TV has French plug so i can't make an electrical connection to my UK socket.
Scary: Yes you can you just need to change the plug, or the socket, or just cut the plug of an poke the wires into the socket.
Corky: Well there's no way for me to change the plug or the socket, and I'm not about to go poking bare wires into a socket
Scary: Yea but, yea but, that doesn't mean it's not theoretically possible, sure it may not work, sure it may blow your TV up or burn your house down but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

[jigger]

Corky. No PCI-E connection no work. How many times must you be taken to water?

[Corky34]

Corky. No PCI-E connection no work. How many times must you be taken to water?

Yes and that's what I've been saying from the start, it's just Scary that seems to be saying that even though the P100 card doesn't have a physical PCIe connector that an end-user could still make a PCIe connection to the card.

[jigger]

And he's right. It's a PCI-E system.

[HalloweenJack]

[Corky34]

And he's right. It's a PCI-E system.

Half of it is and half of it isn't, then again I've never said it's not a PCIe system, in fact quiet the opposite, I've even said to scaryjim that perhaps it's best if we agree to disagree, but unfortunately he's refused to do that and seems more interested in proving someone on the internet wrong.

[scaryjim]

Half of it is and half of it isn't

So you do agree it has a PCIe connection then?

... then again I've never said it's not a PCIe system, in fact quiet the opposite ...

Really? Because in post 38 of this thread you said:

I'm not saying it's never going to support PCIe, I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't, at least that what AnandTech‎ seems to indicate, my guess is their binning Pascal and the high end goes into the P100 and lesser ones will probably go into a lower power, PCIe card.

EDIT: In the AnandTech article they have a picture of the NVLink hybrid cube mesh and *that* connects to the CPU via PCIe, but the cards themselves don't have a PCIe connection.

I'll repeat the key bit just in case you missed it:

I'm not saying it's never going to support PCIe, I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't ....

Sorry, I'm not sure I heard that right. Lets try again....

I'm not saying it's never going to support PCIe, I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't ....

Direct quote, in context, of you saying the the P100 card does not support PCIe. No doubt you'll try to find a way to claim it's out of context and it's not what you said, but the full post is there in this thread for everyone to read and make their own minds up.

As I've said before, this was never about agreeing to disagree because we no longer disagree. We agree. You have at some point agreed with absolutely everything I've said in this thread. We are in full agreement that the P100 connects to the PCIe bus directly over the mezzanine connector on the back of the card. Apparently you don't want to call that a PCIe connection for some reason, and as I've said, that's your prerogative, but you are in disagreement with pretty much everyone else in this thread on that point, and it's a use of language that will cause arguments because people will misunderstand you.

Of course, if you're happy to continue causing arguments on the internet, there's no reason for you to acknowledge that your use of language was misleading or inaccurate. But you don't give the impression that you're happy being involved in an argument, so I thought perhaps you might want to understand why the argument started. Again, your prerogative, but if you want to avoid arguments on the internet, you might want to be careful about what you say and how you say it.

For now, I'm happy to leave it that we actually agree that the P100 supports PCIe and connects direectly to a PCIe bus over one of its Mezzanine connectors.

[DanceswithUnix]

Half of it is and half of it isn't, then again I've never said it's not a PCIe system, in fact quiet the opposite, I've even said to scaryjim that perhaps it's best if we agree to disagree, but unfortunately he's refused to do that and seems more interested in proving someone on the internet wrong.

Coming out with inflammatory lines like

Scary: Yea but, yea but, that doesn't mean it's not theoretically possible, sure it may not work, sure it may blow your TV up or burn your house down but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

wasn't helping though. Burn your house down??? I mean, as a proof of concept you would just have to wire up the equivalent of the data signals of a x1 PCI socket using some wirewrap wire and an old PCIe extender board. It isn't brain surgery, in my teenage years I used to do stuff like that all the time, there were usually wires coming out of the back of my computer to some breadboarded contraption or other.

But you are right that this isn't going anywhere, so I am going back to looking at the cute rabbit with the pancake on his head

[Corky34]

So you do agree it has a PCIe connection then?

So now you're conflating not only a connection and a connector but also a system.

Really? Because in post 38 of this thread you said:

Nope, don't see where in what you quoted i say it doesn't use a PCIe system

I'll repeat the key bit just in case you missed it:

Sorry, I'm not sure I heard that right. Lets try again....

Argumentum ad nauseam isn't suddenly going to change things you know.

Direct quote, in context, of you saying the the P100 card does not support PCIe. No doubt you'll try to find a way to claim it's out of context and it's not what you said, but the full post is there in this thread for everyone to read and make their own minds up.

Then show me where i would make that PCIe connection, show me where i could plug the P100 card into a PCIe connector, as I've repeatably asked you to do, it's quite simple, show me where i can connect a P100 card to a physical PCIe slot and I'll eat my words and apologies.

As I've said before, this was never about agreeing to disagree because we no longer disagree. We agree. You have at some point agreed with absolutely everything I've said in this thread. We are in full agreement that the P100 connects to the PCIe bus directly over the mezzanine connector on the back of the card. Apparently you don't want to call that a PCIe connection for some reason, and as I've said, that's your prerogative, but you are in disagreement with pretty much everyone else in this thread on that point, and it's a use of language that will cause arguments because people will misunderstand you.

Then let's agree to agree, whatever makes you happy or whatever it takes for you to accept that not everyone has the same opinion as you, that just because you don't agree, or because you disagree, or whatever you want to call it, doesn't mean you should berate them incessantly until they share your opinion, like i said show me where i can connect a P100 card to a physical PCIe slot and I'll eat my words and apologies.

Of course, if you're happy to continue causing arguments on the internet, there's no reason for you to acknowledge that your use of language was misleading or inaccurate. But you don't give the impression that you're happy being involved in an argument, so I thought perhaps you might want to understand why the argument started. Again, your prerogative, but if you want to avoid arguments on the internet, you might want to be careful about what you say and how you say it.

For now, I'm happy to leave it that we actually agree that the P100 supports PCIe and connects direectly to a PCIe bus over one of its Mezzanine connectors.

If there was an arguments it's mostly be caused by you IMO, fifty posts after i said "perhaps it's best if we just leave it there" & "perhaps it's best if we just agree to disagree" some 50 posts after i accepted our opinions differ you're still carrying on the argument.

Well we don't agree but if it makes you happy then I'll play along, just like i was willing to accept that we had differing opinions 50+ posts ago.

[scaryjim]

... Nope, don't see where in what you quoted i say it doesn't use a PCIe system ...

Then we have a bigger problem, and one that debating this on a forum will not resolve.

EDIT: besides, since your whole argument is predicated on being able to get a P100 from somewhere which you can't actually do, I will show you where you would make the PCIe connection:



You'd buy one of those motherboards, which is just as possible as you buying a P100 separately, and you'd plug it into the mezzanine connector, which is used to carry both nvlink connections AND PCIe connections (as well as power).

Incidentally, that's from this link that you posted yourself, in attempt to prove that there is such a thing as an "nvlink connector". The article contains the statement "Given that Nvidia did not gave out an official name for the mezzanine connectors, we’ll be calling it “Dual Socket LGA400” from now onward.", which means that actually neither nvidia, nor the author of the article, call it an "nvlink connector". Although I imagine you're now going to tell me why I'm wrong about all of this as well.

[Corky34]

Again with the straw man, my whole argument is not predicated on being able to get a P100 from somewhere, it's that if you can show me where i can connect a P100 card to a physical PCIe slot, as i initially said, that it will eventually come with a PCIe connection (that it's capable of using PCIe) but the first cards are only going to come with NVLink, i get the feeling that they're fabricating (and initially selling) large silicon and binning ones that don't meet make the grade for a lesser (lower power draw) HPC card that will use PCIe.

That you can't use a P100 card with A (singular) PCIe connection without using NVLink.

But none of that seems to matter as I said ages ago that "perhaps it's best if we just leave it there" & "perhaps it's best if we just agree to disagree" it's just seems you...

Or at least that's what you think.

[scaryjim]

Again with the straw man, my whole argument is not predicated on being able to get a P100 from somewhere, it's that if you can show me where i can connect a P100 card to a physical PCIe slot, as i initially said, that it will eventually come with a PCIe connection (that it's capable of using PCIe) but the first cards are only going to come with NVLink...

If you honestly can't see that the bit of post 36 you quote there doesn't *just* say that you can't connect a P100 directly to a physical PCIe slot, then there is no hope. Just like if you can't see how "I'm not saying it's never going to support PCIe, I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't... " is the same as saying "I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't support PCIe", there is no hope.

You made a number of generic statements that were, given all available context and information at the time, demonstrably false. You have since made a number of clarifications and specifications to those statements, and your position as stated now appears to be correct. But that doesn't make those original statements any less wrong. it just mean you've made your position more clear over the course of the argument. We're only still here because every time I point out that your original statements, in context, don't say what you're now saying, you argue with me about it. You ask me to provide proof of something or other. But when I provide you with the specific proof you ask for, you claim I'm setting up straw men, and don't actually respond to the proof I've provided.

So, do me a favour? Actually respond to the proof you asked for. Post 114: "Then show me where i as an end-user would make that PCIe connection." So I've shown you - a picture of a genuine prototype motherboard onto which you could plug a P100 and make a PCIe connection (via one of the mezzanine connectors). As an end user. No technical intervention required. Do you have a response to that?

[Corky34]

If you honestly can't see that the bit of post 36 you quote there doesn't *just* say that you can't connect a P100 directly to a physical PCIe slot, then there is no hope. Just like if you can't see how "I'm not saying it's never going to support PCIe, I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't... " is the same as saying "I'm saying that presently the P100 card itself doesn't support PCIe", there is no hope.

You made a number of generic statements that were, given all available context and information at the time, demonstrably false. You have since made a number of clarifications and specifications to those statements, and your position as stated now appears to be correct. But that doesn't make those original statements any less wrong. it just mean you've made your position more clear over the course of the argument.

You do know that my position as stated that you say now appears to be correct is exactly the same statement i originally made right? The only thing that changed is part of it is in bold now, i even linked to my original statement.

We're only still here because every time I point out that your original statements, in context, don't say what you're now saying, you argue with me about it. You ask me to provide proof of something or other. But when I provide you with the specific proof you ask for, you claim I'm setting up straw men, and don't actually respond to the proof I've provided.

No we're still here because you're more interested in proving someone wrong on the internet rather than accepting that they were referring to something other than what you assumed they were.

So, do me a favour? Actually respond to the proof you asked for. Post 114: "Then show me where i as an end-user would make that PCIe connection." So I've shown you - a picture of a genuine prototype motherboard onto which you could plug a P100 and make a PCIe connection (via one of the mezzanine connectors). As an end user. No technical intervention required. Do you have a response to that?

I've already responded to it when i explained that "I've never said it's not a PCIe system" and how "you can't use a P100 card with A (singular) PCIe connection without using NVLink." It's up to you how you want to interpret that, agree or disagree, come up with more reasons why you're right and I'm wrong, say anything you like but we'll still in the same situation we were over 50 posts ago, that our opinions differ and there's nothing wrong with holding different opinions.

[scaryjim]

... I've already responded to it when i explained that "I've never said it's not a PCIe system" and how "you can't use a P100 card with A (singular) PCIe connection without using NVLink." ...

So you're saying your response was to change your argument because I actually provide the evidence you asked for? Or that the evidence you asked for was irrelevant to your argument in the first place (in which case why ask for it)?

You had never previously said that your position was "you can't use a P100 card with A (singular) PCIe connection without using NVLink". That's a massive restatement with increasing levels of specificity. And as to "I've never said it's not a PCIe system", actually, you have. I even quoted the bit where you said it. There is only one logical reading of the statement as you made it. I even left all the context of the entire post in, just so you could see that it didn't affect the specific statement you made. Whether it's what you meant to say or not, only you know. But it's what you said.

And that's the thing. You keep restating your argument in more and more specific terms, but THEN you say "like I originally said" as if your very specific new definition is exactly equivalent to your original very generic statement. Go back and read your statements in posts 28, 36, and 38. Read them in isolation, because that's how everyone else read them: we didn't have the benefit of knowing what you were thinking, we had to infer your entire meaning just from the words you wrote in those posts. Even better, ask yourself if you'd agree with those statements if I made them.

See, you claim we're here because I want to prove someone wrong on the internet. I'd argue that we're here because you want to prove yourself right, and so far you've been incapable of doing so.

[Corky34]

So you're saying your response was to change your argument because I actually provide the evidence you asked for? Or that the evidence you asked for was irrelevant to your argument in the first place (in which case why ask for it)?

You had never previously said that your position was "you can't use a P100 card with A (singular) PCIe connection without using NVLink". That's a massive restatement with increasing levels of specificity. And as to "I've never said it's not a PCIe system", actually, you have. I even quoted the bit where you said it. There is only one logical reading of the statement as you made it. I even left all the context of the entire post in, just so you could see that it didn't affect the specific statement you made. Whether it's what you meant to say or not, only you know. But it's what you said.

And that's the thing. You keep restating your argument in more and more specific terms, but THEN you say "like I originally said" as if your very specific new definition is exactly equivalent to your original very generic statement. Go back and read your statements in posts 28, 36, and 38. Read them in isolation, because that's how everyone else read them: we didn't have the benefit of knowing what you were thinking, we had to infer your entire meaning just from the words you wrote in those posts. Even better, ask yourself if you'd agree with those statements if I made them.

See, you claim we're here because I want to prove someone wrong on the internet. I'd argue that we're here because you want to prove yourself right, and so far you've been incapable of doing so.

I guess other people having differing opinions isn't your thing then?

The reason i keep restating my "argument" in more and more specific terms is because you seem incapable of accepting that someone may not agree with you, I'm a long way from wanting to prove I'm right, in fact i accepted that over 50 posts ago when i said we should just agree to disagree, the balls in your court either accept that not everyone may agree with you or not, that's your choice, I've already made that choice and accept that we don't agree it's just unfortunate that my choice is not acceptable to you.