GT/s is also gaining ground for system RAM in order to clear up the ambiguity that DDR causes for end-consumers.

Dylan16807 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

And it's a good way to remove the ambiguity of things like DDR, but ugh "transfers" is not the best word here.

Looking at some documents from Micron I don't see them using GT/s anywhere. And in particular if I go look at their GDDR6X resources because those chips use PAM4, it's all about gigabits per second [per pin]. So for example 6GHz data clock, 12Gbaud, 24Gb/s/pin.

▲

mjevans 4 days ago | parent [-]

Would you rather go back to the modem days and call a 'Transfer' a 'Baud'?

PAM encoding is already analog, and also correspondingly more expensive (power, silicon size, etc) for the increase in speed.

It really wouldn't surprise me if even on workstation platforms only a subset of core lanes were Gen6+ and the common slots were redriven Gen5 or less off of a router / switch chip.

	▲	Dylan16807 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Would you rather go back to the modem days and call a 'Transfer' a 'Baud'? We don't have to go back, baud is still in use. I would expect transfers per second to be a synonym for baud though, and for bits per second per pin to use a different word.

▲

wtallis 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Aside from GDDR for GPUs, DRAM is still mostly specified with MT/s rather than GT/s, probably because marketing prefers bigger numbers. It'll probably fall off once 5-digit numbers become commonplace.