Intel’s Comet Lake U&Y 495 Chipset Datasheet: x8 Link, USB 3.2 Gen 2 Support
by Anton Shilov on September 23, 2019 12:30 PM EST- Posted in
- Chipsets
- Intel
- Motherboards
- Ice Lake
- Comet Lake
Intel has published datasheet of its upcoming Intel 495-series chipsets revealing their key features. As it turns out, the family will feature two chipsets aimed at different types of premium laptops, one for Y series and one for U series.
Intel’s 495 chipsets will be compatible with ‘Premium-U’ and ‘Premium-Y’ processors featuring an OPI x8 interface with up to 4 GT/s data transfer rate. Intel’s 495-series PCH will also support up to 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes, up to three Serial ATA ports, up to six USB 3.2 Gen 2 ports (10 Gbps), up to 10 USB 2.0 connectors, an integrated GbE MAC, a built-in Wi-Fi MAC that requires a CNVi module, and all the other familiar features of Intel’s modern chipsets (e.g., RST, AMR, TXT, VT, etc.).
Intel does not disclose in its document codenames of CPUs to be supported by its 495 chipsets, but it is likely that the new PCH will support the company’s latest 10th Generation Core processors known as Ice Lake and Comet Lake. Meanwhile, it remains to be seen which Intel’s chipsets support the manufacturer’s upcoming desktop CPUs.
Related Reading:
- Intel Documents Show Driver Support for Unannounced 400-Series Chipsets
- Intel Adds B365 Chipset to Lineup: The Return of 22nm
- Cypress and Zhaoxin Have USB 3.1 Gen 2 USB Controllers
Source: Intel
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
View All Comments
Kevin G - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link
10 Gbit on laptops don't make sense due to the additional power required for 10 Gbit speeds. 2.5 Gbit however does make sense that is simply expanding the symbol domain on the same transmission rate as 1 Gbit Ethernet. As such, the power consumption of a 2.5 Gbit NIC should be the same as a 1 Gbit NIC, all other things being equal.What would be helpful is if laptops supported PoE charging. 802.3at supports up to 30W which is enough to slowly charge and use most systems. 802.3bt goes up to 90W which gets a far wider range of systems.
edgineer - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link
>expanding the symbol domain on the same transmission rate as 1 Gbit EthernetCould you speak more on this?
Kevin G - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link
1 Gbit Ethernet only leverages 100 of the 255 possible symbols in its encoding scheme. Jumping up to 2.5 Gbit transmission speed can be done 'for free' in most cases as the change is relatively minor on the controller end. It does require a new switch but again the changes are relatively straight forward.The real benefit to 2.5 Gbit Ethernet is that it doesn't require new cabling as Cat 5e is supported all the way up to 100 m.
close - Wednesday, October 2, 2019 - link
2.5GBASE-T PHY is a 10G PHY at quarter signaling rate. Better spectral efficiency (6.25bpHz vs. 4bpHz for 1G).TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link
Yes, because PoE is SO much more common in homes then 10 gbE is....../rollseyesOutside of IP phones and WiFi access points, almost nobody has PoE. Home routers dont support it, there is no demand for it, and hell, most home users dont even use ethernet anymore.
Korguz - Tuesday, September 24, 2019 - link
" Home routers dont support it, there is no demand for it, " but you can get PoE capable switches, if one needs PoE support. but that does add extra cost.saratoga4 - Thursday, September 26, 2019 - link
>2.5 Gbit however does make sense that is simply expanding the symbol domain on the same transmission rate as 1 Gbit Ethernet.Actually the bigger improvement in bandwidth for 2.5gbaset comes from increasing the symbol rate, not the bits per symbol, although both do increase.
>As such, the power consumption of a 2.5 Gbit NIC should be the same as a 1 Gbit NIC, all other things being equal.
Even if the symbol rate were kept constant (it isn't), decoding more bits per symbol requires substantially more power since you need much more complex encoding and error correction.
imaheadcase - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link
You don't understand what FTTH is. Its not %20, all that means is marketing talk from telcom companies..that can literally mean same speeds as any regular cable person in the USA. Telcoms can run cable all the way to front of the house and market FTTH, but will still only give you packages that they offer online for basic cable speeds.Charter offers Fiber internet to almost all its subscribers by the way. Except if i want it its $1500 a month, $500 setup, 2 year contract. lol Just like cable speeds, and prices it varies widely. Business 5 miles away fiber was quoted $800 a month..1000 setup.
Never trust reports on broadband adoption rates, because they are grossly inflated.
azfacea - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link
You clearly don't understand whats going on residential fiber in the last few years. I dont care what charter offers you or not. I said 30% of North Americans have access to FTTH now. Bell is literally ripping out twisted pair phone lines and replacing it with FTTH. and no it doesnt cost 1500$.internet speeds improvements have been quite high and quite persisitent for 20 years+. gigabit fiber is exteremely common in large cities. and once you put in FTTH there is plenty of room to go for even higher speeds.
the point was that gigabit ethernet is a ludicrous bottleneck in 2020. its like shipping a laptop with USB 2.0 max.
wired internet should not be slower than wireless. and if intel wasn't as fucked up as they are the fix is 2 mm worth of 14nm or 10nm silicon.
close - Monday, September 23, 2019 - link
"the point was that gigabit ethernet is a ludicrous bottleneck in 2020. its like shipping a laptop with USB 2.0 max"You sort of have a point... in principle 1Gbps is old. But USB offers tangible speed improvements for anybody with the right devices (a $15 USB stick). Having 1Gbps wired connection, while ancient, limits almost no real person out there. The people who could really use 2.5+Gbps are very, very few and far between. It may look like a lot if you're a techie surrounded by other techies but in reality almost nobody (relative to global customers) has a NAS able to deliver over 1Gbps real speed. Also no self respecting techie would ever assume that WiFi will deliver anything like that.
On the other hand people do appreciate paying less for the controller, having less heat nd less power consumption. Know your customer.
https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/nas/b... (even the 10G results are pretty tame)
"wired internet should not be slower than wireless"
It's not. Not only is "internet" almost never limited by WiFi or 1Gbps networks these days, no WiFi can consistently reach 1Gbps speeds. Wired doesn't really have these issues.