The PCIe 5.0 tax: Intel's Z990 chipset for Nova Lake runs hotter and uses more power despite shrinking

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 2,010   +58
Staff
Rumor mill: Intel's next Nova Lake desktop platform is coming together, and it's not just the CPUs that are changing. Leaked specifications for the Z970 and Z990 chipsets suggest a smaller PCH that consumes more power and runs hotter than the current Z890 hardware.

The latest leaks focus on the platform controller hub, which handles most of a motherboard's connectivity. For Z990, that hub is said to be significantly smaller than the one found on today's Z890 boards. The die is estimated to measure about 72.5 square millimeters, down from roughly 92.9 square millimeters. The package is smaller as well, shrinking from about 658 square millimeters on Z890 to 600 square millimeters.

The surprise is that the smaller chip doesn't consume less power. Instead, the Z990 chipset is expected to draw more. Its base power is reportedly 7.9 watts, up from 6 watts on Z890, and it can reach 14 watts when the chipset's PCIe 5.0 lanes are fully utilized. The Z970, while positioned lower in the stack, isn't far behind with a base power draw of 6.4 watts. Both chipsets are also rated for higher maximum operating temperatures, reaching 113°C – 5 degrees higher than their predecessors.

That combination – a smaller chip that runs hotter while consuming more power – reflects how Intel expects these boards to be used. PCIe 5.0 is a major factor. Under lighter workloads, the chipset plays only a limited role. A single GPU, for example, connects directly to the CPU, bypassing the chipset entirely. The same applies to modest storage configurations: Z970 supports one PCIe 5.0 SSD, while Z990 supports two, without routing traffic through the PCH.

That changes once more high-speed devices are added. Additional PCIe 5.0 components rely on the chipset for connectivity, and that's where power consumption ramps up. Driving multiple lanes at those speeds requires tighter signal control, which in turn increases energy use. The result is a chipset that remains relatively efficient under simple configurations but becomes significantly more power-hungry as I/O demands increase.

This shift aligns with expectations for Nova Lake itself. The CPUs are rumored to scale up to 52 cores at the high end, representing a substantial increase in parallel processing capability. Reports have also pointed to extremely high peak power limits for flagship models. Even if those figures represent only brief peak states, they suggest a platform designed to push performance aggressively.

Motherboard designs will have to keep up. Higher core counts and increased PCIe bandwidth place more strain not only on the CPU, but also on everything feeding data into and out of it. The chipset sits between the CPU and the rest of the system, and its higher power draw reflects the heavier I/O workload it is expected to handle.

There are still gaps in what has been publicly confirmed. No production LGA 1954 motherboards have been formally launched, although early versions have appeared at events such as Computex. The leaked image of the Z990 PCH likely comes from one of those early boards, offering a preview rather than a final look at the hardware.

Permalink to story:

 
Who's actually benefitted from PCI-E 5 in practice?

Theoretically SSDs. But how many of you are actually benefitting from those speeds? Game loading times don't seem to count. Don't think there's many of us doing huge file transfers on the daily.
Afaik PCI-E x16 4.0 is enough for all graphics cards.

So, upsides: (for the manufacturer mostly it seems?) can cheap out on PCI-lanes for budget graphics cards. Less physical space needed (neat for laptops).
Downsides (for consumers): Way more expensive motherboards due to more complex designs with more layers. More power hungry chipsets (I remember early PCI-E 5 motherboards with active cooling).

For me PCI 4 was and still is good enough. Feels like we're paying for a standard we didn't need yet.

Maybe Gen 5 standards are just cursed, mobile 5G is just as useless to me. Coverage is worse on higher frequencies and it just made the costs go up. Only places where it's meaningfully faster is in very specific locations within line of sight of the tower. Heck - if mobile providers hadn't spend so much on 5G advertising that could have offset the inflation price hikes
 
I'm curious if my existing DDR5 5600 CAS 30 memory will be sufficient, or if I'll have to buy 8000+ to take advantage of these new CPUs.
 
Who's actually benefitted from PCI-E 5 in practice?

Theoretically SSDs. But how many of you are actually benefitting from those speeds? Game loading times don't seem to count. Don't think there's many of us doing huge file transfers on the daily.
Afaik PCI-E x16 4.0 is enough for all graphics cards.

So, upsides: (for the manufacturer mostly it seems?) can cheap out on PCI-lanes for budget graphics cards. Less physical space needed (neat for laptops).
Downsides (for consumers): Way more expensive motherboards due to more complex designs with more layers. More power hungry chipsets (I remember early PCI-E 5 motherboards with active cooling).

For me PCI 4 was and still is good enough. Feels like we're paying for a standard we didn't need yet.

Maybe Gen 5 standards are just cursed, mobile 5G is just as useless to me. Coverage is worse on higher frequencies and it just made the costs go up. Only places where it's meaningfully faster is in very specific locations within line of sight of the tower. Heck - if mobile providers hadn't spend so much on 5G advertising that could have offset the inflation price hikes
In general, you can have more high speed USB ports, more high speed nvme m.2 ports and theoretically you can have more PCIe devices (like 4x NVME to PCIe adaptor boards).

In reality, right now PCIe 5 is not really needed. Things could change in 4-5 years.
 
Back