Friday, October 9th 2009

NVIDIA Halts Development of Core i5 & Core i7 Chipsets

There was a time when for the Intel platform, you could choose between motherboards based on chipsets from four or more vendors. With the weakening and discontinuation of chipset development for the Intel platform from the likes of VIA, and SiS, and NVIDIA facing a technical and legal blockade with further development of Intel chipsets with the latest Intel processors having integrated memory controllers and the Quickpath Interconnect system interface, consumer choice is reduced to platform core logic coming only from Intel, while motherboard vendors are able to use additives such as the NVIDIA nForce 200 PCI-Express bridge chip, or even the latest LucidLogix Hydra controller, among additional SATA, SAS and Ethernet controllers, to enhance the motherboards' feature-set beyond what the chipset can provide.

Following NVIDIA making the right noises about the future of its chipset division and development of chipsets that drive Socket LGA-1156 processors, it is becoming increasingly clear that its development has hit a possible legal or technical hurdle. Until those issues are ironed out completely, NVIDIA will not invest in further development of that chipset. In a statement, NVIDIA expressed its official position of its chipset division, and where things stand specific to the products it makes. Speaking of which, NVIDIA's chipset division currently sells chipsets for Intel's FSB-driven processors, AMD's latest processors, and the ION platform, which forms the foundation of a more capable ULPC platform based on the Intel Atom processor.

The statement that pertains to the DMI chipset reads:
We will continue to innovate integrated solutions for Intel's FSB architecture. We firmly believe that this market has a long healthy life ahead. But because of Intel's improper claims to customers and the market that we aren't licensed to the new DMI bus and its unfair business tactics, it is effectively impossible for us to market chipsets for future CPUs. So, until we resolve this matter in court next year, we'll postpone further chipset investments for Intel DMI CPUs.
As for chipsets that drive Intel's Socket LGA-775 processors, NVIDIA said that it will continue to innovate integrated solutions. The company already has the high-end segment covered with its nForce 700i Series chipsets, while gaining ground on its recently-introduced single-chip chipsets with GeForce 9000 motherboard GPUs. The aforementioned recent report also mentioned development of chipsets with even more powerful integrated graphics, with dedicated memory, and support for DDR3 system memory.

Despite facing over three years of competition with ATI (which later formed AMD's own desktop chipset division under the Graphics Products Group), NVIDIA claims to lead AMD quantitatively in sales of chipset for the AMD processor platform. NVIDIA's ION platform, which is gaining in popularity and scoring design wins, is poised for further development.

In spite of impending problems, NVIDIA maintains an optimistic outlook with its chipset division catering to both Intel and AMD processor platforms. "We expect our MCP [chipset] business for both Intel and AMD to be strong well into the future," the statement added.
Add your own comment

47 Comments on NVIDIA Halts Development of Core i5 & Core i7 Chipsets

#26
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
AM2(+) is where the action (sales volume) is. I won't doubt NVIDIA's claims, at least on the ground. Every hardware store here is sure to offer you a GeForce 8000 chipset based board with an AMD processor (in combo discounts). The layman thinks "GeForce" is the name of a motherboard first, and graphics card later.
Posted on Reply
#27
1Kurgan1
The Knife in your Back
Its kinda of interesting that now their main chipset sales will be leaning on the direct competition.
Posted on Reply
#28
suraswami
btarunrAM2(+) is where the action (sales volume) is. I won't doubt NVIDIA's claims, at least on the ground. Every hardware store here is sure to offer you a GeForce 8000 chipset based board with an AMD processor (in combo discounts). The layman thinks "GeForce" is the name of a motherboard first, and graphics card later.
I wouldn't agree with it entirely. Frys and Microcenter has more choices with AMD chipset than NVidia chipset. NV 8000 series is hard to find now a days. I favour Nvidia chipsets especially for their RAID choices, better hdd transfer speeds etc over AMD chipset, I am really getting sick and tired of SB600/700 slow HDD transfer speeds. Planning to move my server to NV platform this weekend.
Posted on Reply
#29
TheMailMan78
Big Member
inferKNOXThat isn't true for total price vs performance, or in fact... at all.:p
Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? I'm confused.
Posted on Reply
#30
sideeffect
Apparantly they don't plan new AMD chipsets either. www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15852/69/.

It seems that Nvidia are pulling out of less profitable highend products so they can focus their efforts on more profitable areas like netbook and mobile phone chipsets.

It is bad news for the PC consumer though.
Posted on Reply
#31
TheMailMan78
Big Member
sideeffectApparantly they don't plan new AMD chipsets either. www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15852/69/.

It seems that Nvidia are pulling out of less profitable highend products so they can focus their efforts on more profitable areas like netbook and mobile phone chipsets.

It is bad news for the PC consumer though.
That article is older than the front page one on TPU. I think this was more of a rumor on fudzillas part than fact.
Posted on Reply
#32
TheLaughingMan
newtekie1What did they do wrong? The dick move of locking PhysX if ATi hardware is detected? Well it was a direct responce to ATi locking native support for PhysX on their hardware, then everyone bitches and moans when nVidia completely locks out ATi. One dick move after another from both sides. So get off your high ATi horse, and open your eyes. Both sides have pulled dick moves. You didn't bitch when ATi blocked native support for PhysX, so obviously PhysX isn't important to you, so why bitch about it now?
AMD/ATI blocked PhysX because they had to. Nvidia owed it as a propriety property and AMD/ATI was never given permission to use it on their own cards. But the deal was if you bought one of the still selling Aegis PhysX cards or (now recently) a Nvidia GPU to run as a dedicated PhysX card, everything was fine. Now they are saying that is a no go too. AMD has done its fair share of dick moves, but PhysX was not one of them.

I just wanted to say this is a little worse than blocking support of a feature like PhysX. Intel is block all possibility to make chipsets for their processors which is unfair business practice. It is like AMD suddenly saying ATI graphics cards will only work with AMD chipsets and detected AMD processors. If you ATI, you buy the whole package which would be unfair.

All this back stabbing crap needs to stop.
Posted on Reply
#33
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Intel has always been greedy, they fit in there with Microsoft, Nvidia seems to be that way with the Physx stuff. Seriously NV is getting hurt, they need to start back with AMD as of chipset making since they wont allow SLI on AMD chipsets etc.
Posted on Reply
#34
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
TheLaughingManAMD/ATI blocked PhysX because they had to. Nvidia owed it as a propriety property and AMD/ATI was never given permission to use it on their own cards. But the deal was if you bought one of the still selling Aegis PhysX cards or (now recently) a Nvidia GPU to run as a dedicated PhysX card, everything was fine. Now they are saying that is a no go too. AMD has done its fair share of dick moves, but PhysX was not one of them.
You should really read up on PhysX and CUDA more. PhysX, despite being owned by nVidia, is free to use, develope for, and support. You don't need nVidia's permission to use it on your hardware, it is completely free to do. So your argument is flawed. ATi blocked native support for PhysX and CUDA on their hardware. Yes, nVidia really only wanted it to spread CUDA and PhysX, because they know the only way CUDA/PhysX would be successful is if it ran natively on both ATi and nVidia hardware. The problem is that support needed to be added to the ATi driver, and ATi refused to help in this area, essentially blocking native PhysX/CUDA support.

This crap about nVidia requiring a licencing fee, or charging ATi needs to stop. This was never the case, CUDA and PhysX are both completely free. Any hardware manufacturer can adapt their hardware use support it free of charge, they just have to write the drivers to support it. ATi didn't even have to do that, a 3rd party was willing to do all the driver developement for them, they just had to include the additions in the driver, and they still refused.
Posted on Reply
#35
erocker
*
newtekie1You should really read up on PhysX and CUDA more. PhysX, despite being owned by nVidia, is free to use, develope for, and support. You don't need nVidia's permission to use it on your hardware, it is completely free to do. So your argument is flawed. ATi blocked native support for PhysX and CUDA on their hardware. Yes, nVidia really only wanted it to spread CUDA and PhysX, because they know the only way CUDA/PhysX would be successful is if it ran natively on both ATi and nVidia hardware. The problem is that support needed to be added to the ATi driver, and ATi refused to help in this area, essentially blocking native PhysX/CUDA support.

This crap about nVidia requiring a licencing fee, or charging ATi needs to stop. This was never the case, CUDA and PhysX are both completely free. Any hardware manufacturer can adapt their hardware use support it free of charge, they just have to write the drivers to support it. ATi didn't even have to do that, a 3rd party was willing to do all the driver developement for them, they just had to include the additions in the driver, and they still refused.
And it works regardless. In Windows 7 anyway. :ohwell: I hope Nvidia gets back into the chipset business once they have their newer hardware settled and ready.
Posted on Reply
#36
1c3d0g
Rakesh95Haha very true
let Nvidia do what their good at
Maybe now they can focus on making a SoundStorm 2 PCIe card...:eek: oh my, did I say that out loud?!? :laugh: :p
Posted on Reply
#37
KainXS
erockerAnd it works regardless. In Windows 7 anyway. :ohwell: I hope Nvidia gets back into the chipset business once they have their newer hardware settled and ready.
Thats true and praise be to the hackers, but I will still stick with what I said, If you buy a Nvidia 8600GTS to go with a AMD card you shouldn't need a hack to get it to run when its supposed to in the first place unless you remove your AMD card.

I don't even have AMD hardware right now but Its not right and I'm never going to agree that it is right, I could go deeper than that but I don't want to derail the thread.
Posted on Reply
#38
e6600
umm
this is news?
Posted on Reply
#39
Bundy
Well it's in the news section and is the most popular article for the day - I'd say so.
Posted on Reply
#40
Flyordie
suraswamiI wouldn't agree with it entirely. Frys and Microcenter has more choices with AMD chipset than NVidia chipset. NV 8000 series is hard to find now a days. I favour Nvidia chipsets especially for their RAID choices, better hdd transfer speeds etc over AMD chipset, I am really getting sick and tired of SB600/700 slow HDD transfer speeds. Planning to move my server to NV platform this weekend.
SB700 fixed the SB600 issues. Jeeze AMD, unlock the SB700's hidden potential, just because it MAY in a 1 in 1billion to the power of 2 cause a BSOD if you are running more than 20TB on the controller doesn't mean its that big of a deal for current power users.
Posted on Reply
#41
Rakesh95
inferKNOXwow, that's a pretty inflamatory 1st post you made there.
When they come hunting for your head, you're on your own buddy, I covered my back, LOL!:laugh:
Haha no probs budddy, just saying what i think, im sure a lot of people will agree.
it isnt the kinda first post you expect is it :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#42
DarthCyclonis
The last chipset's from Nvidia sucked. They know it, everyone knows it. Since they licensed SLI to intel on their P and X58 chipsets there was not reason for them to have their own. They need to stick to investing money into into perfecting their GPU's and the manufacturing process before they get involved again in the chipset business. Without good GPU's chipsets fore Nvidia are irrelevant.
Posted on Reply
#43
hat
Enthusiast
Gotta love Nvidia bitching about Intel's unfair business tatics. Maybe, Nvidia, you need to look in the mirror and think about buggering the drivers to disable physx support when an ATI card is around...
Posted on Reply
#45
MN12BIRD
csendesmarkLOL - Core i5 chipset?
What's inside?
No MC needed, no PCIe controller needed!

What kind of development? Fancy heat sink ? :D
LOL that's what I was thinking. One big ass heatsink with a big NVIDIA logo on top of a tiny NForce200 chip hahahha. God I hate NVidia chipsets. Stick with GPUs guys no one cares about your chipsets anymore.
Posted on Reply
#46
Bo_Fox
MN12BIRDLOL that's what I was thinking. One big ass heatsink with a big NVIDIA logo on top of a tiny NForce200 chip hahahha. God I hate NVidia chipsets. Stick with GPUs guys no one cares about your chipsets anymore.
+1!!!!!!!!!!!

NF2 was awesome with Soundstorm, NF4 was awesome even though it was missing out on Soundstorm, and then all of the buggy and power-hungry chipsets after that just did not capture the same attention that NF2/3/4 did. We do not seem to be complaining about the lack of NForce chipsets for Corei7's (at least I definitely am not, enjoying my Intel ICH10R).
Posted on Reply
#47
inferKNOX
TheMailMan78Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? I'm confused.
I'm quite definitely in opposition
TheLaughingManIntel is block all possibility to make chipsets for their processors which is unfair business practice. It is like AMD suddenly saying ATI graphics cards will only work with AMD chipsets and detected AMD processors. If you ATI, you buy the whole package which would be unfair.
That would leave us in a world with 3 companies: Apple, AMD & Intel. Brrrr... what a chilling thought. That would of course be until Microsoft decides to make it's own computers, then they'd all be bought over by Sky Net, then the computers would be :cool: and we'd be :respect:, ha ha ha!
No seriously though, that's the way things are headed:shadedshu (buy it'd be Sky Vision [ISP] instead of Sky Net, lol, kiddin again...sigh).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 16th, 2024 16:17 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts