nVidia exits the chipset business

udaman

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
1,209
Do U always get UR news from the Enquirer, Merc? :p

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2353939,00.asp?kc=PCRSS03069TX1K0001121

Nvidia has confirmed that the company has essentially placed its Nforce chipset line on hiatus, given the legal wrangling between itself and Intel. According to Robert Sherbin, the lead corporate communications spokesman for Nvidia, Nvidia will "postpone further chipset investments".


"We have said that we will continue to innovate integrated solutions for Intel's FSB architecture," Sherbin said in an email. "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."
Intel claims that its four-year-old chipset license with Nvidia does not cover the "Nehalem," or Core series of microprocessors. Nvidia disagrees, and the matter will be hashed out in court in 2010. Nvidia still sells chipsets specifically designed for AMD's line of processors, but has halted further development as well.



Meanwhile, a story on the SemiAccurate Web site claimed that Nvidia is in the process of abandoning the mid-range to high-end GPU market, including canceling the GTX260, GTX275, and GTX285 and possibly the GTX295. Sherbin called the story "patently untrue".
News of Nvidia's decision to halt its chipset development was reported earlier at PC Perspective.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
Right, so if nVidia quit making GPUs...ATI would have no incentive to improve.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
Perhaps nVidia determined that they don't make CPUs.

If Intel doesn't want you and AMD is your mortal enemy.... There's not a lot of room there.
 

Bozo

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 12, 2002
Messages
4,396
Location
Twilight Zone
Good!
Maybe this will get AMD to think about producing their own motherboards.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
Sorry to disagree but I think of this as generally bad. For the same reason I really don't want AMD to die, is why I don't want Nvidia to fail. Competition is good, and monopolies are generally bad for society. This is definitely heading in the direction towards a monopoly.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,564
Location
I am omnipresent
There's nothing keeping nVidia from making AMD chipsets except the fact they don't want to. Plenty of judgment-impaired people would surely pair an nVidia-based card with an AMD CPU and an nVidia chipset.
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Count me amongst them, and stick your "judgement impaired" where the sun don't shine. I have probably built thousands of systems using that combination, with considerable satisfaction.

Not too long ago, Nvidia chipsets were clearly the best available. Over the last two or three years, we have seen a couple of changes:

(1) VIA are no longer competitive (are they even making chipsets still? We don't seem to see them at all anymore.)

(2) ATI/AMD chipsets have become common. After the inevitable period of well-earned suspicion, the ATI mainboard chipsets have proved themselves to be everything you could want: they are pretty much completely trouble-free.

On the graphics card side of things, the great black/white divide that saw Nvidia provide close to 100% of our cards has faded away, mainly because ATI drivers have finally become more like the Nvidia ones - pretty much fuss-free and lacking the stab-you-in-the-back gotchas that ATI driver software was notorious for until not so long ago.

We still prefer Nvidia-based cards (MSI. Gigabyte and Leadtek), of course, but no longer experience that all-too-familiar and always unwelcome feeling of impending dread whenever we have to work on an ATI-equipped system. These days, you can pretty much plug an ATI card in and expect it to work first time, and go on working every time, just as Nvidia cards have done snce they got the old TNT drivers right back about the time that the Voodoo III was released and AGP was still the new kid on the block.

All these comments apply only to the AMD platform. What Nvidia Intel-platform chipsets were like, I can't really say - we havn't found any need to sell Intel desktop CPUs on a regular basis since the Pentium III 1000 was one of our favoured units - and that's a long, long time ago now.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
All these comments apply only to the AMD platform. What Nvidia Intel-platform chipsets were like, I can't really say - we havn't found any need to sell Intel desktop CPUs on a regular basis since the Pentium III 1000 was one of our favoured units - and that's a long, long time ago now.

You are behind the times: Intel current C2d and i7 CPU's are now significantly more powerful than AMD's offerings. That being said, AMD is successfully marking out territory in the cost-effective budget class. Perhaps your market is limited to relatively low-end machines and in that case your statement may be valid.
 

Chewy509

Wotty wot wot.
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
3,327
Location
Gold Coast Hinterland, Australia
(1) VIA are no longer competitive (are they even making chipsets still? We don't seem to see them at all anymore.)
http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/desktop-chipsets.jsp

IIRC, they don't have a license for current i5/i7 offerings, as nVidia doesn't either, (which is the main topic of the thread). They do a license for HT, but not HT3.0 which means they can make AM2/AM3 compatible chipsets, but will be lower spec'ed for AMD platforms.

(2) ATI/AMD chipsets have become common. After the inevitable period of well-earned suspicion, the ATI mainboard chipsets have proved themselves to be everything you could want: they are pretty much completely trouble-free.
Good to hear...

My AMD-8151/8131/8111 chipset combination is going strong, and has been trouble free, except for 1 incompatibility issue with AMD-8151 and certain late model AGP video cards. (The issue is with AGP video cards that use a bridge chip to convert a PCIe based GPU into an AGP one, like a nVidia 6600 or ATI HD3000 series card. AGP based video cards like nVidia Quadro AGP or ATI FireGL AGP cards work perfectly fine).

Now back OT. I can see why nVidia have done what they have done, BUT loss of another competitor as large as nVidia from the mainstream chipset market will be a blow. How big, I don't know, but it means for the current situation, running a AMD CPU and nVidia SLI is no longer an option, and for the Intel side, well, let's see what happens in the future... (Not that I placed a lot of value in current SLI/Crossfire configurations - I just don't see the cost benefit in the setup).
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
You are behind the times: Intel current C2d and i7 CPU's are now significantly more powerful than AMD's offerings.

Powerful enough to justify the horrendous price premium? Powerful enough to justify putting up with Intel mainboard chipsets and drivers (which I have never, ever liked, not since the VX, TX, and BX)? I don't think so.
 

ddrueding

Fixture
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Messages
19,511
Location
Horsens, Denmark
Powerful enough to justify the horrendous price premium? Powerful enough to justify putting up with Intel mainboard chipsets and drivers (which I have never, ever liked, not since the VX, TX, and BX)? I don't think so.

Yup. When I went from a fast AMD system to a C2D I was blown away. There is a snappiness there that isn't elsewhere.

And the boards/drivers are excellent these days. The only things I buy are Gigabyte boards with Intel chipsets and Intel boards with Intel chipsets.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
I have to agree, I was really impressed with the speed difference between my AMD and my recent Core i7. I'm also impressed with the speed difference between my AMD and Intel T9600 with the latter feeling far snappier.
 

MaxBurn

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
3,245
Location
SC
Funny, dealing with crappy motherboards is what drove me back to intel. You know, little details like having USB mice and keyboards work in DOS boot disk applications and having the motherboard be compatible with KVM switches. At the moment I am feeling like supermicro and intel branded motherboards are the only thing I really want to buy, I guess gigabyte as a distant third.

Never played with an ATI chipset machine though, just not daring enough to play.
 

P5-133XL

Xmas '97
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,173
Location
Salem, Or
Powerful enough to justify the horrendous price premium? Powerful enough to justify putting up with Intel mainboard chipsets and drivers (which I have never, ever liked, not since the VX, TX, and BX)? I don't think so.

Absolutely! There is nothing in the AMD arena that is even close to the performance of the Intel i7 processors. The extreme top AMD processors are just now starting to get performance parity to the bottom-mid C2D processors.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
The extreme top AMD processors are just now starting to get performance parity to the bottom-mid C2D processors.
While true a few months back, I think that's overstating the current situation a bit. The latest AMD cores are within a few percent of equivalently clocked C2D cores and are now being sold at reasonable prices. The i7 is obviously a different story again, but I contend that non-geeks aren't remotely interested in them yet.

The exception is Photoshop, which seems to be explicitly designed to run slow on AMD machines. Adequate for most people, though.

Power differences are still dramatic, AFAIK AMD CPUs need about 50% more power than corresponding Intel CPUs, although less than this at idle.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Never played with an ATI chipset machine though

The current ones (last 12 months) seem pretty good to me. Smooth installation and no weirdness later. Obviously, the graphics are in a different league to Intel efforts and usually include DVI.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,737
Location
USA
The current ones (last 12 months) seem pretty good to me. Smooth installation and no weirdness later. Obviously, the graphics are in a different league to Intel efforts and usually include DVI.

The graphics will only be short-term advantage to AMD once Intel gets their act together and Larrabee peeks it's head out into the wild.
 
Top