backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by alkalinetaupeh.. on Feb 14 at 4:06 PM

Intel makes NVIDIA very happy

Intel has licensed NVIDIA's SLI technology for its own branded motherboards built with the X58 chipset, formerly codenamed Tylersburg.

AMD/ATI's Crossfire technology has been available on X58 motherboards since the chipset was launched in November. SLI and Crossfire enable the simultaneous use of multiple video cards together for increased graphics performance.

The X58 chipset exclusively supports Core i7 CPUs using DDR3 DRAM and the LGA-1366 socket. It will support future Core i7 and Gulftown Westmere-based chips as well. Core i5 and Westmere-based CPUs will use other chipsets supporting the LGA-1156 socket instead.

So far, the DX58SO Desktop Board, codenamed Smackover, is the only motherboard that Intel makes that uses the X58 chipset. Current owners should be able to enable SLI support through a BIOS update.

X58 chipsets are built on a 130nm process at some of Intel's older fabs. It pairs the X58 I/O Hub northbridge with the ICH10 southbridge. It does not support ECC (Error Correcting Code) DRAM, which corrects single bit memory errors and detects multiple bit errors. This has traditionally been a feature of Intel's enthusiast level chipsets.

Some X58 motherboards built by other manufacturers have already licensed SLI from NVIDIA, which has had working drivers since last year.

All motherboard manufacturers must pay the required hefty fees and submit boards through the certification process at NVIDIA’s Santa Clara Certification Lab. There are unique ‘cookies’ given to each vendor to enable SLI usage. NVIDIA branding and logos must be prominently displayed as a condition of SLI licensing.

Apparently, enabling SLI on the X58 chipset was easy, as it supports a peer-to-peer writing scheme which is almost exactly the same as the PW Short technology that NVIDIA uses with its own NF200 SLI switch chip.

Sales of the Core i7 have been below expectations due to the global economic recession. The high-end enthusiast market that uses Core i7 is the same market that NVIDIA is courting with its SLI products. Motherboards using the Core i7 cost more to produce due to its support for triple memory channels, raising overall platform costs. Core i5 and mainstream Westmere-based products will address this problem by only supporting two memory channels.

Even though it was always considered a low volume product, sales of the Core i7 accounted for less than one percent of Intel's CPU sales in December.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Call Me Shallow
By mindless1 on 2/11/2009 12:55:14 PM , Rating: 1
... but I'm not going to buy something code-named "smackover".




RE: Call Me Shallow
By strikeback03 on 2/11/2009 1:05:35 PM , Rating: 2
Really, WTF is up with Intel board names. Bad Axe was bad, Skulltrail is worse, and Smackover is absolutely ridiculous.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By Diosjenin on 2/11/2009 1:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
As opposed to the Foxconn Bloodrage? Or the ASUS Rampage II Extreme?

Hey, I think they're ridiculous too. But it's not like these companies don't have marketing departments. They wouldn't be giving their products names like Smackover if it didn't appeal to somebody. Even if those 'somebodies' are the 14-year-old suburbanites with too much money who spend their days playing CounterStrike and using l33tsp34k when they shouldn't, they mean money for Intel, and Intel seems to be okay with that.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By jiteo on 2/11/2009 2:31:32 PM , Rating: 5
Asus Asspwn Floorwipe III Extreme Ninja!


RE: Call Me Shallow
By walk2k on 2/11/2009 4:36:04 PM , Rating: 5
Rock Solid, Ass Pwning.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By jiteo on 2/11/2009 4:44:27 PM , Rating: 2
I wish I could mod that up.

You win :D


RE: Call Me Shallow
By alkalinetaupehat on 2/14/2009 4:06:47 PM , Rating: 2
Signed in just to say sir, that pwns.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By Joz on 2/11/2009 11:18:22 PM , Rating: 2
No, bloodrage is a great idea.

Have you effing seen the thing? Not only does it look like a assraping machine, it performs like one too!


RE: Call Me Shallow
By GaryJohnson on 2/11/2009 2:38:52 PM , Rating: 2
I agree the names are bad, but Bad Axe and Skulltrail at least elicited some whim of bad-assery.

But what the heck is "Smackover"? That sounds like a hangover except with smack instead of alcohol.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By amanojaku on 2/11/2009 2:57:50 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if Skulltrail is a place.

Bad Axe, Michigan
Smackover, Arkansas


RE: Call Me Shallow
By strikeback03 on 2/11/2009 3:12:33 PM , Rating: 2
Then again, there are some town with names which the filter would probably block, so that isn't necessarily a good inspiration either.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By 440sixpack on 2/11/2009 10:15:17 PM , Rating: 2
Belchertown, Massachusetts


RE: Call Me Shallow
By therealnickdanger on 2/12/2009 12:29:30 PM , Rating: 2
Assf*ck, Delaware

I never tested well in geography...


RE: Call Me Shallow
By Slash3 on 2/12/2009 1:43:33 AM , Rating: 3
It follows in their long tradition of geographic place names.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By rbfowler9lfc on 2/11/2009 10:58:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, Intel desktop board naming has been annoying for ages.

Isleton, Newberry Lake, Pearl Creek, Dragonpeak Tail, Eve Cove, all these sound like killer names, isn't it?


RE: Call Me Shallow
By mindless1 on 2/11/2009 11:39:27 PM , Rating: 1
We each have our preferences, I'll take any of these before something so ridiculous as smackover. He!! I'd think naming it "Paris Hilton" was at least funny.


RE: Call Me Shallow
By Dark Legion on 2/12/2009 12:48:06 AM , Rating: 2
But they would have to make the board both suck and blow at the same time, or else its just doesn't make sense.


Future Gulftown support..
By Bucky Beaver on 2/11/2009 12:56:24 PM , Rating: 3
This is the first reference I've seen about LGA-1366 supporting Westmere 32nm CPUs - I just hope it's true! :)




RE: Future Gulftown support..
By fleshconsumed on 2/11/2009 1:29:00 PM , Rating: 2
They will use the same physical socket, however it is still unclear if existing x58 motherboards will support it.


RE: Future Gulftown support..
By TomZ on 2/11/2009 2:25:18 PM , Rating: 3
Given the experience of past history, I'll bet the answer to that is "no."


RE: Future Gulftown support..
By GaryJohnson on 2/11/2009 2:41:41 PM , Rating: 3
Or maybe "yes", but with a BIOS update?


RE: Future Gulftown support..
By Deathspawner on 2/11/2009 2:47:28 PM , Rating: 3
That sounds like the case. In the PDF shown, it specifically shows that X58 will be the platform of choice for Gulftown, so I'd find it unlikely that any current X58 board would be unable to run it. If that were the case, then Intel would likely release a new model (X68) to help differentiate them.

The problem is that when Gulftown gets released, things like S-ATA 6Gb/s and USB 3.0 will be tempting us. The CPU might work in current boards, but those technologies will be hard to ignore.


RE: Future Gulftown support..
By Fnoob on 2/11/2009 5:26:17 PM , Rating: 2
i7 is truly epic, and I will be building one this week ;) - however, pending tech such as SATA 6G and USB 3.0 is going to be sweet and somewhat tempting for wait for. These may well be supported by an add on PCIE card though... better not need a new mobo, dammit.


ECC is for gamers now?
By Fnoob on 2/11/2009 5:05:10 PM , Rating: 2
"ECC (Error Correcting Code) DRAM, which corrects single bit memory errors and detects multiple bit errors. This has traditionally been a feature of Intel's enthusiast level chipsets."

A feature of server/enterprise level motherboards, yes. Enthusiast/gamer, hell no. With the massive performance hit that ECC imposes on speed, what gamer is going to go to the trouble to build a i7 system, overclock it, and then enable ECC to make to run slower?




RE: ECC is for gamers now?
By Jansen (blog) on 2/12/2009 6:27:12 AM , Rating: 2
440BX
820E
845E
875P
925X
925XE
955X
975X
X38

Just because you are an enthusiast doesn't mean you are a gamer. And not all gamers overclock their ram.

The latency hit running ECC is not that bad.

It has only been since the X48 that Intel has been missing this feature.


RE: ECC is for gamers now?
By Fnoob on 2/12/2009 9:05:13 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, I wasn't aware that all of those chipsets supported ECC, except for X38 or was it X48 that required the FBDIMMS? My experience with ECC (in my home PCs) ended with the Athlon MP - and that did take a huge latency hit at the higher settings (ECC+scrub).

Also, since you are all over this, help me understand why "X58 chipsets are built on a 130nm process"? One of the few complaints raised about nearly all of the new X58 boards is how hot they run, not just the i7's but also the chipset. Why use such an ancient, hot fab size when they also prolly have 90nm, 65nm idling down?


RE: ECC is for gamers now?
By Jansen (blog) on 2/12/2009 8:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
The X58 chipset is low volume, the 65nm lines are still used for legacy products. 90nm is where the volume chipsets are produced, I think.

I have a table from Intel somewhere, but it's a little old.

If you think about it, there are more computers using ECC than computers with overclocked DRAM.

The latency hit with DDR3 is minimal due to the high clock speeds. Missing a cycle was a big deal at DDR166, not so much at 1600MHz.

Neither X38 or X48 needed FBDIMMs, that was server only, of which almost all are registered ECC.

As DRAM scales smaller, density and sizes are going up. The risk of bit loss has never been higher, it is only due to certain memory tricks that more BSODs don't occur.


Is i5 Larrabee + dual core i7
By Ladel on 2/11/2009 9:52:57 PM , Rating: 2
If Pryde is correct about Larrabee being 45nm it occurred to me that Intel may have bypassed shrinking their existing IGP and implemented a dual/quad core Larrabee as the graphics chip in the i5 . The design is modular and would have to have a memory controller anyway , just add Intels version of hypertranport , stir , bake , serve .

The MCM means when the planned shrink of Larrabee happens upgrading the i5 will be easy.




By toyotabedzrock on 2/12/2009 1:35:22 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not 100% sure but i believe i read somewhere that they are not taking this route.


RE: Is i5 Larrabee + dual core i7
By Pryde on 2/12/2009 4:25:13 PM , Rating: 2
Intel is releasing the IGP onto the CPU because without the FSB there is no real need for the NB. On the cheaper boards there is not going to be the x58 IOH which supply's the PCIe lanes, it will also be on the CPU. So basically for P55 the CPU is being merged with the NB.


RE: Is i5 Larrabee + dual core i7
By Pryde on 2/12/2009 4:28:36 PM , Rating: 2
intel makes nvidia happy
By jazkat on 2/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: intel makes nvidia happy
By A Stoner on 2/11/2009 5:29:26 PM , Rating: 2
I dunno, I think Intel likes having a punching bag in the market. Once AMD is gone, then Intel does become a monopoly and then there is little to limit the government's interference. They may want to keep AMD down, it is AMD's ball to carry in order to advance themselves. Intel simply makes a better product and has been doing so for a long time. AMD was doing great when Intel was sucking due to the P4 thermal problems caused by its desire for ever longer pipelines that could take a 1+1 and turn it into an entire spreadsheet. That pipeline must have zigzaged across that chip like a thousand times. AMD has to produce to profit.


RE: intel makes nvidia happy
By jazkat on 2/11/2009 9:41:18 PM , Rating: 1
i agree but let me correct you on one thing.. intel makes a better product from amd's design's.... :)


RE: intel makes nvidia happy
By Pryde on 2/12/2009 4:18:26 PM , Rating: 2
AMD used to make Intel CPUs, anything AMD has put on their CPUs it has been done before by Intel. If anyone is leeching off others designs it is AMD. Intel had trouble in the P4 days and AMD had great success. AMD is back where it has been for most of its life, struggling for market share.


Details, details...
By Slash3 on 2/12/2009 1:41:27 AM , Rating: 2
Did anyone actually read the press release?
http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1234353747819.html

"As a result of today’s announcement, NVIDIA SLI technology is now available for all consumer PC platforms, including the Intel Core i7, Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Duo processors, as well as those based on the AMD Phenom II CPU."




RE: Details, details...
By Jansen (blog) on 2/12/2009 6:31:08 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, SLI is "available". As long as you pay the licensing fee.

Press releases are spin documents.


Lucid Hydra?
By shin0bi272 on 2/11/2009 6:50:05 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone remember the Lucid Hydra 100 from IDF last year? Well intel had dumped 18 million into the development of this technology and Last update on their site said they had gotten an additonal 18 million from RHO Ventures. It does make sense that intel would include this into their x58 mobo specs since the entire concept of the hydra is a traffic cop sending the next frame to be drawn to the card that is ready it would have to be on the mobo or on an add in card (which would slow it down obviously).




Covering Server Bases
By Spectator on 2/12/2009 2:40:17 PM , Rating: 2
Lets face it.

Intel have only done this as they are getting into bed with Nvid on some levels.

They need it for the server market where nvid is see'ing growth with cuda and gpu apps.

Its totally logical and predictable.

But the more fun side of the equation is they get more info that will help possition Larabee when they decide to release it.




Covering Server Bases
By Spectator on 2/12/2009 3:18:51 PM , Rating: 2
Lets face it.

Intel have only done this as they are getting into bed with Nvid on some levels.

They need it for the server market where nvid is see'ing growth with cuda and gpu apps.

Its totally logical and predictable.

But the more fun side of the equation is they get more info that will help possition Larabee when they decide to release it.




Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By quiksilvr on 2/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By scarywoody on 2/11/2009 1:04:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
They should just accept the fact that nVidia and ATI has the GPU market by the balls


Not according to market share.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By ksherman on 2/11/2009 1:07:04 PM , Rating: 1
And with the supposedly up-coming Larrabee GPUs, you (hopefully) wont want Intel to stop making GPUs


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By CommodoreVic20 on 2/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By monomer on 2/11/2009 1:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
That was reported by The Inquirer, so should really be considered only a rumor. Sony was pretty quick to deny the report, which probably doesn't mean anything, but I would guess they still haven't actually settled on a graphics vendor yet.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if it does turn out that Intel will end up providing the graphics on the PS4.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By afkrotch on 2/11/2009 1:25:08 PM , Rating: 2
Umm...unfounded rumour there.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By omnicronx on 2/11/2009 1:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
Bad rumour at that, imagine how fun it would be to program on the Cell and x86 hardware at the same time ;)


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By nuarbnellaffej on 2/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By Pryde on 2/11/2009 5:28:22 PM , Rating: 3
x86 is a instruction set and not a architecture. Larrabee will use the x86 instruction set with Larrabee-specific extensions. At the end of the day Larrabee should be easier to program on which should give it a great edge over the likes of Nvidias CUDA.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By omnicronx on 2/11/2009 1:52:43 PM , Rating: 2
You have too much faith in Larrabee, Intel thinks the industry is going to bend backwards for them. This is just not going to happen. Larrabee is essentially a bunch of scaled down 10 year old x86 processors. Early designs draw huge amounts of power (up to 300w draw), and the first release of Larrabee is going to be slower than both its competitors.

If someone can tell me what incentive developers will have to program for a completely new gpu which will lack any considerable market share is beyond me.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By Pryde on 2/11/2009 5:39:06 PM , Rating: 2
Well many company's are already upgrading their software to make advantage of the increased power the x86 GPU can provide. While it has been generally accepted that Larrabee will be as fast as Nvidia or ATI at gaming, Intel should demolish CUDA.

It is believed that Larrabe will scale far better than Nvidia or ATI products. Intel is also releasing it on 45nm with 32nm planed for a year after.

Larrabee is a huge change from the traditional GPU but I can't how it can hurt having another competitor in the GPU market. I would not mind a 300W card as long as it offered the performance of a 300W card ( unlike the 2900 )


By toyotabedzrock on 2/11/2009 7:51:37 PM , Rating: 2
The incentive is that if they know how to program for a multi-core CPU then programing for Larrabee will be very very easy to learn. They are removing complexity really.

Maybe you neglected to notice the large 6 and 8-pin power connectors sticking out the back of a modern graphics card, in other words they aren't power sipping green devices themselves.

One thing that disappoints me about Intel is that chipsets are still produced on a 130nm die size, and using 2 different sockets seems like it is designed to make people who build there own systems pay more.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By SilentSin on 2/11/2009 1:15:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They should just accept the fact that nVidia and ATI has the GPU market by the balls

Couldn't be more wrong: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/display/2008080...

Also entirely off-topic of the article here. This is about Intel licensing the use of SLI with their own motherboards, not using SLI with their own GPUs (which would indeed be an exercise in stupidity). The article doesn't explicitly mention the use of the NF200 chip, but the result is the same because it gives NVidia a source of revenue for something that's already available to the consumer standard and will only raise prices for us buyers. http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYwNiwxLC... The X58 is actually performing better WITHOUT NVidia's proprietary nonsense. Between this and NVidia's nefarious naming schemes, they really seem to be going after the gullible and uninformed lately.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By walk2k on 2/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By walk2k on 2/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By Raedrik on 2/11/2009 4:46:05 PM , Rating: 2
That source does not represent the overall market: only gamers who use Steam. And since users of Steam are gamers, they usually have higher end GPU's which is why Intel GPU's are used so little on Steam.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By Pryde on 2/11/2009 5:41:15 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Most people who use steam have a discrete GPU. Larrabee is Intels jump into this market.


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By walk2k on 2/12/2009 1:01:47 PM , Rating: 2
Correct, higher end GPUs.. like SLI.

You're aware we are talking about SLI here, yes? Did you even READ the article?


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By C'DaleRider on 2/12/2009 6:41:45 AM , Rating: 2
Market Share of Desktop as of Q3, 2008 (Quote/info source: Jon Peddie Research):

Desktop GPU shipments are still ruled by Intel with 43.9 percent of the market , an increase in market share from Q2. NVIDIA's share of the desktop GPU market slipped to 32.6 percent and AMD's share climbed to 20.3 percent of the market.

Sorry, walk2k, you EPIC FAIL!
Market Share of Notebooks (Q3, 2008, Quote/info source: Jon Peddie Research):

"In the notebook market Intel increased its dominant position to 57.1% while Nvidia declined to 23.6% and AMD grew to 17.9%."


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By walk2k on 2/12/2009 1:09:30 PM , Rating: 2
The only reason people use integrated is because they simply DO NOT CARE about performance. People who care DO NOT USE INTEL INTEGRATED. EVER! People who buy SLI (you know, what this article is about??) obviously care about performance.

Then you bring up notebooks... yeah lot of notebooks using SLI. Try reading the article next time before commenting, thanks you very much.


By SilentSin on 2/12/2009 2:22:36 PM , Rating: 2
Did you even read the thread which you were replying to? Here I'll quote it for you since it's so far away and appear as many of your posts do - collapsed:
quote:
nVidia made a superior integrated GPU (the 9400M) that simply demolishes any GPU that Intel has ever made. They should just accept the fact that nVidia and ATI has the GPU market by the balls and should make all motherboards with Intel + nVidia or Intel + ATI configurations.

That OP was off-topic, as has been stated. This thread was commenting on that off-topic statement. It was never about the actual article's topic of SLI, it was about Intel's lack of uber 133+ ball handling skills in the GPU market. On the topic of that OP any and all IGP are fair game including Intel's, which do possess the collective balls of everyone else in the market; in fact it stretches them out on a counter and beats them with a spiked bat. /End


RE: Intel needs to stop making GPUs
By kamel5547 on 2/11/2009 1:30:57 PM , Rating: 2
You must be forgetting the vast number of users who have no interest in running video games. For most users (business and consumer) Intel graphics are all they need.

I would agree with your statement if it were less broad (i.e. all enthusiast motherboards).


By SavagePotato on 2/11/2009 3:40:51 PM , Rating: 4
Not to mention the Intel mobile solutions don't fail en masse to the tune of billions of dollars in lost revenue to the notebook manufacturers.

I wouldn't even touch a notebook with Nvidia parts in it after that debacle.


By Suomynona on 2/11/2009 1:44:37 PM , Rating: 2
Who cares if ATI or nVidia have better products when Intel is still selling more IGPs? Intel could give a rat's ass how capable their graphics are as long as people keep buying them.


By jonmcc33 on 2/11/2009 3:25:10 PM , Rating: 3
You should stop your gamer's mentality. Only 5% of the people with computers will seriously game on them. That is why Intel leads in market share for GPUs. The 9400M doesn't give anything over Intel GMA for web browsing or e-mail.


By Etern205 on 2/12/2009 9:55:15 AM , Rating: 1
I guess you forgot about the i740.


"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki




Latest Headlines
2/10/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 10, 2012, 5:50 PM
2/9/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 9, 2012, 11:54 AM
2/8/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 8, 2012, 1:11 PM
2/7/2012 Daily Hardware Reviews
February 7, 2012, 12:23 PM










botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki