Print 26 comment(s) - last by Hare.. on Nov 18 at 10:27 AM

ATI powered Intel D102GGC2
Farewell Radeon Xpress Intel motherboards, hello SIS 662

DailyTech previously reported on Intel’s Desktop Board motherboard roadmap back in June. At the time the then current roadmap listed an upcoming Intel Desktop Board D103GGV Gem Valley slated for release in 2H’2006. The motherboard was expected to feature a variant of ATI’s Radeon Xpress chipset. Since the completion of the AMD ATI merger, Intel’s latest roadmap makes no mention of the D103GGV Gem Valley motherboard.

The current D102GGC2 Grant County 2 based on ATI’s Radeon Xpress 200 is still on the latest roadmap, and a few boards have even made it out the door. Intel’s latest Desktop Board roadmap lists mostly motherboards powered by Intel’s in-house developed chipsets. On the other hand, there is one exception that’s expected in Q2’07; the new D201GLY Little Valley. Intel Desktop Board D201GLY Little Valley is currently expected to be powered by a SIS 662 chipset and feature a mini ITX form factor. The SIS 662 chipset was previously released in early July.

The design for the upcoming D201GLY Little Valley hasn’t been finalized yet. Intel’s roadmap signifies the D201GLY Little Valley as being in earlier preliminary stages. Expect the D201GLY Little Valley to arrive in Q2’07 around the same time the first Bearlake motherboards appear.

Comments     Threshold

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

By raven3x7 on 11/16/2006 1:06:58 AM , Rating: 3
What the hell are they thinking. Replacing quality ATi chipsets with the junk SiS have always produced. On the other hand who else is left to partner with anyway. Via an nVIDIA aren't exactly fond of Intel

By tak on 11/16/06, Rating: 0
By Samus on 11/16/2006 2:36:48 AM , Rating: 4

I'll leave this alone, but only state that, although the SiS chipset is probably stable and reliable like most of their (recent) products, but definately agree that ATi made far superior chipsets to practically everyone including Intel and nVidia in the performance sector.

With AMD, chipset quality didn't really decipher speed because so much of the 'chipset' is in the CPU, but Intel's Core processors require a substantially better engineered chipset than AMD CPU's require.

Compare 945 to 965 to 975 performance, and you see what I mean. The performance difference is all about northbridge power.

By GI2K on 11/16/06, Rating: 0
By Tsuwamono on 11/16/2006 7:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
who cares about USB? The 975 OCs like mad. ATI kicks the crap out of intel

By Hare on 11/18/2006 10:27:28 AM , Rating: 2
Did I miss something? 975 is an Intel chipset?

Besides 965 OCs better than 975 :P
Cheap 965 boards like Abit AB9 can reach 500mhz.

By DigitalFreak on 11/16/2006 9:39:21 AM , Rating: 2
More like Intel isn't fond of Via (and maybe Nvidia).

By othercents on 11/16/2006 11:28:52 AM , Rating: 5
I find this a blow to NVIDIA more than ATI. Really we expected ATI not to be allowed into the Intel design because they are the competitor, but you would expect NVIDIA to be the replacement instead of SIS. I think NVIDIA and everyone else in the market was expecting them to be the replacement.


By Lazarus Dark on 11/16/2006 2:15:51 PM , Rating: 2
I was also expecting a much closer relationship to nvidia. while the enthusiast market is a small percentage of intels sales, word of mouth and approval of enthusiasts is important in sales. And a large percentage of enthusiasts seem to want the ability to use nvidia sli. Im expecting announcements along the lines of crossfire not supported on next intel platforms and replaced by sli support. Well except maybe nvidia still doesnt want to do that, after all 680i is looking to perform quite well.
Hmmm... but this is just one board right? I dont think its really any indication of where they are heading.

By mindless1 on 11/17/2006 4:37:53 PM , Rating: 2
I'd expect that in Intel's mind, using a cheap (SIS) chipset means total platform cost allows a higher % of cost for the Intel CPU.

This is NOT about what an enthusiast would want.

By deeznuts on 11/16/2006 2:53:18 AM , Rating: 3
You guys mentioning performance and overclocking, do realize that this is a mini-itx form factor. The only real criteria is stability. As long as they are stable, they are fine for what they're using them for.

SIS chips have been pretty darn stable in my experience, just not the fastest.

RE: Performance
By zsdersw on 11/16/06, Rating: 0
Integrated graphics
By PrinceGaz on 11/16/2006 8:15:01 AM , Rating: 3
Isn't the integrated graphics of the SiS662 (like all SiS integrated graphics to date) rather poor both in features and performance? By poor, I mean in comparison with nVidia, ATI, and even Intel.

Whilst that may not matter to most businesses now, what about when Vista comes along?

Anti-SIS Fanboism needs to end.
By Dfere on 11/16/2006 9:58:59 AM , Rating: 1
SIS caters to a different market than most people have in their own experience here. I have been a fan of AT since 1998, but this is not,and has not been, a mainstream site since inception. I have my own business and for that SIS is a great chipset. Mini and Micro form factors, built in graphics for my receptionist's desktop computer, and very few issues with standard memory and other parts?

I don't have SIS in my home computer. I do have it in a few of my computers at the office.

By mindless1 on 11/17/2006 4:45:48 PM , Rating: 2
So you are actually claiming there's such a thing as Anti-Sis fanboism, if we prefer other chipsets but not one in particular?

That has to be one of the stupidest concepts in this thread.

Sis doesn't cater to anything, their products are practically always less desirable and thus, can't sell for the same price. There's nothing they're "Great" at, if you have a system that runs ok, it shows no merit to Sis at all if the other alternatives could do the job as well. If you wrote "great price" for your needs, that's quite different than great chipset.

SIS ? I'd rather not ...
By mforce on 11/16/2006 2:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
It's really too bad nVidia got ULI , they made better chipsets than SIS , IMO . There was a time when SIS made good stuff especially for the P IV but they've been down at the bottom for so long that I don't know if they can actually make some quality stuff anymore . I heard the roadmap from VIA also and that looks bad too , they're going to come with stuff that's outdated now but in about a year's time.
Right now the only good chipsets are made by Intel , AMD/ATI and nVidia .
Then again I guess Intel wanted something really cheap , and they don't have anything for that. Integrated graphics is probably very poor on those SIS chipsets. In the end I guess SIS and VIA are just that , cheap . They used to once be on top of the chipset market but look at them now ...

SIS stands for...
By ira176 on 11/16/2006 9:46:54 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously Inferior Silicon.

SIS hasn't been as inovative and competative as Ati or Nvidia. What Intel motherboards are inexpensive?? Why would Intel go with SIS when they can use a better part?

Blame Game
By encryptkeeper on 11/16/06, Rating: 0
ATI is teh suck
By L1NUXownz1fUR1337 on 11/16/06, Rating: -1
RE: ATI is teh suck
By Xavian on 11/16/2006 1:15:50 AM , Rating: 5
but the real question is, who would want a SiS chipset motherboard?

RE: ATI is teh suck
By RaptorEye on 11/16/2006 1:36:44 AM , Rating: 3
Nice One genius, the fact that ATi's next Intel chipset is showing overclocking fair greater then anything nVidia/Intel make, and that's on reference boards, just wait for the DFi versions.

I really wish people like you would not post such stupid and useless comments like that, either post something useful or that contributes to the topic or don't post anything at all.

As for the SiS chipsets, there fair from bad at all, they are just not for the overclocking enthusiast crowd etc, but they do there job more then well and are cheap that's the whole idea with low end Intel boards anyway, to do there job reliably and cheap.

RE: ATI is teh suck
By defter on 11/16/2006 2:57:47 AM , Rating: 2
the fact that ATi's next Intel chipset is showing overclocking fair greater then anything nVidia/Intel make

Let's see, nVidia's 680i chipset overclocks easily to over 500MHz FSB without any tricks (more cooling for northbridge, or higher northbridge voltage). Can you show which ATI's chipset overclocks better?

RE: ATI is teh suck
By PhantomKnight on 11/16/06, Rating: 0
RE: ATI is teh suck
By trabpukcip on 11/16/2006 12:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
Provided DFI doesn't botch it like s939 CFX-3200DR in this pos computer. Hello stability where are you? Oh thats right out the back having a coffee break:

Isn't asus making a new ati intel board as well? My little brothers M2N-SLI Deluxe hasn't skipped a beat (no, don't point out the fact that it is an nvidia board).

My SiS chipset ECS k7s5a board died a long time ago, stuff knows if the Duron still mounted on on it still works ;)

RE: ATI is teh suck
By mindless1 on 11/17/2006 4:40:07 PM , Rating: 2
The fact is that this platform is not targeted at high overclock(ers). Who is the (non-) genius adding irrelevant information??! (I mean, stupid and useless comment).

By DigitalFreak on 11/16/06, Rating: -1
“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Related Articles
SiS Announces 662 Chipset
July 5, 2006, 3:48 PM
2006 Intel Desktop Motherboard Roadmap
June 27, 2006, 11:32 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki