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

#1
W1zzard
NVIDIA's full statement relating to their MCP business:
NVIDIA STATEMENT
We've received a number of inquiries recently about NVIDIA's chipset (MCP) business. We'd like to set the record straight on current and future NVIDIA chipset activity.

On Intel platforms, the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M/ION brands have enjoyed significant sales, as well as critical success. Customers including Apple, Dell, HP, Lenovo, Samsung, Acer, ASUS and others are continuing to incorporate GeForce 9400M and ION products in their current designs. There are many customers that have plans to use ION or GeForce 9400M chipsets for upcoming designs, as well.

On AMD platforms, we continue to sell a higher quantity of chipsets than AMD itself. MCP61-based platforms continue to be extremely well positioned in the entry CPU segments where AMD CPUs are most competitive vs. Intel

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.

Despite Intel's actions, we have innovative products that we are excited to introduce to the market in the months ahead. We know these products will bring with them some amazing breakthroughs that will surprise the industry, just as GeForce 9400M and ION have shaken up the industry this year.

We expect our MCP business for both Intel and AMD to be strong well into the future.
Posted on Reply
#2
Zehnsucht
Even if they got pass the legal hurdles, who would buy a x58/p55 motherboard with Nvidia chipset? I mean, the possibilty to be able to run crossfire would be miniscule. Compared to intels chipset, with both crossfire/sli -able motherboards.

And with recent events with nvidia blocking piss-x when ATi card detected...
Posted on Reply
#3
csendesmark
LOL - Core i5 chipset?
What's inside?
No MC needed, no PCIe controller needed!

What kind of development? Fancy heat sink ? :D
Posted on Reply
#4
zCexVe
Well, they had good chipsets going with nForce 2 , nForce 4 for AMD platform.
They might wanna continue that way with Intel too. But seems like Bye nForce to me.
Posted on Reply
#5
inferKNOX
At least it will allow them to invest in the GT300 now.:laugh:
Just a light-hearted joke, don't kill me:o
Posted on Reply
#6
Rakesh95
by: inferKNOX
At least it will allow them to invest in the GT300 now.:laugh:
Haha very true
let Nvidia do what their good at
Posted on Reply
#7
inferKNOX
by: Rakesh95
Haha very true
let Nvidia do what their good at
wow, 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:
Posted on Reply
#8
Bjorn_Of_Iceland
Looks like some resources are going to be retooled for a while...
Posted on Reply
#9
Assimilator
by: inferKNOX
At least it will allow them to invest in the GT300 now.:laugh:
Just a light-hearted joke, don't kill me:o
I believe you're missing the bigger picture here...

Right now the only decent chipsets for Intel platforms are Intel chipsets (by "decent" I mean nothing from SiS and VIA). This means that Intel has no competition in the chipset market (and especially the high-end segment). That in turn means that Intel is free to charge whatever it chooses for its chipsets, cut whatever features it desires from them, etc. and you'll still have to buy them if you want to use an Intel CPU. The following scenario thus becomes completely plausible:

You want an Intel motherboard? That's cool, the board will cost you $50 but the chipset's $150.
Need SLI and/or CrossFire? Then you have to pay an extra $200 price premium for a board that is identical except for a chipset that supports multiple graphics cards.
You want tri-SLI? Same board, slightly different chipset, another extra $200.
What, not willing to pay $600 for a board that gives you basic functionality? Oh too bad, you don't have a choice!

Lack of competition is a bad thing for the industry and a very bad thing for consumers.
Posted on Reply
#10
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: csendesmark
LOL - Core i5 chipset?
What's inside?
DirectX 10~11 IGP, Additional memory controller for it, additional PCI-Express controller (which P55 also has), storage controllers, and other peripheral controllers.
Posted on Reply
#11
inferKNOX
by: Assimilator
I believe you're missing the bigger picture here...

Right now the only decent chipsets for Intel platforms are Intel chipsets (by "decent" I mean nothing from SiS and VIA). This means that Intel has no competition in the chipset market (and especially the high-end segment). That in turn means that Intel is free to charge whatever it chooses for its chipsets, cut whatever features it desires from them, etc. and you'll still have to buy them if you want to use an Intel CPU. The following scenario thus becomes completely plausible:

You want an Intel motherboard? That's cool, the board will cost you $50 but the chipset's $150.
Need SLI and/or CrossFire? Then you have to pay an extra $200 price premium for a board that is identical except for a chipset that supports multiple graphics cards.
You want tri-SLI? Same board, slightly different chipset, another extra $200.
What, not willing to pay $600 for a board that gives you basic functionality? Oh too bad, you don't have a choice!

Lack of competition is a bad thing for the industry and a very bad thing for consumers.
Yup, I knew someone will take me far too seriously...:ohwell:
Read sentence no.2 in my post please.

EDIT: I couldn't help but add, if Intel got you flustered, just step over to the next shelf/link in your store and turn that frown upside-down with an AMD.;)
Posted on Reply
#12
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
What's that cooking? I smell another EU lawsuit brewing.

I really hate to read this news. I prefer ATI GPUs but thats only because I have more experience with them. I sure hope AMD doesn't take the same route. The silicon industry seems rather brutal as of lately. I sure hope Nvidia has a backup plan for those resources and doesn't just lay a bunch of people off. If they do I'm sure they will just blame the economy instead of just owning up to the decision. :shadedshu

As for Intel well.....it's their loss. Their IGP sucks.
Posted on Reply
#13
HalfAHertz
by: Assimilator
I believe you're missing the bigger picture here...

Right now the only decent chipsets for Intel platforms are Intel chipsets (by "decent" I mean nothing from SiS and VIA). This means that Intel has no competition in the chipset market (and especially the high-end segment). That in turn means that Intel is free to charge whatever it chooses for its chipsets, cut whatever features it desires from them, etc. and you'll still have to buy them if you want to use an Intel CPU. The following scenario thus becomes completely plausible:

You want an Intel motherboard? That's cool, the board will cost you $50 but the chipset's $150.
Need SLI and/or CrossFire? Then you have to pay an extra $200 price premium for a board that is identical except for a chipset that supports multiple graphics cards.
You want tri-SLI? Same board, slightly different chipset, another extra $200.
What, not willing to pay $600 for a board that gives you basic functionality? Oh too bad, you don't have a choice!

Lack of competition is a bad thing for the industry and a very bad thing for consumers.
That's not entirely true. They have one very big compettitor and that's AMD. Yes, yes they don't produce intel MBs, but they produce AMD ones.

It's not just about being competative on the CPU front. You need to plug in that CPU somewhere.AMD and intel compete with the whole package. Would you go for a 500$ CPU/MB or a 300$ CPU/MB if you get 85% of the performance?
Posted on Reply
#14
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
by: HalfAHertz
That's not entirely true. They have one very big compettitor and that's AMD. Yes, yes they don't produce intel MBs, but they produce AMD ones.

It's not just about being competative on the CPU front. You need to plug in that CPU somewhere.AMD and intel compete with the whole package. Would you go for a 500$ CPU/MB or a 300$ CPU/MB if you get 85% of the performance?
That was true a year ago. Intel is beyond the better buy now compared to AMDs best offering. The only advantage AMD has now is the 5800 series and Nvidia chipsets.
Posted on Reply
#16
inferKNOX
by: TheMailMan78
That was true a year ago. Intel is beyond the better buy now compared to AMDs best offering. The only advantage AMD has now is the 5800 series and Nvidia chipsets.
That isn't true for total price vs performance, or in fact... at all.:p
HalfAHertz, you were right about first time posters always somehow finding these threads...:rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#17
KainXS
I don't even care, all I hope is that after this is over AMD sues Nvidia for Unfair Business Tactics for the current PhysX BS just like Nvidia is suing Intel for Unfair Business Tactics, I know its f@cked up, but still what they did is wrong, just like what Intel is doing seems wrong(but might not be).

And as for Nforce, I say who cares, In my experience, Intel boards pretty much always overclock better than the Nforce boards and now since you can get SLI(via hack) and Crossfire on Intel boards why would you buy nforce, and yes this means intel will nearly dominate the chipset market but if AMD steps up like they did with their CPU's and VGA's this won't really be a problem.

How is this cool chiplet, I mean, whats the point in saying "hey this is cool", what do you mean.
Posted on Reply
#18
inferKNOX
by: KainXS
How is this cool chiplet, I mean, whats the point in saying "hey this is cool", what do you mean.
Posted on Reply
#19
Mistral
by: btarunr
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.
This is the part that surprises me the most... I know nVidia has some AM2/3 chips, but them selling better than AMD's own seems a bit out of whack. That's hardly the complete picture, but for example while the 'egg carries them, but NCIX for example has a grand total of 0 nVidia AM3 offerings on their list. Is it system integrators that make the numbers?
Posted on Reply
#20
DaMulta
My stars went supernova
They should just open up SLi on all motherboards......
Posted on Reply
#21
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: KainXS
I don't even care, all I hope is that after this is over AMD sues Nvidia for Unfair Business Tactics for the current PhysX BS just like Nvidia is suing Intel for Unfair Business Tactics, I know its f@cked up, but still what they did is wrong, just like what Intel is doing seems wrong(but might not be).

And as for Nforce, I say who cares, In my experience, Intel boards pretty much always overclock better than the Nforce boards and now since you can get SLI(via hack) and Crossfire on Intel boards why would you buy nforce, and yes this means intel will nearly dominate the chipset market but if AMD steps up like they did with their CPU's and VGA's this won't really be a problem.

How is this cool chiplet, I mean, whats the point in saying "hey this is cool", what do you mean.
What 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?

And while the Intel Chipsets have tended to be better, you have to realize that nVidia only started making Intel chipsets about 4 years ago, starting with the nForce4 Intel Edition in 2005. And the progress they have made in that time is actually extremely promising, or at least it was.

When you look at the initial nForce4 Intel Edition, and compare it to the 780i/790i, you really see how far nVidia had come in 4 years. To the point where their chipsets can actually compete on all fronts with Intels. The only place Intel tended to excel was overclocking, especially with the 680i's terrible Quad-Core overclocking. However, that was fixed with 780i and even more so with 790i. The extreme overclockers are still going to use Intel chipests, because, yes they are still better. However, for most enthuists, nVidia's chipsets offer similar overclocking potential to Intel's offereing. And as a consumer you should care greatly when the only major competition for Intel exits the market. Even if nVidia wasn't totally up to par with Intel, they were close. Competition in the market drives inovation, and drives low prices. Without it, we the consumer are screwed.

by: Mistral
This is the part that surprises me the most... I know nVidia has some AM2/3 chips, but them selling better than AMD's own seems a bit out of whack. That's hardly the complete picture, but for example while the 'egg carries them, but NCIX for example has a grand total of 0 nVidia AM3 offerings on their list. Is it system integrators that make the numbers?
You have to remember that the large majority of sales, in terms of volume, come from the lower end motherboards. AM3 boards are still high end, and the requirement of DDR3 is still scaring off most buyers. So that means AM2+ and even AM2 boards are still the top sellers. That is likely where nVidia is getting that statement from.
Posted on Reply
#22
devguy
Yeah, in the AMD world I can defintely see Nvidia leading chipset sales with their Nforce 6100/6150 as well as 7025/7050 chipsets (410 and 630 I believe). These chipsets can be seen all around in prebuilt machines even today. However, this is an s939/AM2 chipset, and so you hardly ever see Phenoms (or Phenom IIs) using these. I'd still say I see more AMD prebuilts with Dual Core Athlon X2s than Phenom/Phenom II/Athlon II systems combined.
Posted on Reply
#23
trt740
thats not good at all for consumers.
Posted on Reply
#24
mechtech
I want an ATI chipset for an i5, BOOOOO Intel for hindering choices, you smell.
Posted on Reply
#25
Jstn7477
by: devguy
Yeah, in the AMD world I can defintely see Nvidia leading chipset sales with their Nforce 6100/6150 as well as 7025/7050 chipsets (410 and 630 I believe). These chipsets can be seen all around in prebuilt machines even today. However, this is an s939/AM2 chipset, and so you hardly ever see Phenoms (or Phenom IIs) using these. I'd still say I see more AMD prebuilts with Dual Core Athlon X2s than Phenom/Phenom II/Athlon II systems combined.
I wish that OEMs would stop using the 6100/410, 6150/430, and the 7050/630 chipsets, and upgrade to the likes of the GeForce 8200 or 9400 (intel). The 6xxx (MCP51) series is 4+ years old, and the performance can be easily best by Intel's newest IGPs. Then you got retailers like Best Buy pushing: "GeForce 6150: For extreme visual quality and gameplay". C'mon, I owned a DV6000 back in early 2007 with the 6150/430 and overclocking the IGP to 600MHz (and overclocking my Turion X2 to 2GHz/DDR2-800 thanks to nTune) only got me around 300 3Dmark06 points at 1024*768 resolution. These IGPs only have one vertex shader, two pixel shaders, and one ROP, making their performance laughable. Some people buying a computer today expect better graphics performance than their last machine. The 6150 can barely even do Aero without lagging, even moving the mouse over the icons lagged (the gray transparent square that appears when hovering over desktop icons).

[/ RANT]
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment