1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD 1090FX and 1070 Chipsets Disclosed, No PCI Express 3.0

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Nov 8, 2011.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,669 (11.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,414
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    We're talking about AMD 790/890/990 northbridge chip here. The "gen" here didn't change, just the fab process. So it's an optical shrink. The transistor count is the same.

    If you want an example of optical shrinks, don't look at Intel CPUs, look at NVIDIA GPUs. Clock-for-clock, G92b (55 nm) was cooler and drew less power than G92 (65 nm). There were no transistor count changes between them.
  2. Yellow&Nerdy?

    Yellow&Nerdy?

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    349 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Isn't AMD practically shooting itself in the foot by not offering PCI-E 3.0 on their motherboards, all the while using PCI-E 3.0 support to market their next-gen 7000-series graphics cards?
  3. HumanSmoke

    HumanSmoke

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,063 (1.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Since the HD 7xxx series are certainly going to use ( the largely superfluous for graphics) PCI-E 3.0 as a major bullet-point in the selling of the cards, it should lead to some interesting disclaimers:

    HD 7970 PCI-E 3.0*

    * Requires PCI-E 3.0 compliant (Intel chipset) CPU and motherboard

    Red = Font size 0.5......micron

    Does this mean that AMD's future batches of slide decks for graphics will all be based on numbers from SB-E equipped systems ?
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2011
  4. seronx

    seronx

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    981 (0.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    216
    Location:
    USA, Arizona, Maricopa
    most of it is rumours

    March/April timeline will probably hear more about the X90FX/X70 boards
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2011
  5. faramir New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    203 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Not really because they are most certainly out of ammo by now, having only just recently emptied their entire magazine into both knees and ankles ...
  6. The Von Matrices

    The Von Matrices

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,035 (0.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    307
    I doubt the NB would be shrunk to 40nm; the SB may be, but not the NB. The NB is already really small at 55nm (<100mm2) so it probably would be limited by IO density if it was shrunk. Plus, since it would have no new features, why bother with the R&D?
  7. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    41,678 (11.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,210
    why the confusing name?


    1090FX sounds like a new replacement for the 1090T CPU
  8. TRWOV

    TRWOV

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,135 (3.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,719
    Location:
    Mexico
    Well, they woukl have to get to the 1000s eventually, don't they? And you can't buy an 1090FX chipset by itself anyways.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  9. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541 (2.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    I wonder if they are going to try and sell these boards in advance like the 9xx boards, by telling everyone their next chips will be kickass.

    I've heard many stories already of people selling their 990 boards because BD came out and is worse than SB so they want an SB system
  10. [H]@RD5TUFF

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,615 (3.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,707
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Wonder if the socket will be LGA ?
  11. Syborfical New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    86 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Spot on

    Bulldoozer Epic Fail

    New chipset for what ? Oh for the poor bastards that bought bulldozers
  12. faramir New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    203 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    They could always start over somewhere else - say with "Scorpius 1" or something similar that makes it clear what the chipset is aimed at.

    When NVidia got to high 9000s they went to 200-something numbering. When ATI got to high 9000s, they first weny to X-something ('X' being the roman numeral 10) and then to 1000-something in the next generation.
  13. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    27,669 (11.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,414
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Nah, the same AM3+.
  14. imitation

    imitation New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2011
    Messages:
    131 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    The reason these chips don't support PCIe3 is because they can't. Fusion could, but with the classic CPU <---HT---> NB <---PCIe---> SB, HT has become the bottleneck. AMD could cheat and integrate PCIe3 anyways, but wouldn't achieve the full PCIe3 x16 speed. *cough* *Intel* *cough*
    I still don't see why they don't just ditch AM3+ altogether and go FM2 all the way. Piledriver on AM3+? I just don't get it.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page