No, you really don't. Via chipsets are great for low-cost low-performance solutions, and most Nvidia chipsets were quite simply not good.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
NVIDIA Licenses SLI To AMD
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
No, you really don't. Via chipsets are great for low-cost low-performance solutions, and most Nvidia chipsets were quite simply not good.
NIVO
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,253
News at 11....................Nvidia and ATI join forces against Intel to become "NvATIa." Details after the break.
yes, yes i do! I remember those days and I had a few VIA chipset mobos. To claim that the one chipset manufacturer thing going on right now is a good thing is crazy. Competition drives prices lower and performance up. It's why ARM-based stuff is making so many strides and why GPUs are so cheap relative to their performance nowadays. With AMD only competing with AMD (nvidia just decided to stop making chipsets for AMD motherboards) and Intel making intel chipsets (nvidia sort of got told to leave) then you can have fiascos like cougar point and inflated prices.
Nvidia was never any real competition to either of them in the chipset market. Actually, wait sorry NF2 was pretty damn good and was the best Socket A chipset for gamers at the time. So they had. Nvidia's Intel chipsets were mostly horrible and the only reason anyone bought them was to do SLI, outside of that the Intel ones were vastly superior and sold significantly better. The last couple years of Nvidia AMD chipsets weren't any better. As for VIA, they simply got out classed by better chipsets on both sides. Not having and many options has done one good thing, its standardized performance. Intel boards on the same chipset perform roughly the same and the same is true on the AMD side. Its forced motherboard manufactures to compete harder to make their boards stand out. And not having to buy buggy Nvidia chipsets is a great thing. Intel pulled some shit to make it happen, but I actually think its better to have that support there for everyone.
As for competition, Lucid might be able to nip at both Intel and AMD's heels in a few years if they keep improving their chipsets and get a few more companies on board. There looks to be some potential there, they just need to find a way to capitalize on it and to really push every bit of performance from Hydra that they can.
ChronoDetector
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2008
- Messages
- 2,783
About time too, NVIDIA stopped being assholes and finally got their heads out of their asses and decided to license SLI to AMD's future chipsets, at least the circle is now complete.
I wonder how my GTX 580's in SLI will fare in Bulldozer.
I wonder how my GTX 580's in SLI will fare in Bulldozer.
D
Deleted member 134608
Guest
Not having to buy nVidia chipsets anymore for SLI is awesome.
Everything they made after Socket A was garbage. Their chipsets ran WAY too hot, while offering zero RAID performance beyond 2 drives and poor USB performance. Corrupting data on SATA drives and dead laptop chipsets comes to mind too.
ATi/AMD chipsets have never been stellar either, especially when it comes to SATA and peripheral performance. Every generation of Intel ICH has easily beat AMD's southbridge in this.
I'm not going to pay for an LSI or Adaptec SAS controller and plus a board with a NEC/Renesas or Asus USB 3.0 controller just to build an AMD machine.
Intel has had the best chipsets since 286's were new. If you think I'm just a fanboy for saying that go back and read reviews on every major chipset they've released since you could even read reviews online. The nForce 2 was the only blip in history when someone else made something worth buying instead. The nForce 1 deserves a mention, but that was really due to the superb audio it had borrowed from the first XBOX.
So I could care less if I could run nV lets SLI on AMD stuff. So I could care less about this news. I won't run one.
That being said, I'd be excited if Intel announced AMD licensing for Intel chipsets like the old Socket 5/7 days. THAT would be news.
I would not buy an AMD chip now, but they have proven in the past they are capable of making great CPUs. Who knows. maybe Bulldozer will actually compete with an i7 2600k.
Of course if it doesn't, everyone here making Bulldozer posts is going to feel like a tool.
Everything they made after Socket A was garbage. Their chipsets ran WAY too hot, while offering zero RAID performance beyond 2 drives and poor USB performance. Corrupting data on SATA drives and dead laptop chipsets comes to mind too.
ATi/AMD chipsets have never been stellar either, especially when it comes to SATA and peripheral performance. Every generation of Intel ICH has easily beat AMD's southbridge in this.
I'm not going to pay for an LSI or Adaptec SAS controller and plus a board with a NEC/Renesas or Asus USB 3.0 controller just to build an AMD machine.
Intel has had the best chipsets since 286's were new. If you think I'm just a fanboy for saying that go back and read reviews on every major chipset they've released since you could even read reviews online. The nForce 2 was the only blip in history when someone else made something worth buying instead. The nForce 1 deserves a mention, but that was really due to the superb audio it had borrowed from the first XBOX.
So I could care less if I could run nV lets SLI on AMD stuff. So I could care less about this news. I won't run one.
That being said, I'd be excited if Intel announced AMD licensing for Intel chipsets like the old Socket 5/7 days. THAT would be news.
I would not buy an AMD chip now, but they have proven in the past they are capable of making great CPUs. Who knows. maybe Bulldozer will actually compete with an i7 2600k.
Of course if it doesn't, everyone here making Bulldozer posts is going to feel like a tool.
Finally... too bad for NVIDIA this was 12 months late.
I am a AMD CPU loyalist and have never owned a computer with Intel (my first computer had a K6-2).
I have also traditionally always used NVIDIA for my GPU.
But last year when I started planning to upgrade to a Phenom II, I realised that NVIDIA was shunning AMD after they purchased ATI, hence no NVIDIA chipsets for AMD... and their chipsets were very good.
So to use AMD I had to get an AMD chipset... hence I needed to get ATI GPU too (and naturally Crossfire) as that was the only way to go with AMD's chipsets...
But it looks like NVIDIA have realised that this was losing them customers and finally done something they should have done as soon as they announced the end of their chipset line.
But what I don't get is why NVIDIA insists on this silly licensing thing... they should just drop it and let anyone who has a dual PCI 16X mobo to use SLI. Surely they will profit more from more people buying 2 GPUs then they get from mobo licenceing.
I am a AMD CPU loyalist and have never owned a computer with Intel (my first computer had a K6-2).
I have also traditionally always used NVIDIA for my GPU.
But last year when I started planning to upgrade to a Phenom II, I realised that NVIDIA was shunning AMD after they purchased ATI, hence no NVIDIA chipsets for AMD... and their chipsets were very good.
So to use AMD I had to get an AMD chipset... hence I needed to get ATI GPU too (and naturally Crossfire) as that was the only way to go with AMD's chipsets...
But it looks like NVIDIA have realised that this was losing them customers and finally done something they should have done as soon as they announced the end of their chipset line.
But what I don't get is why NVIDIA insists on this silly licensing thing... they should just drop it and let anyone who has a dual PCI 16X mobo to use SLI. Surely they will profit more from more people buying 2 GPUs then they get from mobo licenceing.
The do licensing because it gives them money and allows them to control access to their technology.
Cerulean
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 9,476
This news has my eyebrow lifted.
D
Deleted member 134608
Guest
Exactly. The sale of every SLI licensed board is guarunteed new money, even if someone opts for ATi/AMD instead or used cards.
Reminded me of the last action hero. If you did a 360, you just end up back where you started
The proper phrase is 180 Really?
The few blowing papers, flowing cape, and smoke were enough to make you go nvidia?
That, is very convincing.
RE III - Frankie
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2010
- Messages
- 282
After my hurdles with ATI I will never run AMD hardware ever again. I hope this boat SINKS
You seem to have forgotten a few other blips in Intel's 'perfect' chipset history:
i810 chipset: horrible performance, unreliable, limited to 512MB or ram (yes, this did become a problem for many during the chipsets lifetime), no support for AGP slots.
i815 chipsets: still limited to 512MB of ram.
i820 chipset: Required RAMBUS memory or an extra memory controller that added latency (which was already a huge problem with RAMBUS) and cost. For the boards that used RAMBUS only, you were stuck paying tons more for ram.
i840 chipset: RAMBUS only, no exceptions... enjoy paying more for your ram than nearly all other components.
i850 chipset: MORE RAMBUS!
It was horribly planned and intentionally limited chipsets like the one above that gave via and nvidia a chance to capitalize on intels shortcomings by getting chipsets on the market that people actually wanted.