ATI's Athlon 64 Chipset with Integrated Graphics

EconolineCrush writes "ATI has released the first Athlon 64 chipset with DirectX 9-class integrated graphics and PCI Express. The Tech Report has an in-depth review of the Radeon Xpress 200 that highlights the chipset's impressive performance and surprisingly competent integrated graphics. It looks like the Radeon Xpress 200 could be the missing link that helps AMD crack Intel's dominance of the consumer and corporate desktop markets."

Comments

I wonder

[Gonzman2000]

I wonder if On-Board video will ever replace the need for PCI-E and AGP for gamers. On-board audio now is good enough for most gamers, and we have on-board LAN, etc.

Re:I wonder

[billysielu]

Soon everything will be onboard, didn't you ever see Star Trek ?

Re:I wonder

[stratjakt]

Sure, it already has.

Look at the XBox, PS2 or GameCube. No AGP or PCI-E ports, no need to upgrade every 6 months.

Ever notice that EB Games has aisles and aisles of PS2, XBox and GCN titles, but only about 4 different PC titles stuck on a little shelf off in the corner?

As for the PC market, I don't think so. Games have to push the "cutting edge", and the video card you buy today is obsolete six months later.

My Radeon 9800 is virtually unsupported at this point, with all the driver fixes and enhancements aimed at their latest chipset.

I'd sure hate to have to pitch the entire motherboard every time a new game comes out.

PC Perspective has also done an article on it.

[pacmanfan]

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=88&type=exper t

Not really...

[doormat]

It looks like the Radeon Xpress 200 could be the missing link that helps AMD crack Intel's dominance of the consumer and corporate desktop markets

No, what would crack intel's dominance would be Dell carrying AMD-based computers, which Dell has refused to do. AMD has the superior product in the Athlon 64 and its just a matter of getting IT managers to put faith in AMD and not go with Dell to buy their next big purchase.

Re:Not really...

[ottffssent]

That hasn't worked in the past. AMD's design talent is better spent on CPUs, and the only reason they used to design chipsets was because nobody else would. Back when AMD was making pin-compatible chips, they didn't need chipsets since they used whatever Intel was making. Then along came the Athlon, and AMD needed a chipset. So they made one, and then stopped as soon as Via and SiS started making their (better; cheaper) own. Then came the Athlon MP, and AMD again released chipsets, first the 760MP and then the 760MPX. Both fairly low-performance, low-feature chipsets designed to get some market adoption and convince the real chipset designers it was worth their time.

These days, everybody knows that 1) Athlons rock, and 2) they'll sell. If AMD now produces their own chipsets, they're just competing with their current chipset partners, and diverting talent from CPU design (and flash, and the other things AMD does). Between ATi, NV, SiS, and Via, there's plenty of competition for the Athlon segment and with Intel's recent return to high-quality chipset manufacture, there's competition to produce the best platform. AMD's held up their end of the bargain, and shortly the chipset makers will catch up to Intel as well.

It'd be great if Dell started selling AMD kit. However, that's not going to happen any time soon. Firstly, Dell's getting huge discounts on CPUs and chipsets from Intel. Secondly, even if AMD were to match Intel on price, AMD doesn't have the fab space to keep up. Fab 30 is going all-out, and AMD's in the process of building another one; also working closely with IBM, etc. in an effort to increase that capacity as cheaply and quickly as they can to capitalize on their superior product. AMD's mid-30% market share corresponds to their maximum output. Dell might be able to bump that up to 50%+, but only if AMD brings another fab online. However, AMD has to be careful about investing too heavily in fab capacity they can't use, so they'll only bring online capacity to handle Dell signing on, if Dell agrees to it beforehand which Dell probably won't do, not knowing if AMD really can live up to their end of the bargain later. Kind of a catch-22, but AMD's doing pretty well these days anyway, and the consumer can't really complain either, so it's all OK.

I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[Sycraft-fu]

They've already had a chip like this in the form of the nForce. Integrated graphics AND sound. This is better graphics, and newer technology, but I don't really see any magic bullet that will wow people. Just looks like a good new chipset to me.

AMD's problem in the corperate world is mostly just one of repuation. Corperations tend to like to stay with proven solutions. If something works, don't change to something else. Well, Intel works, and has for a long time, so there is inertia to stick with it.

Also AMD has a really rocky history. For a long time their processors did NOT perform up to their numbers. Also when the Athlons first came out the motherboard situation was abysmal and incompatabilities were rampant. Now granted that's been fixed, but it's easy to break trust and hard to earn it back.

Ultimately, I don't think this chipset will make any large difference. It'll be another nice chipset for AMD chips and more options when you buy one, but it's nothing earth shattering.

Re:I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[hawkbug]

I agree with you on one point - the motherboard situation was horrible at first... and still is if you buy a motherboard with a VIA chipset on it. Then again, I had the exact same problem with Intel based boards using VIA chipets. Just google for "via 686b" and you'll be bombarded with horror stories and "bios fixes" to get around that awful south bridge.

I do however disagree with you on the performance ratings. Almost every time AMD rates a chip, it outperforms the Intel counterpart, depending on benchmark ofcourse. I'd like to see some evidence of where you say their PR ratings didn't live up to expectations. I can't think of any examples right now where they didn't. I can think of the first Athlon XP chips hitting the market with these ratings, and how the 1800+ crushed the Pentium 4 1.8 GHZ. I also know that my XP 2500+ dominates a P4 2.4 ghz - but that's where things get messy. For starters, the P4 2.4 came in many different flavors, some with a 533 FSB while others have 800. So, the 2.4 P4 can and does beat the Athlon XP 2500+ in some situations. I don't think AMD has misled anyone though, their processors are either right on par with Intel's, or even ahead in some cases. It all just depends on how you bench them, and what steppings, drivers, etc you use.

Re:I don't see how this helps them crack anything

[owlstead]

Eh, when did AMD processors not perform up to their numbers? The last ones I remember were the 200 and 233 MX chips, now long lost in history. Yes, there were some problems with chipsets, but that is history as well - my VIA based motherboards have been performing pretty well since some initial USB problems at the very start, thank you. I've got three running (1400, 2400XP and Via EPIA) right now.

The best thing speaking for Intel now is just their name and their chipsets. In the desktop and maybe server processor branche their is little to gain for them:
- more expensive CPU's
- more heat (thus more noise)
- less power
- less headroom
- more memory bandwith needed (expensive memory)

On the chipset side though:
- PCI-X
- Well performing GB ethernet
- Integrated (well performing) S-ATA (RAID)
- Their new onboard sound system coming up
- BX form factor

So I think that AMD can make a bit of a difference by providing a nice cheap all-round solution which packs some/all of these features.

When the chipset advantage of Intel removed they've got little left. Unless they come up with something smart, e.g. from their mobile processors.

I wouldn't want to see either Intel or AMD disappear from the scene just yet. Lets hope they will get out of this mess. When the market is 50/50 or so :)

Step in the right direction

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

I really wish AMD would have developed the 761 further but the nForce and now ATI chipsets should provide a good stable alternative to the VIA/SiS garbage.

I just wish AMD had a motherboard manuf that was as good as Intel. Currently the stability crown seems to be passed back and forth between ASUS and MSI ... which IMO are crap compared to Intel.

Re:Step in the right direction

[stratjakt]

AMD needs to make their own mobos and chipsets like Intel does.

Manager types like to see the same logo on everything, and frankly in my experience, all-intel systems have been the most stable, as in not being prone to crazy hardware incompatibilities.

Re:Step in the right direction

[StupidKatz]

AMD bashers really don't have a leg to stand on. It's been shown since the early days of the Athlon Thunderbird that the chips are reliable - and I have yet to hear about AMD refusing to recall chips that wouldn't do floating point operations properly ala Intel.

VIA was *the* chipset for gamers before the nForce started adding features and improving speed. As long as someone bothers to use something other than the first revision drivers, they've been solid in all the six years I've been building systems with them. (In fact, the latest system uses an nForce chipset, and it displaying odd 'input slow-mo' behavior under heavy load, something which never happened with VIA-based systems I built.)

The problems with instability often come from incompetent people who think they know how to put a computer together from parts pulled from dumpsters or low-sellers on pricewatch after eating chocolate cake with their fingers...

Linux drivers?

[nonmaskable]

If ATI puts out Linux MB drivers for this, I hope they're better than their graphics card drivers, but I don't hold out much hope.

NVIDIA has done an excellent job on Linux drivers for their products, so it CAN be done.

Now the big question ...

[zzabur]

... is ATI finally coming with decent Linux drivers?

I mean -- my first thought was that this could be in my next system -- but then I remembered that ATI Linux driver support is much behind NVidia. As everybody seems to be buying AMD64 systems to run 64-bit Linux, there is hope that this might change?

Btw, the article seems to be 100% about windows software. Does anyone have any Linux experience with this chipset/system?

onboards have seperate GPU's

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

They don't steal the CPU's cycles like you think. The GPU of the Nforce motherboards is integerated into the northbridge. It doesn't tie up the CPU any more that a gforce 2 does, Except that it doesn't have its own memory. Thats the killer. It has to share memory with the main system. That might also steal some cpu cycles, but my point is that the cpu isn't doing the graphics work.

Re:Good to see some competition

[CoderByBirth]

Wow... You got:
*First post
*The "been waiting for this" jaded thing going on
*The FreeBSD/weirdass OS nobody uses reference
*The word "proprietary"
*A reference to something about nforce thats obviously big news in everybodys world but mine
*The notion that you could actually spot the difference between two graphics cards using the same resolution

If I had modpoints I'd mod you through the roof, but I see you already have a well-deserved "Insightful".