Intel Launches New Chipset

mikemuch writes "The new P35 and G33 chipsets, codenamed 'Bear Lake' are now available. They have a new memory controller that supports DDR3 RAM at up to 1333MHz, a new southbridge, and will support the upcoming 45nm Penryn CPUs. They don't yet have an actually new and different GPU — their GMA 3100 is pretty much the same as the GMA 3000 of the G965 chipset." For a little more technical info you can also check out the Hot Hardware writeup.

Comments

Re:What's Different

[dgoldman]

Voltage is lower. Existing (pre-P35) boards won't support the Penryn.

Re:OT: External Intel(r) gfx?

[drinkypoo]

I wouldn't go redundant like this but both of the other replies are from ACs and many people will never read them/know they exist.

So far, Intel is the only company with supported OSS drivers. AMD has "promised" to deliver them for ATI cards, but who knows how long that will take? And nVidia has made no such promise.

In addition, if we could get them without shared memory, the performance would likely improve and it wouldn't drag down system performance. So that would be a great thing.

When we get OSS drivers for ATI, it might become possible to use one under Linux (or any other OS but MacOS for which Apple participates in driver development) in a reliable fashion. But ATI's drivers are poop anyway. Regardless, those who want a 100% OSS system can not buy a current nVidia card, as they are unsupported; an older nVidia card still in production is likely to come from one of the least-reputable vendors, so a card supported by the 'nv' driver that's worth using will be hard to come by. Intel is currently the only credible choice for accelerated video with OSS drivers.

DDR3 RAM at up to 1333MHz? ::Yawn::

[More_Cowbell]

Thanks, but I think I will wait for the next chipset ... that can support ram to 1337MHz.

Re-state the question.

[DrYak]

A chip set is just supposed to talk to the CPU, and in case of Intel's architecture, talk to the memory.

A new chipset for DDR3 is logical in this situation : the chipset has to handle a different and electrically incompatible memory.

But why does a new CPU needs a newer Chipset ?!?!?

Meanwhile, in AMD's land, there's a standard between the chipset and the CPU called Hypertransport.
As long as both the CPU and the chipset follow the same protocol or compatible variation of (like AM2 being HT/2.0 and AM2+ and AM3 being HT/3.0) you can pretty much pair any thing you want.
The only restriction for a mother board is to have compatible socket (the CPU has on-board memory controller and directly speaks to the RAM sticks. There are different sockets type for different memory combination : 794 is for single channel DDR, 939 is for dual channel DDR, AM2 is for DDR2, Opteron F is for DDR2 and much higher number of Hypertransport lanes), and even that is getting stabilised (future AM2+ and AM3 CPUs can plug in today's AM2 board).

Why can't Intel guarantee the same kind of stability ?!?!?

Oh, yes, I know : they make chipsets and earn money by selling more motherboard.
Even back at the Pentium II/III era they have gone through the same cycle, releasing several incompatible chipsets and slot/socket formats in order to pump up motherboard sales, even if the same slot-1 PII motherboard could last until the last PIII only using adapted slotckets.

Meanwhile AMD is getting recommended on various website (like Ars Technica) as preferred solution for entry-/middle- level machines, because of cheaper board and more stable (and upgradable) hardware.

Stability of AM2/AM2+/AM3 is one of biggest AMD's advantage over LGA775 and should be put forward.

Re:Re-state the question.

[meatpan]

Oh, yes, I know : they make chipsets and earn money by selling more motherboard. As a former Intel employee, I can guarantee you that Intel does NOT make money from chipsets and motherboards. The entire purpose of Intel's server and desktop motherboard operation is to enable their new technology through early discovery and elimination of major processor bugs, and to help the actual motherboard/chipset manufacturers to better support Intel architecture.

Why would Intel invest in chipsets and motherboards when the profit margins are slim (as compared to much higher profit margins for a cpu)? For one, the investment in chipsets and motherboards has saved the company from major disasters on several occasions by early detection of obscure bugs. Knowledge of internal problems can allow the company to delay or cancel a product (such as Timna), which is much less harmful to a stock price than shipping a broken product.

By the way, divisions within a company that constitute a material portion of earnings are required to report their revenue. If you want to know whether or not Intel makes money from chipsets, you can look it up in public records.