Slashdot Mirror


Intel X58 To Be First Non-NVIDIA Chipset To Get SLI

Vigile writes "In a somewhat surprising move from a company that is used to holding its proprietary technologies close to its chest, NVIDIA has announced that it is opening up a 'certified SLI motherboard' program for boards using the upcoming Intel X58 chipset. The X58 is Intel's core logic offering for Nehalem/Bloomfield processors and many people wondered how NVIDIA would support SLI on a platform for which they had admitted to not developing a chipset. At first, NVIDIA was pushing the use of their dedicated nForce 200 chip, but have instead decided to open up the SLI technology to X58 motherboards that meet certain NVIDIA requirements. This leaves a lot of questions about NVIDIA's previous SLI statements, how the pricing of the certification affects partners, and if NVIDIA's chipset business is truly at its end now."

103 comments

  1. Re:second person to post by amnezick · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm a girl,

    --
    mov ax,4c00h
    int 21h
  2. Re:second person to post by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I feel a...disturbance...in the Net. As if 100,000 Slashdotters simulatenously clicked the 'Alter Relationship' button next to your nick on this post...

  3. News for nerds and all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    But this is the most intensely boring summary I have ever read on /.

    1. Re:News for nerds and all that by bignetbuy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Perhaps digg is more your speed:

      "Muppet Show to Return To TV After 27 Years

      telegraph.co.uk â" Kermit the frog and friends could return in the first new Muppet Show TV series for 27 years."

  4. Maybe a result of simple business? by bestinshow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe they got a CSI interconnect license from Intel in return for the SLI technology.

    Or the days of proprietary GPU ganging technology are coming to an end. Intel already does Crossfire in their chipsets, and AMD's GPUs are best right now so that's two hits against NVIDIA for their GPUs for the people that buy Intel-based computers.

    1. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by confused+one · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe they got a CSI interconnect license from Intel in return for the SLI technology.

      that's exactly what was reported during IDF, Intel wouldn't license CSI interconnect unless it was part of a cross-license for nVidia SLI.

    2. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by jensend · · Score: 2, Informative
      If nV really were getting QPI in exchange for this, then this would be a big win for consumers all around. However, the news I'm seeing says otherwise, for instance this bit from Tech Report:

      [nV spokesman Tom] Petersen also told us Intel wasn't a party to Nvidia's decision to allow SLI on the X58, so there's no apparent quid pro quo here.

      Nvidia does not plan to abandon its chipset business entirely and will continue to make core-logic products for other Intel platforms, like the current Core 2 one.

      So "we'll keep making chipsets, but only for old technology which soon won't be manufactured any more." Sounds like the death knell for 3rd party chipsets- a huge loss for consumers.

    3. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by citsacras · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All OEM X58 motherboard manufacturers will have to submit their boards for certification by NVIDIA. NVIDIA will also be charging an undisclosed certification fee. If the board passes certification, NVIDIA issues a BIOS key enabling SLI. The NVIDIA SLI drivers check for the presence of this key. NVIDIA will continue to design chipsets for Penryn based platforms, but it will not be making any QPI enabled chipsets for Nehalem. Thus, with Nehalem, the only way to get SLI support with an LGA-1366 MB would be to use an Intel chipset. NVIDIA will be making LGA-1160 based Nehalem motherboards (dual-channel DDR3) for the low end and mainstream markets, but that platform isn't expected to debut until late 2009.

    4. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by The+Warlock · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps they'll continue making low-end high volume integrated graphics motherboard chipsets and are just leaving the low-volume neckbeard motherboard segment to Intel.

      --
      I've upped my standards, so up yours.
    5. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Aw crap. I hadn't seen that article yet. I wish I could find the link to the article which was, obviously, incorrect.

    6. Re:Maybe a result of simple business? by Jarik_Tentsu · · Score: 1

      'bout time!

      Up until now, nVidia held SLi to only their nForce chipsets to try to force users to buy them. But in general, the Intel ones were better - so unless someone was really, really fixated on SLi, they just went for the Intel ones and got a single Graphics card. But if they were really out for top performance, they'd just go for Intel with 2 ATi chips - it only hurt nVidia in the end. Their fixation on trying to force people onto their nForce chips just slightly injured their graphics card sales.

      `Jarik

  5. Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds to me like Nvidia has something up their sleeves. Or maybe not. Being a participant in the Intel Chipset might just mean they are trying to keep their foot in the door. they probably have a better grasp on whats going to happen in the future. Being compatible with intel chipsets (i think) is a big step in keeping their dominance in the Graphics adapter world. Without Intel acceptance, they might have problems with market share in the future when Intel releases their GPU. Way to go Nvidia, for keeping your pants on.

    1. Re:Nvidia by pak9rabid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sounds to me like Nvidia has something up their sleeves.

      Such as licensing their SLI technology to Intel so that they can get an x86 license in return?

    2. Re:Nvidia by kipman725 · · Score: 1

      this is an interesting idea as intel actually needs viable competitors to avoid getting hit by the same laws that almost killed Microsoft. If AMD's CPU arm continues as they have done in the past year I cannot see them lasting very long so intel needs to add some competitors.

    3. Re:Nvidia by Jorophose · · Score: 1

      Intel has nothing nvidia wants.

      nVidia after a few acquisitons can make 386SX processors that they do sell. I have no idea how much the i686s have changed.

      As for 64-bit x86, well, the only people good for that are AMD. Intel's EM64T is just a botched AMD64 because itanium was a spectactular failure. It doesn't look very likely that AMD will deal with nVidia though. There's probably a bit of bad blood now; nvidia's CEO wanted to be CEO of the merged company, and that's why the merge never happened but AMD bought ATI.

      All the better. The GTX series cards are looking to be completely craptastic. Outlook not bright.

    4. Re:Nvidia by FuturePastNow · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that this is a last-resort by Nvidia to stay in business.

      1) Almost every hardcore gamer will be building an Intel Bloomfield/X58 system in the next 12 months (along with companies like Falcon Northwest that cater to hardcore gamers).

      2) Many of the largest mobo makers refused to incorporate the nForce 200 chip in their designs, it's hot and adds costs and licensing restrictions.

      3) AMD/ATI has just released new high-end graphics cards that are actually competitive, and that work in multi-GPU configurations on Intel chipsets.

      Add those three things together, and you're looking at the potential for a huge swing in the high-end gaming graphics market away from Nvidia. And that's just in the short term, long term we have 4) Intel jumping into graphics in a big way.

      This is the right decision. It's the only thing Nvidia could have done, really.

      --
      Give a man fire, and you warm him for the night. Set a man on fire, and you warm him for the rest of his life.
    5. Re:Nvidia by Trogre · · Score: 2, Funny

      All the better. The GTX series cards are looking to be completely craptastic. Outlook not bright.

      Truer words have never been spoken. Tell me, what do you think of Exchange Server?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    6. Re:Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds to me like Nvidia has something up their sleeves.

      Such as licensing their SLI technology to Intel so that they can get an x86 license in return?

      For what reason..

  6. Stop it already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This leaves a lot of questions about NVIDIA's previous SLI statements, how the pricing of the certification affects partners, and if NVIDIA's chipset business is truly at its end now.

    Will you stop posting that stupid bloody rumour? There is no evidence, it has been flat out denied by nVidia, and it would be a stupid move. It is a made up outright lie, propagated by idiots like The Inquirer and fools who never read the multiple retractions. Frankly, I wish nVidia would start suing anyone and everyone who insists on reposting that stupid crap.

    I don't even like nVidia, but this sort of stuff just pisses me off.

    1. Re:Stop it already! by CautionaryX · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot - Where rumors are continually reported as true. Enjoy your stay.

    2. Re:Stop it already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know I shouldn't be surprised. Still, I'd laugh my ass off if Slashdot finally got sued because of their complete lack of basic editorial standards.

    3. Re:Stop it already! by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      Kind of like how Apple denied that they'd use x86 until they actually switched?

    4. Re:Stop it already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that the Apple rumour wasn't detrimental to their business or share-price: this one most certainly is. Besides which, what are nVidia supposed to do? Apparently if they deny it people like you jump up and down and insist it must be true ("Otherwise why deny it?!?") and if they don't deny it, people believe it anyway!

      It's like The Life of Brian: "Only the true Messiah would deny his divinity!"

  7. Rumor has it... by citsacras · · Score: 1

    The going rumor is that Intel and Nvidia struck a deal where Intel would get a license to make SLI chipsets, and Nvidia gets a license to make chipsets for teh upcoming i7 (Nehalem) platform.

  8. There goes the nVidia motherboard business by Catalina588 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I have a Foxconn-built 590i nVidia reference board that supports SLI and has a raft of other features like smart Ethernet, RAID, yada yada, yada. I also use a Skulltrail with SLI chips in it.

    The reason most gamers buy nVidia reference boards is to get SLI. With nVidia now certifying other vendors, starting with Intel's X58, the nVidia reference SLI motherboard market is RIP 2008.

    1. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by Reapman · · Score: 1

      Actually I have an nVidia chipset based board and I don't SLi... I like what nVidia has done in that business, opened it up and made it easier to work on stuff... sure some of the software they have for overclocking and such is crappy, but better then any Intel based chipset I've ever used.

      I won an Intel based motherboard (a couple years back I admit) and if it showed me anything, it's that Intel knows nothing about the gaming business. I trust nVidia to make better chipsets because I've personally had great luck with their video cards.

      If nVidia got out of the business I'd be pretty sad.

    2. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by rgviza · · Score: 1

      They're getting out because their chipsets suck and they are focusing on their core business, which is GPUs. Your Mobo had a MCP55 southbridge with a broken interrupt timer. I have the same chipset (on a DFI board) It won't rear it's ugly head unless you use a dual core CPU and game or use linux.

      Without a BIOS patch you'll kernel panic on linux unless you use a switch that tells the kernel to use it's software timer (coded just for this issue) A while back Microsoft put in a patch that detects this issue and adds a /nofbtimer (or something like that) switch to boot.ini to use the Windows kernel soft timer.

      Some vendors provided fixes (BIOS updates), some didn't. Subsequent problems in their chipset line include memory frying voltage mis-detection (790i) and several other serious issues.

      I had one that was out of warranty (with no BIOS upgrade available) when I upgraded to a dual core cpu and found the problem.

      Good riddance...

      -Viz

      --
      Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
    3. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by kipman725 · · Score: 1

      nvidia made the best chip sets for socket A that were desirable because they overclocked well, were faster and more stable than VIA etc. They also had very good integrated sound with soundstorm, whereas integrated sound had been not even good enough for casual music listening till this point. All before sli2.

    4. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      Too right. I've had a selection of nvidia boards since nforce 2, but all the fun of xfi+4GB ram+conroe+nvidia boards became too much of a headache, and I jumped ship to intel. Nvidia boards have better features - a lot more pci-e lanes, for a start - but having a board that doesn't constantly fall over at random or cause the sound-card to be completely non-functional under certain conditions is worth it. I went through 4 nvidia boards from different vendors (nforce 4, a couple of 650's and a 680i) before I gave up trying to get one that was any good. I stuck with nvidia because I've used sli in the past, and figured I might want to in future.

      However, since I already had an intel board with crossfire (X38), it made sense to upgrade my old 8800 to a pair of ati 4850's. I don't think I'm going back to their motherboard chipsets any time soon.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    5. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by daviee · · Score: 1

      I have an nVidia 680i board and now a 780i board. I got it for fancy features at the time, but don't overclock.

      I'm not sure how Intel chipsets are right now, but to me it seems like nVidia boards (mostly all reference boards) are cutting things too close. E.g. 4 SIMMS in slot and the voltage drops? What kind of design is that?

    6. Re:There goes the nVidia motherboard business by Reapman · · Score: 1

      I've had horrific motherboards from AMD (wouldn't even fit the STOCK fan on the motherboard, was a Slot style older board), Intel (CUV4X-D I think, pretty sure it was Intel, I only once got the kernel to load with both CPU's enabled), Via, etc etc. I don't think these chipsets are crap because nVidia doesn't know what they're doing, they're crap because people want stuff as cheap as possible and so they cut corners.

      nVidia made stuff like tweaking motherboard settings easier and I like what they've done for the market.

      FYI - my EVGA 680i Motherboard overclocks quite well.

  9. What is a Bloomfield? by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

    What is a Bloomfield and why should I care?

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:What is a Bloomfield? by DnemoniX · · Score: 1

      The Bloomfield is Intel's new Quad Core Gaming CPU, with a bulk price to manufacturers at around $999 per unit. In other words unless you are a hard core gamer with money to burn, you probably shouldn't care about it at all.

    2. Re:What is a Bloomfield? by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      Or maybe if I wanted to run Vista. ;-) Thanks.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    3. Re:What is a Bloomfield? by CajunArson · · Score: 1

      The $999 chip is only the highest-end model. In 2008 the 2.66Ghz Bloomfield (or Core i7 by its new marketdroid name) will be $284, which is still not cheap, but also affordable considering it is a brand-new next generation part. In 2009 the Lynnfield mainstream version of Nehalem will appear.

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  10. hmmm by amnezick · · Score: 1

    competition is good .. keeps prices low and performance only goes up.
    but teaming amd/ati (nothing to do here .. they are one now) and intel/nvidia I don't think is good. How long before software heavily optimized for intel/nvidia or ati/amd? Or worse: only works on intel/nvidia || ati/amd??

    --
    mov ax,4c00h
    int 21h
    1. Re:hmmm by confused+one · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel chipset also supports ATI Crossfire. so there's no "teaming" intended apparently. Some software is already heavily optimized for AMD vs Intel cpu and nVidia vs ATI gpu.

  11. robbIE now allowing political mud-slinging ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yikes. anything for a bit more monIE eye gas?

  12. Boost to graphics card sales by spoilsportmotors · · Score: 1

    Opening up a larger market for their bread-n-butter card sales can't hurt. Probably a bigger win for nVidia than trying to continue to cut in on chipset sales. Intel's X38 & X48 chipsets have been major successes, and have probably boosted sales of ATI (er, AMD) boards. Both nVidia and Intel have a vested interest in reducing the market share of AMD...so it's not completely off the wall. Makes you wonder what sort of tradsies are involved. Probably not an x86 license.

  13. 3dfx by suso · · Score: 1

    Didn't 3dfx have SLI capability 10 years ago?

    1. Re:3dfx by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Same name, different tech. nVidia SLI vs 3dfx SLI.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    2. Re:3dfx by suso · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Different technologies that accomplish the same thing:

      • Scalable Link Interface (SLI) is a brand name for a multi-GPU solution developed by Nvidia for linking two or more video cards together to produce a single output.
      • Scan-Line Interleave (SLI) from 3dfx is a method for linking two (or more) video cards or chips together to produce a single output.

      Sure, it "changed dramatically", but don't all technologies change over time? 3dfx just didn't make it and especially since most of its IP was acquired by Nvidia, I'd say that 3dfx introduced SLI, not Nvidia.

  14. ati crossfire run on any board without this lock d by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    ati crossfire run on any board without this lock down crap. Also only haveing the X58 for the intel cpus sounds like a bad idea $200 - $350 MB for the new intel cpu vs $100 - $300 amd boards with a lot more choice.

  15. Correct me if I am wrong... by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But doesn't SLI mean NVIDIA sells two high end graphics cards? Why wouldn't they do this? It makes perfect sense in every way possible.

    1. Re:Correct me if I am wrong... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 1

      And previously, it meant they also sold you an Nvidia Chipset motherboard. And, not many people buy Nvidia chipsets just for the chipset anymore. That's why.

    2. Re:Correct me if I am wrong... by RiotNrrd · · Score: 2, Funny

      But doesn't SLI mean NVIDIA sells two high end graphics cards? Why wouldn't they do this? It makes perfect sense in every way possible.

      I was thinking this exactly. When I upgraded my system last winter I could not find a SLI board that I really wanted, so I was stuck with having to run only one video card.

      If Apple were to implement SLI in their Mac Pro's I might dump my PC completely and just get a big, shiny, dual-GPU-having, silver box of HELL YEAH!

  16. SLI by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Isn't SLI a con?

    1. Re:SLI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't SLI a con?

      I am starting to believe SLI is a gimmick myself. I was struggling with certain gaming titles, decided to buy another faster card that is SLI capable with my first one. Come to realize, it worked ALRIGHT, but drastically increased heat at the same time. Eventually I decided to go with just the newer faster card, and now the titles run about the same, no noticeable difference. So, yeah, must be a con.

    2. Re:SLI by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Isn't SLI a con?

      No.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    3. Re:SLI by Now.Imperfect · · Score: 1

      You were surprised there was more heat? That seems like a major "DUH"

      Also you aren't gonna see much gain if the cards are not equivalent.

    4. Re:SLI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only is that not funny, but the GP was serious.

      Anyone with any experience (identical cards, SLI setup properly) that can prove it isn't a scam?

    5. Re:SLI by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And what, exactly, makes you think I'm joking? I'm serious: SLI is not a scam. I've seen people I know run SLI, and it gives you a performance boost. It's not 2x performance, but it's not zero either. I won't say it's the most cost-effective way to go, but it's not a scam.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    6. Re:SLI by kipman725 · · Score: 1

      I only see it as useful for the highest end cards where the only way to get more speed is to add another card. As an upgrade path it is cheaper to buy a next gen card which gives better performance and less heat than 2 last gen cards.

    7. Re:SLI by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      Quite true. However, "scam" would apply if it didn't do anything at all. No one ever promised you that SLI was the best value. ;)

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    8. Re:SLI by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 1

      Scam doesn't necessarily mean nothing. It just means it's not as good or it doesn't do as well as it was marketed to do. SLI is a perfect example - "not 2x performance" is a shocking waste of money when another card is ~$400 and it's helping to fry the rest of your components.

    9. Re:SLI by N!k0N · · Score: 1

      I always saw SLI as a "cheap" upgrade path -- IE you buy that brand new, hot off the manufacturing line top tier gfx card today for $500, and 12-18 months later when your gaming isn't as great as it was at the start you "upgrade" with that card, which is now a second tier card (and significantly cheaper).

      Total cost to you, about $750-$800* or so instead of the $1000* or so that you'd have spent to get the new "latest and greatest" card.

      * prices determined after buying *both* cards, assuming the "latest and greatest" are ~$500 each, and tier 2 cards are ~$250+

  17. nForce boards by linuxpng · · Score: 3, Informative

    have been problematic for me. I've recently purchased my first intel system board (since I don't overclock) and can say that I've had much better stability. There is no downside to having intel stability applied to SLI. That being the case, maybe more games will not have such half assed support (or none) for multiple GPUs.

    1. Re:nForce boards by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      so true. my first SLI board had to be replaced 4 times before 6 months and then finally died before 6 months time.

      It was never stable and always hot. There were severe problems with the memory controller onboard.

      I had to apply extreme air cooling to maintain operating temperatures.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
  18. When will geeks learn? by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK, I am a longtime gamer (Atari 2600 onward) and have been building PCs for over 15 years. History has repeated itself time and time again, yet everyone still falls for the same crap. Game's cost a lot to produce, no game maker is going to make a game targeted at some minute fraction of their audience. When 90-95% of the PCs in homes aren't even SLI capable what deludes people into buying such a niche product and then expecting to be catered to?

    Tech demo "games" are what people always point to each time SLI tries to enter the market (way back to Voodoo days) and today with a title like Crysis. Everybody spends and spends and builds mammoth PCs to get the highest FPS in it but no one actually *plays* it as a game, it is just a benchmark and eye candy demo. Then they sit back and whine when all of the "blockbuster" games don't utilize a fraction of their uber systems. WoW, Warhammer: AR, GRID, Assassins Creed, Spore, etc. all run fine on systems over 4 years old. Because that is the middle-of-the-road developers are going to target for the most profit. Sure they may throw in an "ultra high mode" for the few bleeding edgers but it is always an afterthought and either buggy or incomplete.

    None of this is new. Stop throwing $500 into SLI video cards and $300 mainboards, IT ISN'T WORTH IT. Also, another rule of thumb that has always been proven right over time: If a card (video included) requires 2 slots or more for either cooling or "daughter cards" then it is an immature technology and will be streamlined into a single slot solution soon for much cheaper due to the reduced manufacturing costs.

    --
    http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    1. Re:When will geeks learn? by zachtib · · Score: 1

      You're right on several of these points. I built my machine a year ago for about $600: Core 2 Duo 2.1GHz, 2GB DDR2, and an Intel motherboard. I threw in a Geforce 6600GT that I already had and that machine has been able to handle just about everything I wanted to play on it. I recently ordered an 8800GT to replace my aging 6600GT, but that still puts the total cost at under $800.

      One thing I would argue on is Assassin's Creed. My younger brother bought it for PC, and I found it to be fairly hardware intensive... on his laptop (C2D 2.1, 1GB DDR2, 128MB GF 8400) it wouldn't run *at all* until we added another 2GB of RAM, and even then it has to be kept on low settings and 800x600 to be playable

    2. Re:When will geeks learn? by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      For goodness sakes, its a laptop and fairly low-mid specs and the fact that it is playable at all is confirmation enough. Assassin's Creed was the most demanding of the games I listed even and on par with a number of other top titles like Bioshock, Hellgate, etc.

      I'm not coming down on you, just responding to your one "argument" which I think even you would agree is fairly thin.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    3. Re:When will geeks learn? by Ephemeriis · · Score: 1

      When 90-95% of the PCs in homes aren't even SLI capable what deludes people into buying such a niche product and then expecting to be catered to?

      None of this is new. Stop throwing $500 into SLI video cards and $300 mainboards, IT ISN'T WORTH IT.

      That's been my experience as well. Video games are developed to be played. They're looking to sell lots and lots of them. They want the widest audience possible. Sure, a game may run better or look nicer on a bleeding edge system...but it won't require that kind of hardware. Developers are aiming for decent, not amazing hardware.

      Sure, if money is absolutely no object then go right ahead and pour it into SLI and GPUs and whatnot. But generally speaking you can get more for your money if you put it into RAM and CPU.

      A friend and I both built custom gaming machines not too long ago... He got a nice SLI motherboard and a couple high-end video cards...wound up spending something like $700 on video cards alone. I built a much cheaper system, single video card, but more RAM and a slightly faster CPU. His machine definitely out-performs mine at absurd resolutions with all the options cranked up... But at 1280x1024 (which is what my LCD monitor likes) there is absolutely no visible difference between the two machines.

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    4. Re:When will geeks learn? by Now.Imperfect · · Score: 1

      I gotta disagree on Assassin's Creed, it is a faiy intensive game, I have a Pentium D clocked at 3.4 6hz and a 7600GT... and while that is not a "awesome system" it is within 4 years old and struggles with Assassin's Creed.

      Second, single slot variations of most cards are available with a smaller heat sink. Also I liquid cool so almost anything i put in will only take one slot. Of course there are the dual GPU cards as well which offer better performance that the single card counterparts in SLI/crossfire. It is a matter of preference at this point. SLI is definitely a mature technology (not as much can be said for tri-SLI)

    5. Re:When will geeks learn? by billcopc · · Score: 1

      The problem with SLI is you spend 4x the money to get a 20-30% boost, maybe 50% if the game is particularly sloppy in its graphics pipeline, and often 0% if the game doesn't support SLI at all - hell, some of them even crash under SLI.

      Meanwhile you can buy a cheap board, and a single card one step up, that will deliver steady performance across all games with far less compatibility/tweaking issues to worry about.

      I can't help but roll my eyes and belittle people when they blow $200-300 on a board, then buy a pair of mid-range cards "because they ran out of money". There's absolutely no sense in having two 9600GT's in SLI, when a used 8800GTS at half the price can beat the SLI, yet a few hundred imbeciles do it every day.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    6. Re:When will geeks learn? by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Crysis. Everybody spends and spends and builds mammoth PCs to get the highest FPS in it but no one actually *plays* it as a game, it is just a benchmark and eye candy demo. Then they sit back and whine when all of the "blockbuster" games don't utilize a fraction of their uber systems. WoW, Warhammer: AR, GRID, Assassins Creed, Spore, etc. all run fine on systems over 4 years old.

      WotLK is bogging down below 30 fps on systems with a brand new 4870 using the new shadow options, and even without that on 30" screens, which seem to be the target for SLI. So WoW benefits from SLI. Warhammer slows to the teens at 1920x1200, which is becoming a common resolution (seen on 22-28" monitors) in large RvR encounters on a 4870, but not on a 4870x2 or a couple gt280s. So Warhammer benefits from SLI. Assassin's Creed is slow at points on an 8800 GTX at 1680x1050, so with higher resolution it should probably benefit from SLI. I finally played Crysis, and when it's modded a bit it's actually a really good game. Not a 96, but easily a 91. People ignore the good gameplay because they're focused on the graphics, which certainly benefit from SLI and end up truly enhancing the gameplay. Love it or hate it, Oblivion even benefits from SLI at high resolution with HDR and forced AA. Half Life 2 E2 slowed down occasionally on my 4870 at 1920x1200, so it would benefit from SLI. Company of Heroes looks okay on a 4870, but I can't make it look great without framerates dropping to the teens. I could if I had SLI.

      My point is that most popular games do have significant, tangible benefits from SLI.

      I don't have SLI, though, and I don't want it. I don't think the cost and power usage justify the benefit, despite believing that the benefit is quite real, even with it being partially diminished by microstuttering.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    7. Re:When will geeks learn? by Molochi · · Score: 1

      I have to say I agree with you. I only recently upgraded to a new gaming system and went with a single ATi 4850 for most of these reasons. I happily game on a HDTV at 1920x1080 or 1360x768, so I'm not running the ultrahigh resolution tech demos that seem to be needed to show the "benefits" of a system that uses a KW PSU to power a pair (or trip or quad) of leet GPUs.

      I have mixed feelings about the multislot cards though. Even though the 4850 uses a single slot design, only uses a single pci-e aux plug, and runs quietly enough for my tastes, it also runs hotter than I'm used to seeing. If they'd gone with a bigger chunk of copper and stuck with a quiet fan I wouldn't have complained.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    8. Re:When will geeks learn? by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      Everybody spends and spends and builds mammoth PCs to get the highest FPS ... 90-95% of the PCs in homes aren't even SLI capable

      I suggest you look up the meaning of "everybody", as you seem to be confusing it with something else.

      IT ISN'T WORTH IT

      Not for most people, no, but for game developers, people with huge monitors, and people with enough money to make the extra cost irrelevent, the tradeoff might be different.

      Of course, Extreme Edition/Ultra/etc are probably silly even for them; pay 70% more to get an extra 10% performance? At least SLI can nearly double performance.

      Crysis .. no one actually *plays* it as a game, it is just a benchmark and eye candy demo

      Um, I'm pretty sure I played it as a game; it's a fun FPS, at least for the first 2/3rds.

    9. Re:When will geeks learn? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      128 megs of video ram? were you running XP or Vista? Vista allows for memory sharing, and Assassin's Creed ran just fine on a dual core 1.8 ghz C2D with 1 gig of system memory dedicated to video and one gig dedicated to the OS and programs. GPU is a faulty as hell 8600M GS, for which I have to send the laptop in to have replaced. By default, however, my 8600M has a dedicated 512 megs of RAM before the Vista added memory.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    10. Re:When will geeks learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Developers need ultra high-end cards so they can target the midrange cards that will be available when their games are finished.

      And if other people want to finance the R&D by buying ultra high-end cards they don't need, more power to them. I want faster graphics cards, but I'm not interested in shelling out thousands of dollars per year for them.

    11. Re:When will geeks learn? by Christophotron · · Score: 1

      I run my 4850 at 1920x1080 and I am amazed at its performance. Haven't tried Crysis yet, but CoD4 and every other game I have tried runs at minimum 60fps with graphics turned all the way up. The 4850 is a hot card but only because they throttle the fan down by default. I think it was a really dumb thing to do. There's an easy fix but you have to edit an XML file (which I have no problem doing, but most people would). I cranked the fan up to 100% from the default of 7% and saw the temperature drop from 75C to 45C in a matter of minutes. I heard it kick in but I can still barely hear it over my PSU and CPU fans. Hopefully ATI will wise up and make their future cards run at sane temperatures BY DEFAULT.

  19. As a developer I target three or four year olds by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Machines that is. If I only support the very latest then my sales will be a fraction of what they are.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:As a developer I target three or four year olds by hypergreatthing · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you target three or four year olds, i'm supposing you work in the tobacco industry?

    2. Re:As a developer I target three or four year olds by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Nah, he's a heroin pusher.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  20. Two wrongs don't make a right by TravisO · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Intel's GPU performance is abysmal, a SLI'd Intel still won't compare to just one Nvidia card.

    1. Re:Two wrongs don't make a right by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Please think before posting. Previously, you could only get SLI with a nVidia (nForce) motherboard. nVidia is certifying Intel's X58 chipset (not a nVidia chipset) as a SLI chipset. You will be able take two nVidia cards and put them in an Intel-chipset board and run SLI.

      SLI is a nVidia technology. This doesn't have the slightest bit to do with Intel's graphics cards.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    2. Re:Two wrongs don't make a right by Ascoo · · Score: 1

      Intel wants the SLI certification so that their chipsets can support SLI'ed NVidia based cards, just as how they currently support Crossfire'd ATI video cards. While Intel does make graphics chipsets, I wasn't under the impression they were attempting to SLI their own GPUs.

      And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).

    3. Re:Two wrongs don't make a right by oldhack · · Score: 1

      And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).

      Unless it's not intesnive.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    4. Re:Two wrongs don't make a right by Ascoo · · Score: 1

      And for all intensive purposes (commercially available chips/cards), any single Nvidia and ATI card will outperform any of Intel's current offerings (sli'ed or not).

      Unless it's not intensive.

      But it's not intensive, why bother with SLI? Does SLI save power, cost, etc? I was under the assumption that the only reason to SLI was that the end cost of using two lower performing GPUs was less than the cost/availablity of a higher performing GPU.

  21. Better article by Godji · · Score: 1
    Another fine article (AFA?) is here.

    From AFA:

    At the Nvision event in San Jose, California, Nvidia outlined another plan: it will certify certain Intel X58-based mainboards for SLI compliance and will provide âoeapproval keys that will be integrated into the system BIOS for boards that pass certificationâ. The company said that it will charge mainboard makers for SLI compliance, but right now the terms are unknown.

    This smells like yet another "we'll put arbitrary software restrictions in our stuff because we're greedy. Wonder why they are the only ones with no free drivers whatsoever?

    I call bullshit. I stopped using their chipsets long ago, but now I'll actually switch to AMD for video. No more NVidia - hello, software freedom.

    Now if I could only find a P45-based board that can run FreeBIOS....

    1. Re:Better article by hellwig · · Score: 1

      Anyone have any examples where the NVIDIA drivers detect your chipset, and if it's not an NVIDIA chipset your card underperforms? Sounds like that's what they'd be doing in this instance as well. IANAL, but that doesn't sound legal. They can't force you to use their chipset to run their graphics card. Admitting that their software will look for approved keys and hinder performance if they are not found definately sounds anti-competative. Isn't licensing the technology enough?

      --
      Eggs
      Milk
      Bread
      Cat Litter
      Soda
      ...
    2. Re:Better article by Godji · · Score: 1

      They do something of the sort. A friend bought the nForce 680i SLI when it came out. It had a BIOS option to increase PCI-E bandwidth with certain high-end nVidia video cards by some 15%. The option would only work with a 8800-series card. Interestingly, the option disappeared in later BIOS revisions.

      Yet another example: the only difference between a commodity GeForce and a really expensive Quadro is a switch in the driver. The driver enables special features for Quadros, including the ability to run SLI on non-Nvidia pre-X58 chipsets. So much for their "technical reasons" lie.

      I've had it with nVidia.

  22. Another goddamned Intel chipset ? by billcopc · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or is Intel "releasing" a new chipset every 6 months that does fuckall better than the last one ? It's like they've gotten an NVidia DNA transplant.

    Just like the Geforce 9 and GT2 have been craptacular rehashes of existing tech, the X38/X48 and now X58 are errily similar and in many cases worse performers than the P35 they're supposed to replace.

    X38 was supposed to have "unofficial" SLI support. X48 too. Now X58 has "official" SLI. Big whoop! Given the inflated price of these boards, I suspect many people will continue buying NVidia boards at an equally inflated price, but with the guarantee of the latest and greatest SLI support.

    I'm really unimpressed with both parties on this one. Driver modders have already demonstrated that NVidia's "secret SLI tech" is nothing but a software-enforced restriction. Any board with proper bus topology can handle two GPUs via point-to-point communication. NVidia created the problem artificially, and they want money to kinda sorta make it go away.... methinks they should lay off the legal team and spend that money on R&D so they just might come up with a product that is worth my money to upgrade, you know - their core business!

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Another goddamned Intel chipset ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the X38/X48 and now X58 are errily similar

      Um. You aren't following things very well, are you? Upcoming Nehalem family processors use integrated memory controllers, and no longer have the Intel FSB. Instead they use QPI, Intel's analog to Hypertransport. X58 is a QPI chipset. It's not even remotely similar to X48 and friends.

    2. Re:Another goddamned Intel chipset ? by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Ok sure, so they've taken a page from AMD's book. Care to show me how that matters to anyone ? I know this represents several changes in the CPU and chipset, but in the end it's just a bus. It's not like the FSB was at any significant disadvantage vs Hypertransport. Core2's don't have anywhere near as many stalling problems as the old Netburst, so the FSB has been quite satisfactory so far.

      Intel seems to like talking about the future... Nehalem, Nehalem... I've been hearing about it for five years now. If Nehalem's going to be god's gift to PC freaks, then why are they wasting everyone's time and money with all these in-between products that are hardly distinguishable from the old stuff ? P35 can do just about everything the X38/X48 do, but few people care to spend their money on disappointing DDR3, at least not until the chipsets figure out how to actually make it faster.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
  23. Without a QPI license they are at a dead end by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    Without a QPI license they can't make dual 16x slot motherboards (the DMI interface doesn't have that kind of bandwidth) so they are relegated to making low end motherboard chipsets only ... that is not a place they want to be.

    AMD can't really save them there, since AMD is pretty much dead in the high end in the moment ... and they are in bed with ATI, which makes it hard for NVIDIA to compete on the integrated front.

    If they don't get a QPI license they will phase out their chipset business, the "denial" was just damage control ... as was the planted misinformation about them having a QPI license through third parties (they would sing it from the trees if they really did).

  24. Re:second person to post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a girl with a small penis.. at least you've got the balls to admit it publicly.

  25. Traze by Traze · · Score: 1

    So...
    Everyone forgot already that there was a time SLI worked fine on Intel boards?
    Really?

  26. If you call 2% common, then it sure is! by Markos · · Score: 1

    1920x1200 is becoming a common resolution? Hardly, check out the Half Life 2 survey, a cool 2.29% of users are running it.

    http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

    1024 x 768 and 1280 x 960 are still what most users are running by far. At those resolutions, a decent midrange card is more then any average user needs. Their games will run great.

    Basicly SLI is great for those who are willing to pay through the nose to run the game at crazy resolutions, AA and AF maxxed to the tits. Because god knows that just improves the game experience so much that its worth shelling out more $$$.

    1. Re:If you call 2% common, then it sure is! by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      1920x1200 is becoming a common resolution? Hardly, check out the Half Life 2 survey, a cool 2.29% of users are running it.

      http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

      1024 x 768 and 1280 x 960 are still what most users are running by far. At those resolutions, a decent midrange card is more then any average user needs. Their games will run great.

      Basicly SLI is great for those who are willing to pay through the nose to run the game at crazy resolutions, AA and AF maxxed to the tits. Because god knows that just improves the game experience so much that its worth shelling out more $$$.

      Common among enthusiasts, who are the target market of high end video card, yes, most definitely. I saw a recent poll, I think on the hardocp forums, that showed 1920 and 1680 basically tied for the most popular resolutions for that enthusiast community. NV and ATI aren't selling multi-card systems for 1024x768, but the higher resolution market is quite large, growing very quickly, and is the market that has money to spend and people who can truly benefit from multi-card systems (assuming they don't care much about money, or computer gaming is ridiculously important to their lives)

      Even at 1280x960 a rather new high end card is required to play a lot of games at 30+ fps at default settings. I was at 1280x1024 until recently (which is the 1280 LCD resolution - note that the steam survey shows that most people at 1280 are using CRTs still, given the 4:3 aspect ratio, which is interesting) and nothing short of an 8800 would run several games smoothly, and I never even tried Crysis.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  27. Driver Change? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Is this anything more than an Nvidia driver change, or was SLI lurking in the X58 all along and Intel was just waiting for permission to turn it on? Just what is required from a chipset to support SLI anyway? The implication is that it's more than the connecting cable between the cards. Could SLI have been running on non-Nvidia boards long before now? So many questions.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  28. ASRock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't ASRock have SLI using a chipset from a 3rd party years ago that was subsequently bought out by either nVidia or ATI (can't recall which) which then stopped selling the chipset?

    ASRock was the one that also made true AGP and PCIe boards, and typically had an expansion slot to support newer CPU socket types. (Sort of a misnomer IMO though as it replaced a sizeable chunk of the mb, as in they ALWAYS had DIMM slots, CPU slots, and some power supply circuitry, and cost nearly as much as a new mb would'e cost anyways.)