Nvidia likes cake!

[Tempered81]

If rumours about Nvidia?s inability to get a license to produce Intel Common Serial Interface (CSI) bus compatible chipsets are correct, its multi-GPU technology SLI may either disappear from the market or Nvidia may change its SLI licensing policy and open up the technology for others.

At present Nvidia SLI multi-GPU systems may feature two, three or even four graphics processing units (GPUs) by Nvidia Corp. to speed up graphics rendering speed in games. One substantial peculiarity of Nvidia SLI multi-GPU technology is that several graphics cards have to be installed on a mainboard that is based on Nvidia nForce SLI core-logic.

Even though two graphics cards may technically function on any mainboard with any chipset provided that there are several PCI Express x16 slots, Nvidia does not allow system logic sets developed by companies like Advanced Micro Devices or Intel Corp. to power multi-GPU systems carrying two or more Nvidia GeForce-based add-in-cards. In order to enable SLI technology for its Intel Dual Socket Extreme Desktop Platform (DSEDP) Intel had to install certain PCI Express hub chips from Nvidia onto its Intel Desktop Board D5400XS mainboard. By contrast, ATI CrossFire and CrossFire X multi-GPU technologies that allow several ATI Radeon graphics cards to work in cooperation can be enabled on any third-party chipset, but not Nvidia?s (due to prohibition of Nvidia).

Nowadays enthusiasts of high-performance computers and gamers prefer central processing units (CPUs) by Intel due to their high performance. However, Intel does not allow third-party chipset developers to create and sell core-logic sets compatible with its processors without a special license. Currently Intel?s CPUs utilize AGTL+ quad-pumped processor system bus and various chipset designers have license to produce compatible chipsets. However, later this year Intel plans to introduce new so-called Common Serial Interface (CSI) bus for processors, which is similar to AMD?s HyperTransport, but also requires a license.

According to a news-story by The Inquirer web-site, Intel ?is refusing to provide Nvidia with a vital piece of CSI technology?, which may indicate that Nvidia loses ability to produce Intel-compatible chipsets late in 2008, which may be a huge blow to Nvidia?s chipset business division.

With no in-house developed Intel-compatible chipsets, Nvidia will have to either allow SLI technology to function on third-party chipsets, or its multi-GPU technology will only function on chipsets supporting microprocessors by AMD, which currently cannot offer the same level of performance as Intel?s CPUs and are usually not gamers? processors of choice. As a consequence, Nvidia SLI multi-GPU platform may find itself unpopular or may even cease to exist. On the other hand, even if Nvidia fails to get CSI license at any cost, the company may focus on creating graphics cards with several GPUs on them, which do not require any special chipsets.

Not a lot of gamers actually use multi-GPU technologies. Only about 1.5% of Half-Life 2/Counter Strike gamers had a multi-GPU personal computer (PC) with either two, three or four graphics processors, the stats at Steampowered web-site revealed last year. Nvidia?s SLI technology is clearly more popular than ATI?s CrossFire. Steam hardware survey indicated that there are about 96% multi-GPU systmes with two GeForce chips and only around 3.9% - 4.0% machines that feature two Radeon GPUs. According to a recent survey by X-bit labs, about 6% of end-users utilize a computer with two or more graphics cards.

Nvidia does not comment on unannounced products. Nvidia does not comment on business matters. Intel and Nvidia did not comment on the news-story.


http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/v...Gen_Processor_Bus.html

 

[Tempered81]

oops, delete this, i meant to put it in video/graphics

well i guess it has to do with intel and amd as well.

 

[Sheninat0r]

I'd like to see an open SLi platform... more choice for customers is always good.

Of course, all of this won't matter if [keyword IF] DAAMiT pulls a ridiculous move and regains the performance crown for CPUs and video cards.

 

[AmberClad]

Well DAAMIT had better pull some sort of rabbit out of its hat, because so far, I'm not impressed by the projected performance increases for the GeForce 9800 series and that leaves me with nothing so far that I'd jump at upgrading to.

Intel is kind of the wildcard here, as there's been nothing solid thus far with Larrabee, and they don't exactly have any sort of track record as far as high performance discrete GPUs.

 

[lopri]

I have a big time grudge about this whole thing (CSI/QuickPath) but since I have to go to work now I will say some other time.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
Nvidia does not comment on unannounced products. Nvidia does not comment on business matters. Intel and Nvidia did not comment on the news-story.

jaredpace, a request if I may, could you provide links to online articles so we all can read the originating piece as well as have the direct link for future reference?

 

[lopri]

Sounds like Anton Shilove @xbitlabs

 

[Tempered81]

yup its from xbitlabs news section.

 

[nullpointerus]

I remain thoroughly skeptical that these problems will remain when CSI hits the market.

Originally posted by: jaredpace

With no in-house developed Intel-compatible chipsets, Nvidia will have to either allow SLI technology to function on third-party chipsets, or its multi-GPU technology will only function on chipsets supporting microprocessors by AMD, which currently cannot offer the same level of performance as Intel?s CPUs and are usually not gamers? processors of choice. As a consequence, Nvidia SLI multi-GPU platform may find itself unpopular or may even cease to exist. On the other hand, even if Nvidia fails to get CSI license at any cost, the company may focus on creating graphics cards with several GPUs on them, which do not require any special chipsets.

All those outcomes seem great, except for SLi being limited to AMD platforms.

nVidia's SLI licensing requirement is idiotic. People say that this SLI licensing push is keeping nVidia's motherboard chipset business afloat, but wouldn't it be better to let inadequate products languish or improve as consumers dictate?

The only thing I don't want to happen is for nVidia's ESA to die because of this.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Will Intel's new CSI bus prove to be the industry's next Micro Channel? Proprietary, requires a license, probably at high cost.

It's a really good way for Intel to strongarm the rest of the industry. Contrast that with HyperTransport, which, if I'm correct, anyone can get a license to use. This is another example of Intel being the big, bad, bully, whereas other companies like AMD emprace relatively open standards. Tell me again why I should support this bully?

Nvidia is the little bully, what with their SLI licensing, but they're about to get the crap kicked out of them by the bigger bully.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Will Intel's new CSI bus prove to be the industry's next Micro Channel? Proprietary, requires a license, probably at high cost.

It's a really good way for Intel to strongarm the rest of the industry. Contrast that with HyperTransport, which, if I'm correct, anyone can get a license to use. This is another example of Intel being the big, bad, bully, whereas other companies like AMD emprace relatively open standards. Tell me again why I should support this bully?

Nvidia is the little bully, what with their SLI licensing, but they're about to get the crap kicked out of them by the bigger bully.

Ya, thats about what I got out of it too. And that Nvidia is very greedy.

 

[NinjaJedi]

I'll have a slice of that but only if its cellular peptide...with mint frosting.

I have no idea what the actual numbers are but its probably safe to say Intel chipsets outsell NV ones. It is also really safe to say NV GPUs outsell ATI. With only a small percentage of gamers actually using multi GPUs I think it would be a wise idea for NV to license SLI to Intel. With the majority of gamers buying a M/B with an Intel chipset and a NV GPU the chances of NV selling another GPU go way up if Intel has SLI. I really doubt NVs chipset M/B would go extinct. There are plenty of loyal NV fans that will still buy a NV based M/B. ATI licensing Xfire to Intel didn't mean no one purchased ATI chipsets. Or NV could just step it up and make a chipset that doesn't suck.

Every time someone purchases a Intel Chipset M/B NV loses twofold. They lose a sale of a M/B and limits the sale of only one possible GPU.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: AmberClad
Well DAAMIT had better pull some sort of rabbit out of its hat, because so far, I'm not impressed by the projected performance increases for the GeForce 9800 series and that leaves me with nothing so far that I'd jump at upgrading to.

Intel is kind of the wildcard here, as there's been nothing solid thus far with Larrabee, and they don't exactly have any sort of track record as far as high performance discrete GPUs.

why you think ive been posting my x38 and 2 x hd3870's around.

So what is the point in sli if the board that supports it cant overclock for dog dookie, and is also very unstable, and very unreliable?

Whats even more funkier is that the board is made by foxconn. Most likely one of there upper tier board pcb's yet it performs nothing like there mars edition which is actually pretty good from what im hearing.


Anyhow as ive been telling everyone, i have a 780i which is currently out to a custom builder getting drafted for an entire water setup. Mosfet and all. [Because of THAT STUPID PCI-E 2.0 Controler]. Its not a cheap project because of the word custom.

But lets see sturdy the 780i is when you have hardcore cooling on it.


But anyhow intel not supporting nvidia is a financial suicide. Expecially when nvidia can easily turn the market around. If Nvidia got pissed and didnt support intel at all, people would actually have a reason to buy an AMD processor.

The cpu plays very little role once you get to phenom, and you'll find your faster gpu limited then cpu limited. If AMD had both options of ATI + NVIDIA, and Intel only offered 1, which was ATI, The AMD machine would seriously SPANK the intel rig in gaming.


Also amber your paying the premium on the 9800GTX for tri sli, i wish it was also for the performance tweeks, which there isnt any because the 9600GT is pretty dayam close to it.

But no other cards minus the big expensive ones will support tri sli. :\

 

[Tempered81]

Fugger & Kingpin over at XS are saying the 790i is overclocking like p35s and x38s. wonder if that is going to change anything, or if people are still going to prefer intel chipsets over nvidia. If nvidia allowed sli on intel chipsets, they wouldnt be able to sell a single one of theirs. Maybe the 790 will change that? Don't know as i don't own nvidia mobos.

 

[n7]

I hope this happens.

We all know that absolutely nothing but nVidia's greed is preventing SLI on Intel chipsets.

If Intel pulls this off (i hope they do), lol, nVidia is going to get pwned.

Or they'll wise up & suddenly make a "breakthrough" that allows for SLI on Intel chipsets.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't think that either one of them are acting irrationally in this circumstance. Nvidia has a responsibility to their shareholders to maximize shareholder value. They feel that increased chipset sales will more than offset lower gpu sales by limiting sli to nvidia chipsets only. Intel might decide that licensing csi to nvidia will cost them more in lost chipset/cpu sales than witholding said license. Aren't companies SUPPOSED to be greedy? Some of you think that the world is full of daisys and everyone should just hold hands and be friends. Well, guess what, if intel or amd could kill nvidia without repercussions they wouldn't hesitate one second. Ditto for nvidia or amd on intel. The business world is cruel and the stakes are high, but the rewards for success are high as well.

This is why we like having amd be a strong foil to both intel and nvidia: they keep prices reasonable and spur innovation. I say let intel and nvidia beat each other up indefinitely; in the long run we the consumers will win. If amd ever usurps intel's and/or nvidia's spot then I hope that somebody else keeps THEM honest, too.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
I don't think that either one of them are acting irrationally in this circumstance. Nvidia has a responsibility to their shareholders to maximize shareholder value. They feel that increased chipset sales will more than offset lower gpu sales by limiting sli to nvidia chipsets only. Intel might decide that licensing csi to nvidia will cost them more in lost chipset/cpu sales than witholding said license. Aren't companies SUPPOSED to be greedy? Some of you think that the world is full of daisys and everyone should just hold hands and be friends. Well, guess what, if intel or amd could kill nvidia without repercussions they wouldn't hesitate one second. Ditto for nvidia or amd on intel. The business world is cruel and the stakes are high, but the rewards for success are high as well.

This is why we like having amd be a strong foil to both intel and nvidia: they keep prices reasonable and spur innovation. I say let intel and nvidia beat each other up indefinitely; in the long run we the consumers will win. If amd ever usurps intel's and/or nvidia's spot then I hope that somebody else keeps THEM honest, too.

QFT. I love opening a thread and seeing some honest to goodness market rationalization in play. Gives me warm fuzzies. Thank you bryanW1995.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Contrast the market situation between Intel and NV, holders of two relatively proprietary technologies, with the internet, which was based on relatively open standards. Look at the way the internet technology market opened up wide. If Intel and NV would open up their standards, I believe that the overall market for their technologies would be opened up wide too. I think that keep their technologies "closed" is very closed-minded, and is hurting the market as a whole.