AMD launches chipset for Intel chips

[Gizmo]

And so we lived to see the day when AMD announced a chipset for Intel processors. It is an integrated chipset based on RS690 and its Xpress 1250 graphic core can run Vista aero glass just fine.

Read more on the Front Page:
http://www.aoaforums.com/frontpage/content/view/2009/2/

[kadu07]

Can this chipset also run AMD cpu's. Seems like a stupid question but I'm guessing no since the sockets are different. Am I right?

[Wolf2000me]

Originally Posted by kadu07

Can this chipset also run AMD cpu's. Seems like a stupid question but I'm guessing no since the sockets are different. Am I right?

yes, you are right, for exactly that reason

[GrahamGarside]

Intel and Amd use totally differant northbridge/bus system from one another.

The major differance is the Athlon's have an onboard memory controller mening there isn't one on the northbridge like with intel systems.

[keithwalton]

Its really an ati chipset that was due out more than 6 months ago. since the amd take over they've delayed and crippled the chipset.

[Gizmo]

Yeah, the logic of that move escapes me:

"Let's build a chipset that will work with our competitor's products, but not too well, thus ensuring that only the bottom feeders in the market will even be potentially interested in it. Oh by the way, that means that we won't be able to make very much (if any) money on it, either."

They would've been better off just to can the thing if they were going to go this route.

IMO they should've built the best chipset for the buck that they could. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making money off your competitor, and the entire market knows that Intel will turn on them in an instant if Intel thinks they can turn a profit by doing so. It has been demonstrated time after time. Futhermore, they could've put some pressure on nVidia in the chipset business. As it is? Everybody will just laugh at AMD's Intel offering, which will in turn result in questions about how good the offering for their own chip is.

[Wolf2000me]

Originally Posted by gizmo

Yeah, the logic of that move escapes me:

"Let's build a chipset that will work with our competitor's products, but not too well, thus ensuring that only the bottom feeders in the market will even be potentially interested in it. Oh by the way, that means that we won't be able to make very much (if any) money on it, either."

They would've been better off just to can the thing if they were going to go this route.

IMO they should've built the best chipset for the buck that they could. There is absolutely nothing wrong with making money off your competitor, and the entire market knows that Intel will turn on them in an instant if Intel thinks they can turn a profit by doing so. It has been demonstrated time after time. Futhermore, they could've put some pressure on nVidia in the chipset business. As it is? Everybody will just laugh at AMD's Intel offering, which will in turn result in questions about how good the offering for their own chip is.

You're talking talking about something like this?
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37712

Originally Posted by Inq

Then DAAMIT came to be, and so did many other things, including uncertainty over the fate of this chipset, coupled with substantial success and performance-crown-snaffling by the Nforce 680i. After all, Intel has not too much interest in its chief competitor influencing its systems, nor did AMD have much interest in creating a 'too good' chipset for its, well, chief competitor.

I don't know, and this article in particular is basing its info on an event half a year ago. Intel has also been pressuring severely, resulting in only DFI producing a board for the ATI/AMD RD600 chipset.
I've been watching the RD600 chipset through the DFI version for a while now. It has some unique features like independent FSB overclocking, physics support, PCI-E RAID, etc.
Performance clock per clock isn't super, but it's not that bad either. The differences lie between small percentages. Maybe it gets better when the board matures somewhat.

http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4409&s=18

[bonesaw]

why?

[radcon56]

Did aquiring ATI have anything to do with AMD's development of the intel stuff or were they working on it prior to that?

[Wolf2000me]

Originally Posted by radcon56

Did aquiring ATI have anything to do with AMD's development of the intel stuff or were they working on it prior to that?

ATI had been working on it before AMD took over. ATI has also been releasing chipsets a while before that.

[cadaveca]

ALL Current AMD chipsets are ATI products. The currently released RD600 is actually an intel-compatible chipset from about 2 years ago.

Because this very old chipset is more than capable of keeping up with 965/975/680i/C55xe, there is alot of expectations focused on these next chipsets. I remember very clearly when the first silicon hit the testing stages(arpund R520 debut, if i got it right)...the problem in developing chipsets is that thier production cycle is a bit longer due to the more complex nature of it's supporting pcb, in comapirson say to a videocard or cpu.

This means that you've been working on these things for quite a while, but if relationships between you and the cpu-maker don't go so well in the meantime, the profibility of these chipsets can drop largely, due to a lack of support from said party.

I'll tell you guys something. If you have stocks in the pc market...get them out now, even at a loss!

For those curious about RD600, it really does not seem prudent to think about it, even. I'm and ATI fanboy, never deny that, but this product sucks. For Crossfire users, if you buy Conroe, buy 975x. If you buy Allendale, 965. If you must use SLi, the 680i is the way to go.

AMD is sitting pretty smug right now. They got the Ace in thier pocket, burning a hole. It's gonna fall out soon enough.

The industry cannot meet demand right now. NOONE can meet demand. The end effect of this is very strange...instead of raising prices, Intel has seemingly focused on dropping them lower. This creates further demand...and pisses alot of people off when they cannot get product.

[Wolf2000me]

I was thinking seriously about ATI's RD600, mainly because of its independent bus clocking and overclocking features. Also the possibility for a card doing physics is a factor.
But I've been meaning to ask you Cad. It's always good to ask the sceptical ATI fanboy about ATI products

So, you seem to think RD600 is not the way to go. Is it the clock/clock performance making you not recommend it?
Maybe the lack of support for that chipset?
I was not really considering crossfire. Just single card with maybe a 2nd graphics card for the physics.

[cadaveca]

I do not find the independent memory control to be truly independent. There are holes...weird holes...sometimes i change stuff and get strange results...I cannot install windows with X-Fi installed, and onboard sound disabled(that pissed me off to no end...6 OS installs later I figured out what to do).

The board layout is great, and really, it's great for tweaking...I play alot of videogames, but i spend more time tweaking than anything else...


TBH, it's the CAS5 performance that has me a bit upset. Unless you wanna dump alot of voltage into your rams for decent clocks, this board bites. I need far too much vDIMM to get stable.


I've tried every chipset now, and TBH, I've only had my hands on a single RD600 board, and many of the other chipsets, so maybe my outlook is a bit skewed, but I really have a hard time recommending anything other than what I already have.


That being said tho, 3D performance on this board is pretty stellar, for DX9 and up titles. DX8 is hampered due to chipset latencies introduced by having independant clocks(what really makes for the "holes" I mentioned earlier).

It's just plain that the 975 is highly tuned, but that tuning can lead to some difficulties if you do not buy the proper parts. Of course, this can be alleviated by bios settings(or lack thereof), but you truly do not have alot of flexibility.

I choose performance over flexibility. I'm more than capable of choosing the proper components for my pc's, tho.

I hope that these newer chipsets solve alot of these issues, and I'm sure that once the ATI and AMD engineering teams work together for a product, the performance will be hard to beat. I'm patiently waiting.

[Wolf2000me]

Well. A friend of mine bought the DFI RD600 board a few weeks ago. He hasn't done much overclocking yet and is pretty much running stock because his watercooling components are still in transit.
I do know he installed XP Pro with an X-Fi, don't know if he disabled onboard sound though.
And what if a BIOS revision resolves a deal of the issues you've discribed?
How about the ATI physics? I'm pretty sure there is no real app or game that makes good use of it. But how about the future? And is the physics design through a graphics card a matured process?

Thanks for the info Cad

[cadaveca]

BIOS can fix CAS5, but not the stability holes.

Physics...is not something anyone talks about, so I won't either. But I'll say this much...RD600=8x8x2, while 975=8x8x4. So...

[Wolf2000me]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

BIOS can fix CAS5, but not the stability holes.

Physics...is not something anyone talks about, so I won't either. But I'll say this much...RD600=8x8x2, while 975=8x8x4. So...

Yep, I get the picture

Thanks

[cloasters]

Illiterate that I am about chipsets, I'd be inclined to go with an Intel chipset for a Cure-Duet proc.