NVidia's Dispute over Nehalem Licensing - SLI not involved

X58 with an extra chip from nvidia .. soudns expensive. Also I have read that Intel will not be supporting motherboard manufacturers who do that.

Best for nvidia to put the SLi on the card and have dual gpu cards so they can forget about Sli on intel chipsets.

 

Interacting with still images? Awwrite, I need that GT280 NOW









Yes, I do realise they are referring to the upcoming GPU accelerated Photoshop, its just a poor use of words.

 

Okay, digging back a little way I know, but this clearly illustrates that people calling nForce 200 a PCIe switch are dead wrong.

It's more like a PCIe hub

 

Yes they are.

 

Not quite.
Digitimes says that mainstream LGA 1160 is a go for Nvidia-designed chipsets.
The trouble of developing one for the high-end might not be worth it to them (and it would be difficult to achieve sufficiently differentiating performance in an QPI-enabled integrated memory controller architecture), or perhaps it would collide with their own strategy of downplaying the role of the CPU in modern high-end gaming.

 

I thought KGA 1160 chipset were supposed to have a more cost friendly DMI interface for the chipset (and integrated PCI 16X to make without a northbridge) ?

 

Yes.

That doesn't stop Nvidia from doing their own ***-tastic southbridge for it, or perhaps just renaming the PCH, adding the so-called 'SLI processors' to that one as well and market it as the 'less expensive CPU, more expensive GPU' 'balanced PC' solution they've been touting.

 

What's your problem with triple buffering? The increased latency? Isn't that somewhat counteracted by being able to run at say 50fps instead of 30fps?

 

vsync on double buffering is ideal but you can only reasonably use it on older games where the framerate is locked. Else the framerate always suddenly gets cut in half, then doubles again etc. ; I hate it, it's very jerky. I don't get how using something better is an heresy!
for me it's vsync off with a refresh rate of 85Hz or higher. the 60Hz limitation of LCD is the heresy.

 

I hope good ole JHH knows wtf he's doing. The AMD-Nvidia-Intel love/hate triangle is really fascinating.

 

I don't see how turning 1 x 16x into 2 x 16x helps in any way, you aren't magicing bandwidth out of thin air, bar some data which is sent to both cards and I'll admit I have no idea how much that is.

I believe testing with X58 Tri-SLI has shown a native X58 solution to be faster than one using BR04.

Edit: Holy crap I quoted something from about 8 months ago

 

Just because there's no formal "front-side bus", it doesn't necessarily mean that it did away with all remnants of the "front-side bus technology".
Even Intel itself officially names the DDR3 memory controller, Quickpath Interconnects and L3 cache as the "uncore" part of the CPU design...

 

Is the court case referred to above about the QPI license?

 

Is this related (yes i'm being lazy not reading the entire thread)

Intel filed a lawsuit against NVIDIA last night, reports bit-tech.net, saying the CPU giant is suing the GPU giant over NVIDIA's license to create motherboard chipsets, alleging their agreement does not cover current and future Intel CPUs, including the Nehalem family. The report states NVIDIA claims this filing does not impact any of their currently shipping products.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/02/18/intel-files-lawsuit-against-nvidia/1

 

Think about it.
Why would Intel sue over something that doesn't exist yet (Nehalem-ready chipsets from Nvidia) ?
And how could Nvidia have started development unless they had been given direct access to Intel's brand new tech, including sensitive trade secrets ? Who guards those secrets ? Intel, of course.
Notice how Intel didn't start suing VIA over their P4-bus chipsets until they were pretty well into their market life cicle.

It's pretty obvious, isn't it ? It's a preemptive strike, a scare tactic if you will, but i doubt JHH will back off this one.