Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel move to stop ATI products working with Conroes

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 24, 2006 11:58:47 AM

Intel has pulled the license that allowed ATI to make Conroe compatible chipsets. Will this mean that Conroe systems with multi GPU’s will just be a memory???

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225
July 24, 2006 12:38:16 PM

They will get SLi support, would be pretty logical.
July 24, 2006 12:47:51 PM

One things for sure, that doesn't look good for Intel in trying to prove they're not a monopoly. Pulling ATIs license to make chipsets for Intel chips is like a kid taking his ball back because he got picked on. Pretty lame thing for Intel to do and won't look good for them in court.

Intel needed ATIs chipsets too since their own integrated chipsets suck ass. I bet some think that this may lead to Intel trying to buy Nvidia. I don't see that happening.

My question though is what is Nvidia gonna do. AMD chipsets made up a lot of the motherboard chipset segment. Granted they'll probably sell a lot of Conroe chipsets but still. Thats a huge chunk of business if they decide to punish AMD/ATI too and not make chipsets anymore. Not to mention how pissed off enthusiasts will be if they're restricted to a future of AMD and Crossfire only or Intel and SLI only.

My biggest complaint here is I wanted a Conroe system with Crossfire compatibility.
Related resources
July 24, 2006 12:52:40 PM

I know nothing about the reputation of theinquirer.net but I've read a few posts here from people saying they can't be totally trusted.
July 24, 2006 12:54:46 PM

Why do you keep bringing up the inquirer? Look at the artcile, the guy who wrote it finished with 2 sentences with no detail, no confirmation whatsoever. Dont confuse people with that crap. Beside, it's bad business for Intel or for anyone for trying to do that. That will alienate themselves, and if it's already on plan for ATI to produce conroe chipsets, it's not simply just Intel right to cancel it. Remember what we call contract?
July 24, 2006 12:56:43 PM

Kinda weird since there are already crossfire boards out there. Yeah, just a memory, till you pull head out of your 8O I want to see what Nvidia's response is. If Intel is the kid that got picked on, Nvidia is the kid that didn't get picked for the kickball game.
July 24, 2006 12:58:38 PM

Quote:
I know nothing about the reputation of theinquirer.net but I've read a few posts here from people saying they can't be totally trusted.


Exactly, they are like tabloid in the real world. The people who wrote it have no professional ethics binding like some of the prominent website such as Anandtech or Toms. Everyone can write crap on it, think about it, everytimes someone on Tom's wants to write an article, they have to pretty much do a lot of research or already have the knowledge. The scums on The Inquirer wrote everything in 2-3 sentences and say everything without confirmation. Do you believe the crap on TV that says you can lose 30 lbs in 6 days? If not, then dont believe the Inquirer.
July 24, 2006 1:03:32 PM

Intel only used ATi to make 'budget' chipsets anyway. The 965 chipset should fill that spot easily, and they already have the 975X chipset for enthusiasts.

If you mean that Intels integrated graphics suck, they are fine for office applications, and extremely cheap. Anyone interested in games should be using a dedicated graphics card. None of the gpu's integrated into the current generation of chipsets (ATi, or Intel) are any good for gaming performance anyway.

975X chipset boards will still support Crossfire, its not like AMD can change the drivers to disable crossfire if it detects intel inside, as these systems have been selling for some time.

If anything, all that will happen is Intel will improve their ties with Nvidia. If Nvidia want to make Nvidia SLI, with Nforce 590 ,and Conroe, they need the license to make the Conroe's bus. If intel and nvidia improve their relationship, then no doubt NVidia can be convinced to disable the purely software block on SLI + 975X (and future Intel PCI Express x16 chipsets/motherboards)
July 24, 2006 1:23:30 PM

Hahaha... what dumb 8O would even be reading that site anywhoo? Intel only working with Nivida cards? Can you say profit loss boys and girls.

People please stop quoting garbage sites like that here, and go post it in some gaming site.
July 24, 2006 1:30:10 PM

Quote:
@ Topic,
it just means ATI won't make chipsets for Intel. Crossfire support could come from Intel's chipsets in the future. It probably means Intel and nVidia will build a stronger alliance. Which makes sense...


Do any of the ATi chipsets for Intel CPU's support crossfire anyway? Intel only used ATi for its 'budget' chipset, the 975 chipsets which support crossfire are pure 'intel' chipsets anyway, nothing ATi about them.
July 24, 2006 1:41:13 PM

Quote:
My biggest complaint here is I wanted a Conroe system with Crossfire compatibility.


Agree.

I think one of the reason why Intel doing such decision is try to prevent their technology go to AMD.
July 24, 2006 5:54:36 PM

Quote:
One things for sure, that doesn't look good for Intel in trying to prove they're not a monopoly. Pulling ATIs license to make chipsets for Intel chips is like a kid taking his ball back because he got picked on. Pretty lame thing for Intel to do and won't look good for them in court.

Intel needed ATIs chipsets too since their own integrated chipsets suck ass. I bet some think that this may lead to Intel trying to buy Nvidia. I don't see that happening.


Umm, Intel's integrated chipsets dominate. Nobody who buys them cares about gaming performance.

As for antitrust concerns, don't be ridiculous. ATI is now part of Intel's primary competition. It's silly that you think some kind of law is going to say that a company must continue to do business with another company when it's been BOUGHT by said company's biggest competition. Don't be retarded.
July 24, 2006 8:22:04 PM

Quote:
One things for sure, that doesn't look good for Intel in trying to prove they're not a monopoly. Pulling ATIs license to make chipsets for Intel chips is like a kid taking his ball back because he got picked on. Pretty lame thing for Intel to do and won't look good for them in court.

Intel needed ATIs chipsets too since their own integrated chipsets suck ass. I bet some think that this may lead to Intel trying to buy Nvidia. I don't see that happening.


Umm, Intel's integrated chipsets dominate. Nobody who buys them cares about gaming performance.

As for antitrust concerns, don't be ridiculous. ATI is now part of Intel's primary competition. It's silly that you think some kind of law is going to say that a company must continue to do business with another company when it's been BOUGHT by said company's biggest competition. Don't be retarded.

Word...that would be like.."Here we know you're our biggest competitor, take our next design and make chipsets to support it."

Not a bad move by Intel at all. It puts more pressure back on AMD at a time when the pressure is already high. Have you seen the stock prices?

Edited for grammatical reasons...
July 24, 2006 8:47:55 PM

Hi,
It is clear that intel will try to put as many problems to ATI as it can , as it is being bought by AMD.
July 24, 2006 9:24:55 PM

Heres some more from dailytech if you don't like the inquirer
here

and

here
July 24, 2006 9:52:15 PM

Quote:
Hahaha... what dumb 8O would even be reading that site anywhoo? Intel only working with Nivida cards? Can you say profit loss boys and girls.

People please stop quoting garbage sites like that here, and go post it in some gaming site.


An ATI graphics card will work on a motherboard with an nVidia chipset, and vice versa. You can even do Crossfire on an nForce SLI board; it's just the software that needs to be changed.

ATI has just been bought by AMD, and that's the reason that Intel is canceling their chipset deal with them. Intel doesn't want to give business to their rival.
July 24, 2006 10:43:33 PM

Quote:
Intel has pulled the license that allowed ATI to make Conroe compatible chipsets. Will this mean that Conroe systems with multi GPU’s will just be a memory???

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225


I think that Intel didn't renew its license for crossfire, and it gave the Inquire a chance to skew the story.

Why would Intel care if ATI makes chipsets? Intel will still make licensing fees, Intel will probably sell ATI some of the chips on the motherboard (maybe even the southbridge or audio), Somebody will have to buy an Intel proc. to use the motherboard. In short, Intel will still be making money off an ATI motherboard & Intel will be making the processor for it. In this case, why would Intel care if AMD owns ATI?
July 24, 2006 11:21:57 PM

Quote:
ATI motherboard & Intel will be making the processor for it. In this case, why would Intel care if AMD owns ATI?


it's pretty obvious. That means every time Intel makes profit from the sale of a processor, AMD makes a profit as well.
July 24, 2006 11:22:42 PM

Aren't the DFI SLi 590 and R600's coming next month?..
July 24, 2006 11:24:50 PM

I was under the impression that Intel pulling ATI's license was a decision they made before the merger :?:
July 24, 2006 11:46:37 PM

Wouldnt bother me if they did or not. Because im never buying an ati product, not after them selling out to a hillbilly texan company, they should have been proud to be canadian, now they are just a subsidary of a texan company gg ati go fuck urself.
July 25, 2006 12:03:24 AM

Quote:
Wouldnt bother me if they did or not. Because im never buying an ati product, not after them selling out to a hillbilly texan company, they should have been proud to be canadian, now they are just a subsidary of a texan company gg ati go **** urself.


LOL..colorful. What really amazes me is ATI doing the deal. They Aren't in trouble.
July 25, 2006 12:41:07 AM

amd is a californian company, not texan, they just have the headquarters in texas. funny that you have a chip from them...
July 25, 2006 12:46:08 AM

Quote:

LOL..colorful. What really amazes me is ATI doing the deal. They Aren't in trouble.


Yeah I have to wonder what AMD offered ATI to go through with it ? I mean whats in it for ATI ? Since they already said Intel accounts for most of its buisness ? They already sold chipsets for both companies so other then a bucket of cash I dont see why :) 
July 25, 2006 1:09:28 AM

Quote:
amd is a californian company, not texan, they just have the headquarters in texas. funny that you have a chip from them...


LMAO! caught my eye too... lol :lol: 
July 25, 2006 1:45:43 AM

Quote:
Exactly. So technically, Intel doesn't need ATI if their chip run CF. I don't even think Intel needs anyone to make chipsets for them.
It's not that Intel really needs ATI's chipset for Crossfire or even Nvidia's for SLI, but both ATI and Nvidia license this technology; now that ATI is owned by AMD I can't see them licensing Crossfire to Intel anymore, so you'll need to buy an ATI board again for Crossfire support, as you would an Nvidia board for SLI.
July 25, 2006 2:43:54 AM

Sunnydale, California is a long way from Texas....
July 25, 2006 2:55:03 AM

Yep and cannot wait to switch to core 2...
July 25, 2006 3:18:13 AM

Makes me want smell that brand new fresh packagaing aroma from a Core 2 box even more espically an E6600 :lol: 
July 25, 2006 3:49:05 AM

Quote:
THEY ARE F*ING MORONS, SCREW THEM I SAY!!!!


Prozac, you are internalizing too much. Its bad for your emotional health. Just let it all out and say how you really feel. :wink:


Peace
July 25, 2006 3:58:28 AM

Quote:
One things for sure, that doesn't look good for Intel in trying to prove they're not a monopoly. Pulling ATIs license to make chipsets for Intel chips is like a kid taking his ball back because he got picked on. Pretty lame thing for Intel to do and won't look good for them in court.

Intel needed ATIs chipsets too since their own integrated chipsets suck ass. I bet some think that this may lead to Intel trying to buy Nvidia. I don't see that happening.

My question though is what is Nvidia gonna do. AMD chipsets made up a lot of the motherboard chipset segment. Granted they'll probably sell a lot of Conroe chipsets but still. Thats a huge chunk of business if they decide to punish AMD/ATI too and not make chipsets anymore. Not to mention how pissed off enthusiasts will be if they're restricted to a future of AMD and Crossfire only or Intel and SLI only.

My biggest complaint here is I wanted a Conroe system with Crossfire compatibility.


Did you study economics at all? Once aquired by AMD they become direct competition. Pulling proprietary licenses and the like from ATI is only good business sense unless you want your advances to go directly to AMD's engineers. Intel doesn't need ATI, they can kiss and make up with Nvidia and the issue is solved. NVidia's not going to be very happy with AMD either, doubt they'll be working with them as much. A monopoly can only exist if there is a single supplier or one entity controls/owns all the suppliers. Now I don't think Intel owns even a share of AMD so it's a mute point unless they want to look like the cry babies at Netscape when they tried the same junk over browsers. So basically what AMD is doin is this "I'm tellin!, .... Mom Intel is selling more cpu's than me again" Oh and I should say all I currently own are AMD 64's, six of them in the house. I feel like such a dufus, it's going to take time but they're all going Conroe within the year. Why does Benedict Arnold's name continue to come to mind everytime I think of this and AMD now?
July 25, 2006 4:10:57 AM

My personal view on this is that it sucks, intel are going to make things harder for ATI now. So it will make more sence to go for nvidia if you are with intel, maybe intel will make some agreement with nvidia now. This will suck for us end users though because it will mean less choice :cry: .
July 25, 2006 4:27:48 AM

Quote:

My question though is what is Nvidia gonna do. AMD chipsets made up a lot of the motherboard chipset segment. Granted they'll probably sell a lot of Conroe chipsets but still. Thats a huge chunk of business if they decide to punish AMD/ATI too and not make chipsets anymore. Not to mention how pissed off enthusiasts will be if they're restricted to a future of AMD and Crossfire only or Intel and SLI only.

My biggest complaint here is I wanted a Conroe system with Crossfire compatibility.


It would be interesting if Nvidia could get into the x86 dual core processor market, but it would mean starting from scratch and competing with "AMT" for the smaller share of the market not owned by Intel.

I had looked forward to next summer's ATI DX10 integrated video with Crossfire for Conroe. Guess that won't happen now. Since I don't like Nvidia cards, I'll go with AMD when I go dual core. Ideally, I'd wanted one of each; an X2 system and a Conroe system at comparable clock speeds.

This news makes me really want to wait it out a year and see how it all works out. I guess my Northwood and my Prescott with HT PCs can chug along for one more year. It's not like I'm playing anything more than Oblivion and HOMM 5. They both do okay everywhere else but in games.
July 25, 2006 4:39:36 AM

Quote:
Wouldnt bother me if they did or not. Because im never buying an ati product, not after them selling out to a hillbilly texan company, they should have been proud to be canadian, now they are just a subsidary of a texan company gg ati go **** urself.


As was already said, you own a product from a "hillbilly texan company". As is, I like the idea of Conroes because they're based on designs from Haifa. While I got stuck with Netburst the last couple of years, and one is a real oven roasted turkey (ie the P4 630), the Haifa team was designing mobile chips that ruled. Now, Netburst is dead and Intel actually has a decent CPU out there on the desktop.

All these companies are multinational, with headquarters, fabs and research facilities all across the world. About the only thing local anymore is the local farmer's market and I wouldn't even bet on that.
July 25, 2006 4:39:49 AM

Quote:
Intel has pulled the license that allowed ATI to make Conroe compatible chipsets. Will this mean that Conroe systems with multi GPU’s will just be a memory???

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225


You're not only reading but quoting a supermarket gossip rag about Computer tech? I don't go read Cosmo to find out how to hunt deer why would I even give you any credibility from this point forward. Do you realize most rational peole don't read that thing or the may use it as cat litter liner, I hear it does well for that.
July 25, 2006 5:08:01 AM

As I posted before the information isn't just at the inquirer, I know the inquirer is rubbish but the information is right I will post it again.

HERE!

AND

HERE!
July 25, 2006 5:27:05 AM

Although I enjoy a round of enquirer-bashing as much as the next guy, they did get the ATI-AMD merger right.........
July 25, 2006 6:34:19 AM

Quote:
amd is a californian company, not texan, they just have the headquarters in texas. funny that you have a chip from them...


Not only that, but he's running a californian GPU on a gfx board made by a californian company...

I'm just wondering why he's so pissed, seeing as how much he likes products from USA companies.

Fritz
July 25, 2006 10:00:29 PM

Yes and I have a great choice... when I bought my 6600 Gt it was because of the cheap price and at the time it was a good buy, my next move was ati, how ever not any more. They sold out for money nothing more nothing less. I dont like products from usa I just dont have a choice. If I have a choice I dont go with american products, I have a danish headset (sennheiser PC 160SK), a swiss mouse (logitech), a korean monitor (LG), a korean heatsync (zalman).
July 25, 2006 10:21:49 PM

Indeed, it is hard to build a computer and boycott companies based on personal preference. Basically, you have to choose the lesser of two evils when it comes to certain components...
July 25, 2006 11:06:27 PM

You know its odd I always bought ATI for video cards hmmm well since Voodoo went under but thats showing my age lol lets just say I bought the ATI radion 7000 when it was new :)  Well now I guess since I was wanting to replace my X1300 with something a little better I may just switch and see what these Nvidia people are all on about :)  I already run a Nvidia Nforce mobo and the quality seems good enough to convince me ! Alas ATI I ave played many good games but im afraid we must part ways for a while it seems lol
July 25, 2006 11:33:21 PM

Well, I remember the Voodoo days too. I had both a Diamond Monster 3D with a Diamond Stealth 2d. Then I went with an SIS 2d card with a Voodoo 2 for 3D. That was back in the Pentium days. I went AMD K62-450 and Geforce 2 MX after that.

What amazes me about both the AMD/ATI merger and Intel's chipset decision is that I always used to think of AMD and Nvidia together and Intel and ATI. The only way I'd ditch an ATI card is if I decide to go with a discreet ATI TV card, because I've had All in Wonders in my PC's since the 8500 days.

I play fewer games nowadays, but I do more video recording and editing and ATI is still better than Nvidia's product for that. At least ATI has half way decent multimedia cards that are also good gaming cards. That is one area where Nvidia's missing a market.

Now, all we need is for Intel to get into the discreet graphics card market. As is, I'm tired of swapping out cards and would like to see the GPU integrated into the CPU instead of on the motherboard as part of the northbridge. Ideally, it should still work with an add in PCIe card for those who still want one.
July 26, 2006 12:03:55 AM

Quote:
Intel has pulled the license that allowed ATI to make Conroe compatible chipsets. Will this mean that Conroe systems with multi GPU’s will just be a memory???

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33225


I did not read the whole thread, not intend to do so, but...DFI RD600 MB fo Conroe..

Then, to all of you that say hat they never buy an ATI or AMD product anymore...

BLA BLA BLA..

Just look at all the morons that were bitching Intel praising AMD now going to get a Conroe...

If AMD release a really powerful CPU coupled to an extraordinary chipset made by ATI running some kind of fabulous ATI video card, you'll be the first to switc side and get one..
July 29, 2006 12:05:07 AM

Quote:
Quote:

Then, to all of you that say hat they never buy an ATI or AMD product anymore...

BLA BLA BLA..

Just look at all the morons that were bitching Intel praising AMD now going to get a Conroe...

If AMD release a really powerful CPU coupled to an extraordinary chipset made by ATI running some kind of fabulous ATI video card, you'll be the first to switc side and get one..


Well, it looks like the license thing was just a rumour at The Inquirer. As for dissing Intel and praising AMD. It's based on performance, not fanboyism.

I did not want an Athlon XP after Tom's Hardware's story on overheating. I went from an AMD K62-450 to a P4 Williamette. Now I have a Northwood and ended up getting a Prescott before I realized Intel required a new board for Conroe due to voltage issues. I wish I'd gotten an Athlon 64 3000+ instead of that P4 630.

Anyone who builds a PC every 2-3 years should look at the best that's out there and choose based on what they can afford. AMD and Intel play leapfrog like ATI and Nvidia. Now that ATI is AMD, it will get interesting. Can't wait to see what's coming by the end of 2008.

Right now, Conroe is the best and Athlon X2 is still quite good and more affordable (and available). So, no one loses, unless they really go budget with an Pentium D easy bake oven. Considering my A/C bills at home, I'd rather have all of our PCs updated to cooler CPUs.
!