Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD 1090FX, 1070 Chipset Info Leaked; Missing PCIe 3.0

By - Source: DonanimHaber | B 58 comments

In 2012, AMD will introduce its AMD 1090FX and 1070 Chipsets, as replacements to its current 990X and 970. The most interesting part is the new chipsets still will not support PCI-Express 3.0.

The 1090FX will be the top tier 10-series chipset, replacing the 990FX. The 1090FX northbridge will support two PCI-Express X16 links and up to four graphics cards. The 1070 provides one PCI-Express link for two graphics cards. The "Chipset Competitive Landscape" slide shows the new 10-series set to go against Intel's new Ivy Bridge chipset. AMD breaks down what it sees as advantages (more SATA connectivity and 2X16 XF) and disadvantages (PCIE 3.0 and SRT) against the Ivy Bridge. The 10-series chipset will be compatible with current processors, which adds to AM3+'s longevity. 

The 10-series chipset most surprisingly will not support PCI-Express 3.0. This is a disappointment to this writer, with Intel already gearing up PCI-Express 3.0 support for the Ivy Bridge release. What is still to be seen is how will this affect AMD's Radeon HD 7000 series graphics cards supporting PCI-Express 3.0. This question should be answered by in the end of the year, as the Radeon HD 7000 expected to release around the holidays.  

The new SB1060 southbridge does provide an improvement over current gen motherboards. The SB1060 will support an eight SATA 6 Gb/s RAID controller, all ports running at 6 Gb/s. This outpaces Intel's 7-series in terms of SATA 6 Gb/s ports. The SB1060 will offer for the first time a native USB 3.0 SuperSpeed controller. Currently, 990FX & 970 don't natively support USB 3.0 but is offered through a third-party controller. 

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 27 Hide
    gladosiri , November 8, 2011 11:03 PM
    Forget the PCI-E 3.0 or 1090FX or whatnot..fix the current bulldozer already.
  • 18 Hide
    EXT64 , November 8, 2011 10:42 PM
    Yep - PCI-E 3 isn't really needed yet, however I am still shocked. Normally marketing like to have the latest and greatest as it looks good in the advertisements, even if not really important. I hope they aren't losing enthusiasm for the enthusiast market.
Other Comments
  • 9 Hide
    SirGCal , November 8, 2011 10:39 PM
    I'm a fan (though not a fanboy) of AMD but this still disappoints me. Why do they wait so long to pickup the newer standards on chip instead of third party...?!? I want AMD to succeed so bad but... How many SATA ports do we really need?!? If we need a dozen drives, we'd likely have some sort of RAID controller anyhow for off-chip handling anyhow. For a performance rig, half a dozen is plenty for most any user. Give us PCI 3... 16X crossfire might be interesting but where's the real advantage over 8x... Have to wait for those benchmarks... But I'm not as excited considering the differences from 4-8 were minimal already.
  • Display all 58 comments.
  • 7 Hide
    Parsian , November 8, 2011 10:39 PM
    If I remembered correctly, HD5870 running in Crossfire on two 8x PCI E 2.0 would encounter bandwidth limit (roughly performs about 93%?) So if they have 2x PCI E @ 16x each, with current gen, shouldnt they be still good for a while? unless one wants to run two of 6990s in cross fire...

    correct me please. Thanks



  • 18 Hide
    EXT64 , November 8, 2011 10:42 PM
    Yep - PCI-E 3 isn't really needed yet, however I am still shocked. Normally marketing like to have the latest and greatest as it looks good in the advertisements, even if not really important. I hope they aren't losing enthusiasm for the enthusiast market.
  • 27 Hide
    gladosiri , November 8, 2011 11:03 PM
    Forget the PCI-E 3.0 or 1090FX or whatnot..fix the current bulldozer already.
  • 6 Hide
    Shin-san , November 8, 2011 11:14 PM
    Usually when PCI Express goes to the next version, the performance gain is like 1-3% due to the extra burst performance capability. It's not going to be a big deal for at least 1-2 years, so I don't blame them for not focusing on that right-away.

  • 8 Hide
    palladin9479 , November 8, 2011 11:18 PM
    Yeah PCIe 3.0 will be just a marketing term for the next two years give or take. Current cards can barely use 8x, much less 16x bandwidth for 2.0. It'll be just like when they want from PCI to AGP 1.0, and from AGP 8x to PCIe, hardware usage will take a few years to catch up.
  • 3 Hide
    beenthere , November 8, 2011 11:19 PM
    There is no present or near term need for PCIe 3.0. It's just a marketing ploy for those who don't know better. When it's actually needed AMD will incorporate it into it's chipsets.
  • 0 Hide
    SirGCal , November 8, 2011 11:24 PM
    And that's what everyone said about 2... A year or so later benefits to 2 were very obvious. And even enthusiasts, I know few who keep their motherboards less then a year... They spend more on the better board cause that's going to be their base for quite a few upgrades. This is AMD's problem... And every single system in my home (8 right now) is AMD right now accept the wife's laptop. But they don't look ahead far enough. This is why they are always playing catchup, save the early Athlon 64 era. Build it ready for the future...
  • -2 Hide
    iam2thecrowe , November 8, 2011 11:26 PM
    beenthereThere is no present or near term need for PCIe 3.0. It's just a marketing ploy for those who don't know better. When it's actually needed AMD will incorporate it into it's chipsets.

    its not a marketing ploy. Do you want to end up like one of those people with a pcie 1.x slot that doesnt work with a pcie 2.1 card? I dont, so i would get the pcie-3, if not for added bandwidth, then for future compatability. Not to mention boards running an 8x/8x pcie setup with pcie3 gives them the effective bandwidth of a 2.0 16x/16x slot, so not such a need for the 16x slots on expensive motherboards. I agree with gladosiri, fix bulldozer, then think about motherboards.
  • 2 Hide
    SirGCal , November 8, 2011 11:29 PM
    iam2thecroweits not a marketing ploy. Do you want to end up like one of those people with a pcie 1.x slot that doesnt work with a pcie 2.1 card? I dont, so i would get the pcie-3, if not for added bandwidth, then for future compatability. Not to mention boards running an 8x/8x pcie setup with pcie3 gives them the effective bandwidth of a 2.0 16x/16x slot, so not such a need for the 16x slots on expensive motherboards. I agree with gladosiri, fix bulldozer, then think about motherboards.

    Exactly... I wasn't as clear perhaps, but this is what I was trying to get acrossed... And yes, though I didn't mention it. BD was a big letdown... And their other current business decisions in the market also frighten me in terms of end-consumer future prospect if Intel runs away with a huge lead... (Not to mention what Intel would do with their prices... It amazes me some people think that nothing would change if Intel was the only game in town...)
  • 2 Hide
    _Pez_ , November 8, 2011 11:39 PM
    What is the big deal with this new chipset ?, I don't see anything new that would improve our present experience/performance with the actual chipset 99fx
    . Even those chipset from Intel that are even more pci lanes limted, have good enough or equal perfomance that those from amd.
  • 1 Hide
    palladin9479 , November 8, 2011 11:54 PM
    Quote:
    its not a marketing ploy. Do you want to end up like one of those people with a pcie 1.x slot that doesnt work with a pcie 2.1 card? I dont, so i would get the pcie-3, if not for added bandwidth, then for future compatability. Not to mention boards running an 8x/8x pcie setup with pcie3 gives them the effective bandwidth of a 2.0 16x/16x slot, so not such a need for the 16x slots on expensive motherboards. I agree with gladosiri, fix bulldozer, then think about motherboards.



    Except you'll most likely be replacing your board anyway in two years. PCIe 3.0 cards are backwards compatible with 2.0, there is no current plans of making cards that are incompatible. The only significant difference is bandwidth per lane, 3.0 has 2x the bandwidth per lane that 2.0 has. A 16x 2.0 slot will perform identically to a 8x 3.0 slot, we're just now seeing 8x being fully utilized. The CPU to GPU bandwidth requirement would have to quadruple in the next two to three years before you'd see any benefit from a 3.0 interface. Somehow I highly doubt this will happen. Now three+ years out we might be needing it, my crystal ball doesn't go much past 3~5 years in general though.

    Basically anyone buying a product for PCIe 3.0 ~now~ is buying a marketing slogan only. They'll just replace their boards in a few years anyway to get whatever cool new "feature" is present at that time. So buy a PCIe 3.0 board now, or a PCIe 3.0 board in two~three years, the results will be the same.
  • -2 Hide
    eddieroolz , November 8, 2011 11:59 PM
    I suppose AMD decided to hold off supporting a new technology until it can demonstrate need for it. I do remember a few months back that Tom's explored PCIe bandwidth saturation with multiple cards; I can't remember the result from it, but I do think PCIe 3.0 is going to be needed a whole lot sooner than AMD thinks.
  • -1 Hide
    notsleep , November 9, 2011 12:04 AM
    Quote:
    So buy a PCIe 3.0 board now, or a PCIe 3.0 board in two~three years, the results will be the same.


    me thinks it would cost more/less mature now so the result is not quite the same.
  • 0 Hide
    Sequences , November 9, 2011 12:13 AM
    One would think that new boards should try to integrate the newer stuff on the market. For the consumer's sake, I hope AMD doesn't start sucking too bad. =\
  • 1 Hide
    palladin9479 , November 9, 2011 12:17 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    So buy a PCIe 3.0 board now, or a PCIe 3.0 board in two~three years, the results will be the same.


    me thinks it would cost more/less mature now so the result is not quite the same.


    Ahh but in a few years the board would be replaced with another one that had a mature PCIe 3.0 implementation.

    The point is that you won't be using the brand new shiny PCIe 3.0 slots for those two years, they would exist in name only. Then right when you'd actually be seeing a difference you'll just be buying another board to get new features / CPU support or whatever.
  • -5 Hide
    dontcrosthestreams , November 9, 2011 12:17 AM
    everyone needs to stop hyping x16/x16 16/4 is less than 5% difference. say 21000 instead of 23000 in vantage.
  • 6 Hide
    beenthere , November 9, 2011 12:30 AM
    Folks there is NO new technology here. The PCIe 3.0 is an industry standard for which there is no need or use yet. It probably won't go into use for 2-3 years at least. You could not use it even if you had it.
  • 1 Hide
    ikyung , November 9, 2011 1:11 AM
    beenthereFolks there is NO new technology here. The PCIe 3.0 is an industry standard for which there is no need or use yet. It probably won't go into use for 2-3 years at least. You could not use it even if you had it.

    Isn't the 7000 series and 600 GPUs coming out next year going to use the 3.0? Not trying to mock you, this is a serious question that I'm curious about.
  • 0 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , November 9, 2011 1:17 AM
    iam2thecroweits not a marketing ploy. Do you want to end up like one of those people with a pcie 1.x slot that doesnt work with a pcie 2.1 card?


    Um..PCI-E 2.1 grpahics cards are compatible with PCI-E 1.x slots.
Display more comments