facebook rss twitter

Crisis averted, NVIDIA SLI coming natively to Intel's X58

by Parm Mann on 28 August 2008, 14:59

Tags: NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qao4e

Add to My Vault: x

NVISION '08 almost passed by without any major announcements this year, but NVIDIA has managed to catch us all off guard with a last-gasp bit of news; native SLI support for Intel's X58 chipset.

Cast your memory back a month or so, and you'll recall NVIDIA and Intel coming to an agreement that would see SLI become available on X58 boards via an nF200 bridging chip.

Now, to the dismay of board manufacturers already using the aforementioned bridging chip, NVIDIA has gone on the record and stated that native SLI support will be available after all.

According to Tech Report, NVIDIA has realised that the nF200 solution would limit its SLI functionality to a very niche market. Rather than let CrossFire steal the limelight, the company has decided to allow SLI on X58 - provided board manufacturers meet certain criteria.

It is believed that manufacturers who wish to offer SLI-certified X58 boards will have to submit their products to NVIDIA for certification. That certification won't come free, either, and boards will be required to carry an "SLI certified logo".

If certified, NVIDIA will provide the manufacturer with a key to embed in the system's BIOS. That, then, will unlock SLI support in the GeForce ForceWare driver. Phew!

It'll come as welcome news to those who use SLI, though our reports have shown that SLI remains a highly-niche product. What's important, however, is that X58 will become the first mainstream chipset to offer both SLI and CrossFire support, natively.

On the other hand, it could mean that Lucid's HYDRA engine really is a big threat to SLI.



HEXUS Forums :: 9 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
That's pretty well annoyed me. We have all known for a while that no additional hardware is needed to support SLI, yet nVidia have forced us to buy their motherboards if we wanted it.

Now they finally have accepted that people do not want to buy their boards and a number of manufacturers have told them they will only use the nf200 chip “sparingly”, they decide to do a complete U-turn yet STILL want to vet each board (I bet they have to pay to have the board vetted).

Just give out a universal key to the board manufacturers for crying out loud. The more people that can run SLI, the more graphics cards they can potentially sell. This under-handed way to try and make money off of the technology before anyone even buys a nVidia graphics card really :censored: me off. The cost of vetting the board gets picked up by us at the end of the day.
I think that's fair enough really. If you want to develop a board which utilises my technology and name, at least allow me to ensure it's up to my standards. If it's not, you're potentially lessening the value of my name.
agree with shaithis. Why on earth are they asking manufacturers go through this ridiculous procedure to put SLI on their motherboards? surely the extra hassle, cost and the fact that AMD+crossfire is selling so well atm will discourage them from even producing the boards and then the added final cost of the boards that i assume will be passed onto the consumer will change nothing with regards to the difference between any new chipsets featuring SLI and the existing Nvidia ones.

Not been impressed with NVidia at all recently all they seem to do is make products that are overpriced and offer the consumer very little more over the alternatives available… and then brag about it and openly slate other companies.
pauldarkside
I think that's fair enough really. If you want to develop a board which utilises my technology and name, at least allow me to ensure it's up to my standards. If it's not, you're potentially lessening the value of my name.

Normally I would agree but this is a technology that only exists to sell more of that manufacturers technology…….
shaithis
Normally I would agree but this is a technology that only exists to sell more of that manufacturers technology…….

So what's wrong with that? Seems like good business sense to me - enlarging the market potential for your product whilst recouping some of the costs (licensing and/or accreditation) for use in additional R&D, for example.