No PCI support in Cougar Point chipsets?

[TheDarkKnight]

I see on Intels website, when doing a chipset comparison, that Intels Cougar Point chipsets, both H67 and P67, will have no PCI support. Does that mean what I think it means? That motherboards using those chipsets will have no PCI slots for add-in boards like wireless network adapters, tv tuner cards, etcetera? How would these chipsets being considered enthusiasts chipsets if you can't use add-in cards with any motherboard using these chipsets. Maybe Im missing something here. Hope someone can clear things up a bit. Or maybe my understanding is correct and Intel simply sees PCI add-in cards becoming obsolete for some reason. Looking forward to some knowledgeable replies. Thanks.

 

[Edrick]

If you simply looked at some P67 MBs on Newegg, you would see that they support PCI. My Gigabyte does.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

If you simply looked at some P67 MBs on Newegg, you would see that they support PCI. My Gigabyte does.

I'll bet if everyone who has posted a message on these forums had only looked somewhere on the internet they could have answered their own question and Anandtech could shut down these forums all together, huh?

Okay, so I went to look at NewEgg. And I now see that you are correct. My thoughts now, in retrospect, are that "No PCI support" means no "Legacy PCI Support". All PCI support with these new chipsets will be PCI-E slots. Can anyone can confirm this? Or should I stop being a nuisance and just go Google it? :biggrin::biggrin:

 

[IntelUser2000]

Looking at my Intel DH67BL board pic on the back of the box right now.

I see one PCI slot, and two PCI Express x1 slots

This is a microATX board so regular ATX form factor boards should have more of them. It also has two USB 3.0 slots even though the H67 chipset doesn't support them.

The board has:
-IT8892E PCI controller
-NEC D720200F1 USB 3.0 controller

Most(if not all) boards using H67 and P67 chipsets should support both PCI and USB 3.0, but they will be done using seperate chips.

 

[Edrick]

I'll bet if everyone who has posted a message on these forums had only looked somewhere on the internet they could have answered their own question and Anandtech could shut down these forums all together, huh?

Sorry if I came across a little harsh. Your question was a simple yes or no, where opinion, user experience, etc did not come into play. And any picture of any MB from any review site (like AnandTech) or any sales site (like Newegg) would have given you the answer you sought. I suppose I could have just replied "Yes."

And to answer you next question, P67 supports legacy PCI and PCI-e (using different chips). But most micro H67 MBs do not have PCI support however.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Looking at my Intel DH67BL board pic on the back of the box right now.

I see one PCI slot, and two PCI Express x1 slots

This is a microATX board so regular ATX form factor boards should have more of them. It also has two USB 3.0 slots even though the H67 chipset doesn't support them.

The board has:
-IT8892E PCI controller
-NEC D720200F1 USB 3.0 controller

Most(if not all) boards using H67 and P67 chipsets should support both PCI and USB 3.0, but they will be done using seperate chips.

Thank you for your reply. But it still leaves me wondering, then, why Intels very own chipset comparison tool will tell you that H67 and P67 have "No PCI Support". What does that mean? Is this an error on Intels website? Just want to understand things. It scares me that you can purchase a motherboard with features that you cannot use. I want to know exactly what Im getting into.

 

[Edrick]

Thank you for your reply. But it still leaves me wondering, then, why Intels very own chipset comparison tool will tell you that H67 and P67 have "No PCI Support". What does that mean? Is this an error on Intels website? Just want to understand things. It scares me that you can purchase a motherboard with features that you cannot use. I want to know exactly what Im getting into.

I think what IntelUser2000 is trying to say is that the chipset itsself does not support PCI. Rather, MB makers use the "IT8892E PCI controller" to incorporate PCI into their MBs. Similar to how they are a 3rd party USB3 controller since Intel does not support it directly.

Bottom line is that you can still use your PCI cards that you have.

 

[Golgatha]

I would personally be fine with ditching the PCI slot except for the sound cards I use still need them. Really though, I'd trade them away if I could get an extra 4x PCIe slot on a motherboard. Would like to see 2x16x slots and 2x4x slots along with 3 or 4 1x slots.

 

[Golgatha]

Thank you for your reply. But it still leaves me wondering, then, why Intels very own chipset comparison tool will tell you that H67 and P67 have "No PCI Support". What does that mean? Is this an error on Intels website? Just want to understand things. It scares me that you can purchase a motherboard with features that you cannot use. I want to know exactly what Im getting into.

33Mhz, 32bit PCI slots will be enabled by a 3rd party chip from here on out. Intel's motherboard chipsets do not support PCI natively, only PCI-E. FWIW they also do not support USB 3.0 natively. This support is also enabled by a 3rd party chip.

Also, PCI support was removed from the X58 chipset as well and that is nearly 2 years old now. This is not something new. http://www.intel.com/Assets/Image/diagram/X58_blockdiagram.gif

 

[TheDarkKnight]

I think what IntelUser2000 is trying to say is that the chipset itsself does not support PCI. Rather, MB makers use the "IT8892E PCI controller" to incorporate PCI into their MBs. Similar to how they are a 3rd party USB3 controller since Intel does not support it directly.

Bottom line is that you can still use your PCI cards that you have.

That clears everything up for me. Well, at least with regards to this question anyway. Still trying to figure out this new Sandy Bridge architecture and everything that goes with it. Thanks for the good info.:biggrin:

 

[TheDarkKnight]

33Mhz, 32bit PCI slots will be enabled by a 3rd party chip from here on out. Intel's motherboard chipsets do not support PCI natively, only PCI-E. FWIW they also do not support USB 3.0 natively. This support is also enabled by a 3rd party chip.

Also, PCI support was removed from the X58 chipset as well and that is nearly 2 years old now. This is not something new. http://www.intel.com/Assets/Image/diagram/X58_blockdiagram.gif

A small matter but Im assuming you mean that "some" Intel chipsets do not support PCI natively because Intels chipset comparison tool shows that the H55 and the H57 "do" support PCI, up to 4 devices.

 

[Golgatha]

That clears everything up for me. Well, at least with regards to this question anyway. Still trying to figure out this new Sandy Bridge architecture and everything that goes with it. Thanks for the good info.:biggrin:

Me too. This whole FSB locking thing and only being able to OC by adjusting the multiplier seems all backwards to me. I don't own any Sandy Bridge stuff, but I'm seriously considering it for my HTPC at some point. Always interested in learning about new tech in general as well.

 

[Golgatha]

A small matter but Im assuming you mean that "some" Intel chipsets do not support PCI natively because Intels chipset comparison tool shows that the H55 and the H57 "do" support PCI, up to 4 devices.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...7-New-chipsets-for-Clarkdale-processors/News/

They list 4 PCI slots supported, but this support comes from the IT8892E PCI controller chip, which is a 1x PCIe to PCI bridge chip. Intel's chipset does not have native support.



http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Gigabyte-P67A-UD4-Motherboard/1147/7

16 PCIe lanes are on the CPU die, which are there to connect to graphics cards.

6 or 8 PCIe lanes on the Intel Chipset (3 1x PCIe + 2 PCI enabled by using the 4th lane connected to the IT8892E PCI bridge chip + some lanes for USB 3.0, GbE, Firewire, etc) are connected to everything else.



An example of an Intel chipset with native PCI support is the 975x.

http://img.tomshardware.com/us/2005...l_graphics_with_975x_chipset/975x_diagram.gif

 

[TheDarkKnight]

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...7-New-chipsets-for-Clarkdale-processors/News/

They list 4 PCI slots supported, but this support comes from the IT8892E PCI controller chip, which is a 1x PCIe to PCI bridge chip. Intel's chipset does not have native support.

But if I understand you correctly, the PCI support for the H67 and P67 chipsets comes from the same PCI controller chip. So its interesting that Intel makes a distinction between the 4 different chipsets. Stating that 2 have support and 2 dont. When it appears, from what you are saying, none of the 4 chipsets really have native support.

Edit: Let me try to see if I understand this real quick. On the H55 and H57 Intel has licensed the IT8892E PCI chip for sale "with" the H55 and H57 chipsets and on the H67 and P67 Intel has not licensed that same chipset for inclusion, therefore, the cost is passed onto the motherboard manufacturers to provide it. Is this correct?

 

[Golgatha]

But if I understand you correctly, the PCI support for the H67 and P67 chipsets comes from the same PCI controller chip. So its interesting that Intel makes a distinction between the 4 different chipsets. Stating that 2 have support and 2 dont. When it appears, from what you are saying, none of the 4 chipsets really have native support.

Edit: Let me try to see if I understand this real quick. On the H55 and H57 Intel has licensed the IT8892E PCI chip for sale "with" the H55 and H57 chipsets and on the H67 and P67 Intel has not licensed that same chipset for inclusion, therefore, the cost is passed onto the motherboard manufacturers to provide it. Is this correct?

I imagine the ITE IT8892E bridge chip is purchased like any other 3rd party chip (e.g. Realtek for Audio, NEC for USB 3.0) on the motherboard, by the motherboard manufacturer. The drivers for the ITE IT8892E bridge chip might be licensed for a period of time to provide upgrades for the software perhaps.

 

[Golgatha]

BWhen it appears, from what you are saying, none of the 4 chipsets really have native support.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2134319

Correct. According to the diagrams, I would have to conclude that none of the most recent 1366, 1156, and 1155 socket supporting chipsets support native PCI.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The X58 doesn't have native PCI. The 5 series P55 and H55/H57 does however. The 6 series P67 and H67 omits them.

Intel chipset guys omit PCI support on H67 and P67. Intel motherboard guys add them using the 3rd party chip.

 

[Golgatha]

The X58 doesn't have native PCI. The 5 series P55 and H55/H57 does however. The 6 series P67 and H67 omits them.

Intel chipset guys omit PCI support on H67 and P67. Intel motherboard guys add them using the 3rd party chip.

I'll be darned, you're right!

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20190/10

Wonder why they aren't listed on the diagrams?


Whoa! Here's the definitive list!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_chipsets#Core_i_Series_chipsets

 

[Daemas]

so can any of you guys turn off your PCI Chip like you can with extra marvel and realtek chips?

 

[Golgatha]

so can any of you guys turn off your PCI Chip like you can with extra marvel and realtek chips?

Theoretically it should be possible on chipsets which don't support PCI natively.

 

[toyota]

is there anything negative about pci being 3rd party as opposed to native? for example if I were to use a pci sound card would there be more of a chance of having issues?

 

[VirtualLarry]

is there anything negative about pci being 3rd party as opposed to native? for example if I were to use a pci sound card would there be more of a chance of having issues?

I guess that depends on how well the add-on chip implements it. I mean, I heard nothing but horror stories about the Jmicron add-on chipset during the P35/P45 days, used for adding one IDE port and two SATA ports, but I've never had any problems with them.
(Granted, I keep them in IDE mode, not AHCI, and I load the default MS drivers, not Jmicron's.)

 

[Golgatha]

is there anything negative about pci being 3rd party as opposed to native? for example if I were to use a pci sound card would there be more of a chance of having issues?

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20190/10

Take a look at the benchmarks. I find Intel's native implementations to generally be superior.

 

[Golgatha]

I guess that depends on how well the add-on chip implements it. I mean, I heard nothing but horror stories about the Jmicron add-on chipset during the P35/P45 days, used for adding one IDE port and two SATA ports, but I've never had any problems with them.
(Granted, I keep them in IDE mode, not AHCI, and I load the default MS drivers, not Jmicron's.)

For Jmicron controllers I always run with the MS default drivers. Jmicron drivers will always be crap in my mind.

 

[Zap]

I would personally be fine with ditching the PCI slot except for the sound cards I use still need them.

PCIe sound cards have been available for a while.

is there anything negative about pci being 3rd party as opposed to native? for example if I were to use a pci sound card would there be more of a chance of having issues?

In theory, if everything followed specification you would have no issues. :whiste: