NVIDIA to Acquire ULi Electronics, a Leading Developer of Core Logic Technology

[ZobarStyl]

I'm on the fence on this one...like Erwos said, nV has really been pushing ATi lately, which is great for the GPU industry as far as competition is concerned (and the reason why the GPU industry has moved so fast), but this is almost moving into the anti-competitive realm. I hope the licensing deals with ATi that ULi had don't fall out, that's just harsh, but at the same time, other than southbridges, who can say that ULi was really competition?

 

[Shamrock]

I wonder if they will implement the AGP & PCI-e together, like the ASRock Mobo...

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
BTW, ATi has brought this upon itself, to the best of my knowledge, nVidia has never treated ATi as poorly in public as ATi has treated nVidia.

You obviously haven't seen any of the Nvidia slideshows that bash ATI.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
LOL I can't wait to see the spin nVidia fans put on this one - especially the ones that were saying ULi is trash. Now they'll do a 180 and praise it since nVidia is buying them out.

:disgust: Uhhh... I'm a nVidia supporter and the OP...

ULi has some decent engineers. They make a good Southbridge, their northbridges were and are trash however (I can speak from experience here, having owned an ASUS P5A-B motherboard based on the ALi (ULi) chipset (their intel chipset of the time was little better than the Super-7 one).

The main thing that held ULi back was a lack of real interest in their products from manufacturers so a lot of engineering talent was wasted. It will be interesting to see what they do for nVidia.

Yet AT praised their recent 1-chip solution for AMD processors...

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
I'm on the fence on this one...like Erwos said, nV has really been pushing ATi lately, which is great for the GPU industry as far as competition is concerned (and the reason why the GPU industry has moved so fast), but this is almost moving into the anti-competitive realm. I hope the licensing deals with ATi that ULi had don't fall out, that's just harsh, but at the same time, other than southbridges, who can say that ULi was really competition?

It would seem that Nvidia is trying to do "actual damage" to ATi Corp. It's like Nvida is waging war and is not going to develop a consceince any time soon. The time of "healthy" competition appears to have passed. I wonder if this is a retaliation for that slideshow ATI published recently. That would be funny. Nv spending 50+ million just to get payback. Just a thought.

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
BTW, ATi has brought this upon itself, to the best of my knowledge, nVidia has never treated ATi as poorly in public as ATi has treated nVidia.

You obviously haven't seen any of the Nvidia slideshows that bash ATI.

I'm talking pre NV30 here Creig. Sure people on forums may have been less than flattering about ATi (including myself) - but with good reason at the time.

ATi, their partners and their supporters have told outright lies over the years. So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
BTW, ATi has brought this upon itself, to the best of my knowledge, nVidia has never treated ATi as poorly in public as ATi has treated nVidia.

You obviously haven't seen any of the Nvidia slideshows that bash ATI.

I remember last year, Nvidia released a slideshow and I believe it was about Crossfire.
If you recall, a lot of the points nvidia made (ATI folk will see it as bashing) were actually true, at the time. There was probably some FUD in there as well as all marketing requires some.

Now, the slides ATI recently released, was met with criticism even from ATI fans. They even seem embarrassed by it.

Now Creig, this is not a biased point of view from me, but actual events. Don't know if you'll see it that way.

 

[tuteja1986]

but i think it was a pretty good deal and the price was cheap

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
I'm talking pre NV30 here Creig.

I'm not really sure what pre-NV30/post-NV30 has to do with anything. ATI/Nvidia both trash talk each other and use misleading information to sway the public to purchase their products. It's unfortunate, but it's the way they operate.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Sure people on forums may have been less than flattering about ATi (including myself) - but with good reason at the time.

There have also been people who have been less than flattering about ATI WITHOUT good reason. Nvidia has had their share of blunders and detractors as well. I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
ATi, their partners and their supporters have told outright lies over the years.

Such as?

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

So Nvidia NEVER publishes inaccurate or misleading information? NV40/45 PVP functionality anybody?

 

[Gstanfor]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
I'm talking pre NV30 here Creig.

I'm not really sure what pre-NV30/post-NV30 has to do with anything. ATI/Nvidia both trash talk each other and use misleading information to sway the public to purchase their products. It's unfortunate, but it's the way they operate.

Actually it is relevant. As I said before pre NV30/R300 ATi may as well have not existed as far as nVidia were concerned. Apart from QUAK (which was fact) I can't bring to mind much direct conflict between the two. Certainly nothing like what ATi & co. came out with post NV30/R300.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
Sure people on forums may have been less than flattering about ATi (including myself) - but with good reason at the time.

There have also been people who have been less than flattering about ATI WITHOUT good reason. Nvidia has had their share of blunders and detractors as well. I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

The point was, most anti-ATi sentiment pre NV30/R300 came from the public, not nVidia or anyone else and it WAS richly deserved at the time (driver quality alone).

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
ATi, their partners and their supporters have told outright lies over the years.

Such as?

Gee, where do I start? ATi's Tech TV segment where they claimed the 9700 series could/would use DDR-II? I could go and on and on, but I've listed ATi's lies many times in the past on various forums, you can go find them for yourself.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

So Nvidia NEVER publishes inaccurate or misleading information? NV40/45 PVP functionality anybody?

nVidia stated very early on there was a problem with PVP functionality and they were working on it. (I could be wrong here, but I don't believe they said they definitely would fix the problem, only that they would attempt to fix it). The only people who really care about PVP playbackon NV40/45 are fanatics anyhow, looking for a horse to beat...

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
I'm on the fence on this one...like Erwos said, nV has really been pushing ATi lately, which is great for the GPU industry as far as competition is concerned (and the reason why the GPU industry has moved so fast), but this is almost moving into the anti-competitive realm. I hope the licensing deals with ATi that ULi had don't fall out, that's just harsh, but at the same time, other than southbridges, who can say that ULi was really competition?

It would seem that Nvidia is trying to do "actual damage" to ATi Corp. It's like Nvida is waging war and is not going to develop a consceince any time soon. The time of "healthy" competition appears to have passed. I wonder if this is a retaliation for that slideshow ATI published recently. That would be funny. Nv spending 50+ million just to get payback. Just a thought.

I'm thinking of two words. Do you know what they are?

"collateral" and "damage"

Also, it's things like this that challenge my faith in the free market (not that many technology markets are "free" in the first place).

 

[Creig]

You need to use the quote function better. You're making it hard to pick out my reponses from yours.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
I'm not really sure what pre-NV30/post-NV30 has to do with anything. ATI/Nvidia both trash talk each other and use misleading information to sway the public to purchase their products. It's unfortunate, but it's the way they operate.

Actually it is relevant. As I said before pre NV30/R300 ATi may as well have not existed as far as nVidia were concerned. Apart from QUAK (which was fact) I can't bring to mind much direct conflict between the two. Certainly nothing like what ATi & co. came out with post NV30/R300.

So the infamous Nvidia 3DMark driver cheating doesn't count? And Nv has put out just as much FUD post NV30/R300 as ATI has.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
There have also been people who have been less than flattering about ATI WITHOUT good reason. Nvidia has had their share of blunders and detractors as well. I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

The point was, most anti-ATi sentiment pre NV30/R300 came from the public, not nVidia or anyone else and it WAS richly deserved at the time (driver quality alone).

Yes, ATI had poor drivers in those days and weren't really in the same league with Nvidia. That was years ago. What does that have to do with what's happening today?

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
Such as?

Gee, where do I start? ATi's Tech TV segment where they claimed the 9700 series could/would use DDR-II? I could go and on and on, but I've listed ATi's lies many times in the past on various forums, you can go find them for yourself.

I was under the impression that they were simply showcasing how a card with faster memory would perform compared to standard DDR memory and never said they would actually be releasing a DDR-II based card. At the time, they were working with memory manufacturers on finalizing GDDR3 specs and were demonstrating the advantages of faster memory.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

So Nvidia NEVER publishes inaccurate or misleading information? NV40/45 PVP functionality anybody?

nVidia stated very early on there was a problem with PVP functionality and they were working on it. (I could be wrong here, but I don't believe they said they definitely would fix the problem, only that they would attempt to fix it). The only people who really care about PVP playbackon NV40/45 are fanatics anyhow, looking for a horse to beat...

Actually, nvidia advertised full PVP functionality and then quietly deleted the portion referring to NV40/NV45 WMV9 acceleration from the website without admitting that ANYTHING was wrong. This attempt to simply sweep the issue under the rug is what caused such an uproar.

NV4x's Video Processor - What Happened?

NVIDIA originally told us [Anandtech] that they would have a driver which could take advantage of the processor 2 weeks after the launch of the GeForce 6800 Ultra. We even pressured NVIDIA to work on getting support for the Video Processor in the DiVX codec, since it's quite popular with our readers. The launch came and went, as did the two weeks with nothing from NVIDIA.

I [Anand Lal Shimpi] personally emailed NVIDIA every other week from May until August asking for an update, with no official or unofficial response as to why nothing had happened with the illustrious Video Processor. Finally, when 23 out of the 35 slides of the NVIDIA press presentation about the GeForce 6200 featured the GPU's "Video Processor", I had had enough. It was only then that NVIDIA came clean about the current state of the Video Processor.

As of the publication of this article [October 11, 2004], NVIDIA still has not answered our questions of whether or not there is any hardware encoding acceleration as was originally promised with NV40. So, the feature set of the Video Processor on NV40 (the GeForce 6800) was incomplete, only in its support for WMV9 acceleration (arguably the most important feature of it).

Nvidia did NOT state early on that there was something wrong with the PVP and apparently it's not just ATI fanatics who care about WMV9 acceleration.



I still fail to see how this is somehow "sweet payback for all the garbage ATi has hurled nVidia's way over the years" and that "ATi has brought this upon itself". Neither company is perfect and they've both had their ups and downs.

Sounds like nothing but fanboy talk to me.

 

[Steelski]

time for ATI to buy VIA or SIS......maybee....maybee not

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
I'm on the fence on this one...like Erwos said, nV has really been pushing ATi lately, which is great for the GPU industry as far as competition is concerned (and the reason why the GPU industry has moved so fast), but this is almost moving into the anti-competitive realm. I hope the licensing deals with ATi that ULi had don't fall out, that's just harsh, but at the same time, other than southbridges, who can say that ULi was really competition?

It would seem that Nvidia is trying to do "actual damage" to ATi Corp. It's like Nvida is waging war and is not going to develop a consceince any time soon. The time of "healthy" competition appears to have passed. I wonder if this is a retaliation for that slideshow ATI published recently. That would be funny. Nv spending 50+ million just to get payback. Just a thought.

The good thing is that both Nvidia and ATI are not run by fanboys to get upset by PR slides.

Originally posted by: Nvidia Press Release
NVIDIA intends to supply ULi customers with current products for the foreseeable future.

:laugh:

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: Creig
You need to use the quote function better. You're making it hard to pick out my reponses from yours.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
I'm not really sure what pre-NV30/post-NV30 has to do with anything. ATI/Nvidia both trash talk each other and use misleading information to sway the public to purchase their products. It's unfortunate, but it's the way they operate.

Actually it is relevant. As I said before pre NV30/R300 ATi may as well have not existed as far as nVidia were concerned. Apart from QUAK (which was fact) I can't bring to mind much direct conflict between the two. Certainly nothing like what ATi & co. came out with post NV30/R300.

So the infamous Nvidia 3DMark driver cheating doesn't count? And Nv has put out just as much FUD post NV30/R300 as ATI has.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
There have also been people who have been less than flattering about ATI WITHOUT good reason. Nvidia has had their share of blunders and detractors as well. I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

The point was, most anti-ATi sentiment pre NV30/R300 came from the public, not nVidia or anyone else and it WAS richly deserved at the time (driver quality alone).

Yes, ATI had poor drivers in those days and weren't really in the same league with Nvidia. That was years ago. What does that have to do with what's happening today?

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
Such as?

Gee, where do I start? ATi's Tech TV segment where they claimed the 9700 series could/would use DDR-II? I could go and on and on, but I've listed ATi's lies many times in the past on various forums, you can go find them for yourself.

I was under the impression that they were simply showcasing how a card with faster memory would perform compared to standard DDR memory and never said they would actually be releasing a DDR-II based card. At the time, they were working with memory manufacturers on finalizing GDDR3 specs and were demonstrating the advantages of faster memory.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

So Nvidia NEVER publishes inaccurate or misleading information? NV40/45 PVP functionality anybody?

nVidia stated very early on there was a problem with PVP functionality and they were working on it. (I could be wrong here, but I don't believe they said they definitely would fix the problem, only that they would attempt to fix it). The only people who really care about PVP playbackon NV40/45 are fanatics anyhow, looking for a horse to beat...

Actually, nvidia advertised full PVP functionality and then quietly deleted the portion referring to NV40/NV45 WMV9 acceleration from the website without admitting that ANYTHING was wrong. This attempt to simply sweep the issue under the rug is what caused such an uproar.

NV4x's Video Processor - What Happened?

NVIDIA originally told us [Anandtech] that they would have a driver which could take advantage of the processor 2 weeks after the launch of the GeForce 6800 Ultra. We even pressured NVIDIA to work on getting support for the Video Processor in the DiVX codec, since it's quite popular with our readers. The launch came and went, as did the two weeks with nothing from NVIDIA.

I [Anand Lal Shimpi] personally emailed NVIDIA every other week from May until August asking for an update, with no official or unofficial response as to why nothing had happened with the illustrious Video Processor. Finally, when 23 out of the 35 slides of the NVIDIA press presentation about the GeForce 6200 featured the GPU's "Video Processor", I had had enough. It was only then that NVIDIA came clean about the current state of the Video Processor.

As of the publication of this article [October 11, 2004], NVIDIA still has not answered our questions of whether or not there is any hardware encoding acceleration as was originally promised with NV40. So, the feature set of the Video Processor on NV40 (the GeForce 6800) was incomplete, only in its support for WMV9 acceleration (arguably the most important feature of it).

Nvidia did NOT state early on that there was something wrong with the PVP and apparently it's not just ATI fanatics who care about WMV9 acceleration.



I still fail to see how this is somehow "sweet payback for all the garbage ATi has hurled nVidia's way over the years" and that "ATi has brought this upon itself". Neither company is perfect and they've both had their ups and downs.

Sounds like nothing but fanboy talk to me.

The above are all reasons why everyone should despise secrecy in hardware.

[A rant damning the lot of you as "graphics whores whose minds turn to mush at the sight of pretty polygons" followed. You don't want me to continue it.]

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
LOL I can't wait to see the spin nVidia fans put on this one - especially the ones that were saying ULi is trash. Now they'll do a 180 and praise it since nVidia is buying them out.

Teh Devil!

This nVidia fan still isn't totally sold on ULI(ALI), but is LOL at how smart of a business this is.

As noted by me in other threads, it's obvious the ULI Southbridge is a big improvement over ATIs crappy one, so at very least nVidia gets to choose whether or not any Crossfire motherboards will have ULI Southbridges.

Merry Christmas ATI, here's your coal.

I'm pretty sure Uli/ATI already have licensing agreements in place that won't be affected by this takeover.

It's nice you're "pretty sure" Creig, do you have a link to this info so people considering purchases have something more to go on?

And as noted by Wesley Fink:

Users were more disturbed than ATI may have thought with the limitations of the SB450 south bridge. In practical terms, it made no real difference at all in performance, since SATA2 is not really faster than SATA1 with current drives, and most USB transfers don't come even fractionally close to taxing the transfer capabilities of USB 2.0.

So much for "crappy".

A. Who's "Wesley Fink"? AT reviewer?
B. It seems to me I saw AT bash the ATI Southbridge in their review(s)?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: erwos
Be that as it may, you gotta admit nVidia's been sticking it to ATI pretty frequently these days - pretty obvious that someone's thinking on his/her feet. Observe:
1. ATI announces X1800XT - nVidia pulls out the 7800GTX512, beating the X1800XT soundly in most benchmarks.
2. ATI announces X1600 - nVidia pulls out the 6800GS, beating the X1600 soundly in most benchmarks.
3. ATI announces X1300 - nVidia pulls out the 6600 DDR2, beat the X1300 soundly in most benchmarks.
4. ATI announces new chipset - nVidia buys out ATI's leading southbridge partner, leaving ATI without a well-regarded SB.

As for the USB performance, it matters to those of us who use multiple USB drives. Heck, I nearly built a RAID 5 out of them (ended up using 1394a, since my USB bus was already crowded).

-Erwos

You bet nVidia has been sticking it to Ati lately. This is sweet payback for all the garbage ATi has hurled nVidia's way over the years. Don't expect it to end aytime soon, either.

BTW, ATi has brought this upon itself, to the best of my knowledge, nVidia has never treated ATi as poorly in public as ATi has treated nVidia.

QFT

Beyond that, erwos didn't even mention ATI issues with the 3X paper launched X850 Crossfire and it's 16X12 60HZ limitation, no response to 7800GTX for five months, and no response to SLI for a YEAR. The list goes on and on this year, nVidia is kicking ATIs ass in every way that matters.

Oops. My bad. ATI has pending HDR+AA if the devs release patches, and angle independent AF.

It's not too hard to be a "fanboy" this year, posting positive about ATI is few and far between, they're mostly just getting slaughtered.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Creig
You need to use the quote function better. You're making it hard to pick out my reponses from yours.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
I'm not really sure what pre-NV30/post-NV30 has to do with anything. ATI/Nvidia both trash talk each other and use misleading information to sway the public to purchase their products. It's unfortunate, but it's the way they operate.

Actually it is relevant. As I said before pre NV30/R300 ATi may as well have not existed as far as nVidia were concerned. Apart from QUAK (which was fact) I can't bring to mind much direct conflict between the two. Certainly nothing like what ATi & co. came out with post NV30/R300.

So the infamous Nvidia 3DMark driver cheating doesn't count? And Nv has put out just as much FUD post NV30/R300 as ATI has.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
There have also been people who have been less than flattering about ATI WITHOUT good reason. Nvidia has had their share of blunders and detractors as well. I'm not really sure where you're going with this.

The point was, most anti-ATi sentiment pre NV30/R300 came from the public, not nVidia or anyone else and it WAS richly deserved at the time (driver quality alone).

Yes, ATI had poor drivers in those days and weren't really in the same league with Nvidia. That was years ago. What does that have to do with what's happening today?

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig
Such as?

Gee, where do I start? ATi's Tech TV segment where they claimed the 9700 series could/would use DDR-II? I could go and on and on, but I've listed ATi's lies many times in the past on various forums, you can go find them for yourself.

I was under the impression that they were simply showcasing how a card with faster memory would perform compared to standard DDR memory and never said they would actually be releasing a DDR-II based card. At the time, they were working with memory manufacturers on finalizing GDDR3 specs and were demonstrating the advantages of faster memory.

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

Originally posted by: Creig

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
So, far as I can see (even as far back as PowerVR, nVidias comments have been based on fact, not fiction.

So Nvidia NEVER publishes inaccurate or misleading information? NV40/45 PVP functionality anybody?

nVidia stated very early on there was a problem with PVP functionality and they were working on it. (I could be wrong here, but I don't believe they said they definitely would fix the problem, only that they would attempt to fix it). The only people who really care about PVP playbackon NV40/45 are fanatics anyhow, looking for a horse to beat...

Actually, nvidia advertised full PVP functionality and then quietly deleted the portion referring to NV40/NV45 WMV9 acceleration from the website without admitting that ANYTHING was wrong. This attempt to simply sweep the issue under the rug is what caused such an uproar.

NV4x's Video Processor - What Happened?

NVIDIA originally told us [Anandtech] that they would have a driver which could take advantage of the processor 2 weeks after the launch of the GeForce 6800 Ultra. We even pressured NVIDIA to work on getting support for the Video Processor in the DiVX codec, since it's quite popular with our readers. The launch came and went, as did the two weeks with nothing from NVIDIA.

I [Anand Lal Shimpi] personally emailed NVIDIA every other week from May until August asking for an update, with no official or unofficial response as to why nothing had happened with the illustrious Video Processor. Finally, when 23 out of the 35 slides of the NVIDIA press presentation about the GeForce 6200 featured the GPU's "Video Processor", I had had enough. It was only then that NVIDIA came clean about the current state of the Video Processor.

As of the publication of this article [October 11, 2004], NVIDIA still has not answered our questions of whether or not there is any hardware encoding acceleration as was originally promised with NV40. So, the feature set of the Video Processor on NV40 (the GeForce 6800) was incomplete, only in its support for WMV9 acceleration (arguably the most important feature of it).

Nvidia did NOT state early on that there was something wrong with the PVP and apparently it's not just ATI fanatics who care about WMV9 acceleration.



I still fail to see how this is somehow "sweet payback for all the garbage ATi has hurled nVidia's way over the years" and that "ATi has brought this upon itself". Neither company is perfect and they've both had their ups and downs.

Sounds like nothing but fanboy talk to me.

Q F T

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
I'm on the fence on this one...like Erwos said, nV has really been pushing ATi lately, which is great for the GPU industry as far as competition is concerned (and the reason why the GPU industry has moved so fast), but this is almost moving into the anti-competitive realm. I hope the licensing deals with ATi that ULi had don't fall out, that's just harsh, but at the same time, other than southbridges, who can say that ULi was really competition?

It would seem that Nvidia is trying to do "actual damage" to ATi Corp. It's like Nvida is waging war and is not going to develop a consceince any time soon. The time of "healthy" competition appears to have passed. I wonder if this is a retaliation for that slideshow ATI published recently. That would be funny. Nv spending 50+ million just to get payback. Just a thought.

The good thing is that both Nvidia and ATI are not run by fanboys to get upset by PR slides. Ahh, if only you had proof this were true, that would be great!

Originally posted by: Nvidia Press Release
NVIDIA intends to supply ULi customers with current products for the foreseeable future.

:laugh:

What's funny about the last comment? I think that is terrific! It means ATI will still get the southbridges they need right? The only thing that worries me is the "foreseeable future" comment. That could change in a heartbeat.

Anyways, no idea why you're laughing, care to share the joke? -Cheers

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Rollo
It's nice you're "pretty sure" Creig, do you have a link to this info so people considering purchases have something more to go on?

No, I don't. But do you honestly think there wouldn't be one given the size of the companies involved and the amount of money/hardware at stake? Come on.

Originally posted by: Rollo
A. Who's "Wesley Fink"? AT reviewer?
B. It seems to me I saw AT bash the ATI Southbridge in their review(s)?

A. Who is Wesley Fink? :Q He's been an active AT reviewer for a couple years now.
B. Apparently Wesley seems to think the SB450 has received unfair criticism due to its USB 2.0 benchmark and lack of SATA-II. Real world performance means more to AT users than benchmark graphs.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2617&p=12

 

[Killrose]

This is just bad news in general, but a smart long term move by nVidia. Lets face it, ULi has not been well represented by any Motherboard maker in the western world. Look at the excellent ULi 1695 chipset which offered AGP/PCI-e option on the same board with excellent performance, yet no-one embraced it.

ATi had best order up on those Southbridge chipsets before nVidia smashes the dies, because that is exactly what is going to happen the day the deal closes. ULi must have been close to releasing an SLi capable chipset or something that had nVidia pretty worried.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Killrose
This is just bad news in general, but a smart long term move by nVidia. Lets face it, ULi has not been well represented by any Motherboard maker in the western world. Look at the excellent ULi 1695 chipset which offered AGP/PCI-e option on the same board with excellent performance, yet no-one embraced it.

ATi had best order up on those Southbridge chipsets before nVidia smashes the dies, because that is exactly what is going to happen the day the deal closes. ULi must have been close to releasing an SLi capable chipset or something that had nVidia pretty worried.

Could we be seeing Nforce5 chipset that can do both AGP AND PCi-e? For those people with an AGP card, transistion to PCI-e is no problem, just buy this mother board, and maybe later on spend money on your new GFX card. This would be pretty damn awesome.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
LOL I can't wait to see the spin nVidia fans put on this one - especially the ones that were saying ULi is trash. Now they'll do a 180 and praise it since nVidia is buying them out.

Teh Devil!

This nVidia fan still isn't totally sold on ULI(ALI), but is LOL at how smart of a business move this is.

As noted by me in other threads, it's obvious the ULI Southbridge is a big improvement over ATIs crappy one, so at very least nVidia gets to choose whether or not any Crossfire motherboards will have ULI Southbridges.

Merry Christmas ATI, here's your coal.

Or better yet, Ati can make crossfire compatible with any dual pcie board, and let Nv do all the hard work figuring out how to make their proprietary crap even more proprietary.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
What's funny about the last comment? I think that is terrific! It means ATI will still get the southbridges they need right? The only thing that worries me is the "foreseeable future" comment. That could change in a heartbeat.

Anyways, no idea why you're laughing, care to share the joke? -Cheers

The joke (quote) was meant to be subtle.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Killrose
This is just bad news in general, but a smart long term move by nVidia. Lets face it, ULi has not been well represented by any Motherboard maker in the western world. Look at the excellent ULi 1695 chipset which offered AGP/PCI-e option on the same board with excellent performance, yet no-one embraced it.

My thoughts exactly. Well said.

Originally posted by: Killrose
ATi had best order up on those Southbridge chipsets before nVidia smashes the dies, because that is exactly what is going to happen the day the deal closes. ULi must have been close to releasing an SLi capable chipset or something that had nVidia pretty worried.

I would still be HIGHLY surprised if ATI/ULi don't have some sort of licensing agreement in place that will ensure availablility of ULi southbridges currently in use on ATI motherboards.