I've always wondered about that. It would seem to be a revenue stream that they are just forgoing completely.....letting VIA, nVidia, SiS, etc., reap the financial benefits of AMD's lack of participation in this category.
Take Intel. With every new processor release, there are at least two chipsets released along with the processors. Want a C2D? Sure thing....do you want a 975 or 965 chipset to go with that? (Admittedly, nVidia did get around to releasing a host of chipsets for the Intel chips, but on the C2D release, the 975/965 chipsets were the only players out there.)
So, when C2D came out, Intel sold almost as many chipsets as they did processors, not to mention all the licensing fees the mb manufacturers pay and the like.
AMD, on the other hand, has almost always maintained that they depend upon 3rd party development for chipsets for motherboards that run their processors. I really find that curious in that, not only just casting aside a whole revenue stream that could do the company a lot of good to its bottom line, but it would seem to me that a chipset would have to be developed and constructed just to develop and test a new processor. You have to have something to run the cpu on during its development and testing on different OS's.
So, since AMD's last chipset foray was approx. 4 years ago, and failed quite nicely, maybe that's why AMD really purchased ATI....not for their graphics expertise (although that will be a nice benefit), but more for ATI's ability to bring to market functional motherboard chipsets.....such 690 chipset and 790 chipsets, which are really nothing more than rebranded ATI chipsets.
Of course, Barcelona is on the horizon......and while AMD is close to finalizing the cpu, they've only just released the cpu to motherboard manufacturers to get to work on their BIOS setups. Seems to me a complete waste of time and money for AMD.....AMD should have a complete lineup of working chipsets and BIOS's for the Barcelona already.
So, why does AMD ignore this profitable arena? Lack of production capability? Lack of production skill? What?
Take Intel. With every new processor release, there are at least two chipsets released along with the processors. Want a C2D? Sure thing....do you want a 975 or 965 chipset to go with that? (Admittedly, nVidia did get around to releasing a host of chipsets for the Intel chips, but on the C2D release, the 975/965 chipsets were the only players out there.)
So, when C2D came out, Intel sold almost as many chipsets as they did processors, not to mention all the licensing fees the mb manufacturers pay and the like.
AMD, on the other hand, has almost always maintained that they depend upon 3rd party development for chipsets for motherboards that run their processors. I really find that curious in that, not only just casting aside a whole revenue stream that could do the company a lot of good to its bottom line, but it would seem to me that a chipset would have to be developed and constructed just to develop and test a new processor. You have to have something to run the cpu on during its development and testing on different OS's.
So, since AMD's last chipset foray was approx. 4 years ago, and failed quite nicely, maybe that's why AMD really purchased ATI....not for their graphics expertise (although that will be a nice benefit), but more for ATI's ability to bring to market functional motherboard chipsets.....such 690 chipset and 790 chipsets, which are really nothing more than rebranded ATI chipsets.
Of course, Barcelona is on the horizon......and while AMD is close to finalizing the cpu, they've only just released the cpu to motherboard manufacturers to get to work on their BIOS setups. Seems to me a complete waste of time and money for AMD.....AMD should have a complete lineup of working chipsets and BIOS's for the Barcelona already.
So, why does AMD ignore this profitable arena? Lack of production capability? Lack of production skill? What?
Facebook
Twitter