News
 

Bookmark and Share

(16) 

Originally deployed in 1993, PCI bus will not be supported by performance-mainstream and value chipsets from Intel Corp., the globe’s largest supplier of core-logic sets and microprocessors. As a result, mainboard manufacturers and makers of peripheral cards will have to switch to PCI Express-supporting chips or to stick with other chipsets.

According to sources familiar with Intel’s plans, the company’s H67, P67 and H61 core-logic sets – which are intended for code-named Sandy-Bridge platforms with LGA1155 form-factors – will no longer support PCI bus. At the same time, business- and enterprise-oriented Q67, Q65 and B65 will retain for support of PCI bus.

Considering the fact that a lot of controllers, including audio processors and some outdated network chips, still use outdated PCI bus. As a result, mainboard makers utilizing them will have to replace the older chips with newer PCIe flavours. Moreover, those consumers, who still use products like Sound Blaster PCI audio cards will also have to get something more contemporary.

Considering the fact that PCI (33MHz, 32-bit) bus only provides up to 133MB/s of bandwidth, it is natural that its performance is no longer relevant for modern personal computers.

Intel did not comment on the news-story.

Tags: Intel, 32nm, PCI

Discussion

Comments currently: 16
Discussion started: 06/10/10 12:47:43 PM
Latest comment: 06/18/10 04:34:01 AM
Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-5]

1. 
While this makes technological sense, it doesn't make market sense in my opinion. There's just too many PCI cards out there and to tell people to switch to PCIe counterparts doesn't make sense especially in the value or mainstream category. Not everyone will be willing to switch all their cards. I know that HTPC builders won't be happy because a lot of the TV tuners are PCI cards. I know people like me who buy sound cards won't be happy because most sound cards marketed out there are using PCI bus.

While 133 MB/s isn't a lot of bandwidth, they are more than sufficient for sound cards and maybe even TV tuners. So to completely phase them out now doesn't make sense. They should gradually phase it out instead of dropping it completely.

I have a feeling motherboard manufacturers might be forced to add an external PCI bus that's connected to a PCIe x1 lane to supply PCI slots for their customers because I believe there will still be demand for PCI slots for at least another half decade.
0 0 [Posted by: deltatux  | Date: 06/10/10 12:47:43 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
A lot of people use onboard audio these days and there is a good selection of PCIe sound cards.
Most of the newer TV cards (that support HD) use PCIe or USB.
PCI is as dead as parallel ports and PS/2 ports.
0 0 [Posted by: JonMCC33  | Date: 06/12/10 08:09:48 PM]
Reply
 
You must be joking. Most of abovementioned cards doesnt come nowhere near 133MB/s. And USB solutions for TV tuner or audio card were always resered as last resort solution for notebook users. Not for desktops.
So we could say intel kills desktop versatility and in intels highly praised notebook/netbook world theres no change at all.

btw. USB slutions were always lower end comparing it to obsolete PCI 32b bus.
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 06/18/10 04:17:53 AM]
Reply
 
Yes most motherboard manufacturers will add this for a while. So this is actually a gradual phase-out. Intel can make modern, power-efficient, cheap boards, and if you want extra stuff you can buy from another manufacturer who has added extra chips. It makes sense to have this product diversity.
0 0 [Posted by: CSMR  | Date: 06/13/10 07:49:25 AM]
Reply
 
And how to "gradually phase out"? PCI bus is a parallel bus, so wether you have 1 slot or 3, it's the same for the chipset. So the only step Intel could take is "OFF". And they are doing it gradualy....the Q6x chipsets will still have them.
But unless somebody takes this step, the card-makers will NOT switch willingly. Why develop something new when the existing still brings money?

And I've been waiting for this for a while.... I keep looking for a PCIe-only 2x16+2x1 (even 2x8+2x4) microATX board for a year, and I only found about 3 models (models, not makers) for LGA1156.
When I bought my X-Fi, I WAS looking for PCIe.
0 0 [Posted by: mathew7  | Date: 06/14/10 08:19:50 AM]
Reply
 
And I also am looking for PCIe network card...but nooo...only a pretty expensive Intel and a nowhere-to-be-found-in-my-country DLink. And I need it for a mini-itx router which has 1 PCIe slot. But I'm forced to use a USB-to-ethernet because "someone" won't keep pace with tech.
And before you call me "enthusiast", niche market, I only use one ATI 5850 with Intel's E8400 and DDR2.
0 0 [Posted by: mathew7  | Date: 06/14/10 08:25:59 AM]
Reply

2. 
Nevermind what Intel does ... They also "imposed" BTX but AMD stoped all over that .. They've also changed 4 sockets while AMD used Socket 7 for so many years and the same happened with Socket A and AM2+ later ... They like to believe that they are trendsetter but they aren't.
0 0 [Posted by: East17  | Date: 06/10/10 03:46:15 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
AMD has had Socket A, Socket 754, Socket 939, Socket AM2, Socket AM2+, Socket AM3...really, it's pathetic to point out Intel's number of sockets. Socket 478 lasted quite some time as did LGA775.
0 0 [Posted by: JonMCC33  | Date: 06/12/10 08:15:35 PM]
Reply
 
s939/s940/AM2/AM2+/AM3 are all phisically same sockets

And AMD has their IMC (memory ctrl) integrated on a die far ahead intel. So obviously they couldnt let ignorant people put CPU that requires ddr2 memory onto ddr mainboard. There's als a huge discrepancy in memory leap from but thats not AMDs fault (and for you to learn)
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 06/18/10 04:25:36 AM]
Reply
 
They were also 1st on DDR3, 1st to implement (or at least mass-produce) so many die-shrinks.
So no...they are not trendsetters because of BTX, P4D, EM64T and Itanium (I don't know more big mistakes from them)!
0 0 [Posted by: mathew7  | Date: 06/14/10 08:32:40 AM]
Reply
 
LOL. Why aren't they trendsetters?

Wait you meant same ddr3 modules used for lga775 core2 chips that CAME OUT INCOMPATIMLE for lga1366/1156 sockets with IMC integrated on Nehalem die. :lol:
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 06/18/10 04:29:08 AM]
Reply
 
But they are trendsetters

The only thing is how much nonliterate people are willing to spend for the new shiny pearls :rofl:
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 06/18/10 04:21:30 AM]
Reply

3. 
good for intel. obsolete technology should be dropped when possible if there is to be any progress.
0 0 [Posted by: taltamir  | Date: 06/11/10 02:40:36 PM]
Reply

4. 
The only PCI device left that I still use is my Audigy2 ZS. Onboard sound just isn't good enough and as long as I have a PCI slot I will continue to use the Audigy2 ZS.
0 0 [Posted by: JonMCC33  | Date: 06/12/10 08:08:14 PM]
Reply

5. 
I don't get why some of you get all bent out of shape over Intel getting rid of ~20 year old technology. The PCI Bus needs to go. This will allow more space for more PCIe lanes so they can allow the chipsets to handle newer technology like SATA6 and USB3.

Now granted these first chipsets won't have USB3 yet but Intel is getting the industry ready for the demise of the old tech and in with the new tech.

I applaud this move by Intel and I do have an X-Fi sound card that uses the PCI Bus. However, if you buy a new mobo with this new chipset, you will most likely HAVE to build a whole new system to go with it. It will use a different socket than any processor out now (1155) so you can't just plug in your old CPU into this new board anyway.

So basically keep what you have as is, and simply build a new PC with the newer chipset based Mobos.

It's not rocket science.
0 0 [Posted by: iLLz  | Date: 06/14/10 03:27:32 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
You meant Intel needs more pci-e bandwidth for SATA6 and USB3 in their crappy little chipsets? At the same time while AMD has rationally scaled that same pci-e to gave us full bandwidth USB3/SATA6 support in already available SB850, while preserving that "obsolete tech" inside it.

You really think it's die space that thing intel is looking for?
0 0 [Posted by: OmegaHuman  | Date: 06/18/10 04:34:01 AM]
Reply

[1-5]

Add your Comment




Related news

Latest News

Monday, July 21, 2014

12:56 pm | Microsoft to Fire 18,000 Employees to Boost Efficiency. Microsoft to Perform Massive Job Cut Ever Following Acquisition of Nokia

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

6:11 am | Apple Teams Up with IBM to Make iPhone and iPad Ultimate Tools for Businesses and Enterprises. IBM to Sell Business-Optimized iPhone and iPad Devices

Monday, July 14, 2014

6:01 am | IBM to Invest $3 Billion In Research of Next-Gen Chips, Process Technologies. IBM to Fund Development of 7nm and Below Process Technologies, Help to Create Post-Silicon Future

5:58 am | Intel Postpones Launch of High-End “Broadwell-K” Processors to July – September, 2015. High-End Core i “Broadwell” Processors Scheduled to Arrive in Q3 2015

5:50 am | Intel Delays Introduction of Core M “Broadwell” Processors Further. Low-Power Broadwell Chips Due in Late 2014