Nvidia 680i supports Penryn

hey guys

Penryn is supported on 680i boards....."unofficially" ;) :D

Dinos22

Yay let's kill our D9's while using Penryn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zytek_Fan

Yay let's kill our D9's while using Penryn.

---

lol ^^^^ you do know that ANY motherboard will kill RAM if you run high vdimm
evga statemment basically said that...look like you didn't read it properly :rolleyes:

I'd like to see some pics before I believe a random statement like that.

I thought Penryn needs didn't voltage regulation, so how is it suppose to support it without a motherboard revision?

Tell us more :D

any way you can tell us exaclty what 680i boards? itd make me feel alot better about this dfi 680lt board i just bought not even 2 weeks ago

Yay!!! Now if I could only get my C2D stable :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

hey guys

Penryn is supported on 680i boards....."unofficially" ;) :D

Dinos22

---

Did you hear this on the grapevine or through your own testing (in which case you are probably bound by NDA which is why your statement was so vague).

Good news if so. However the 680i isnt that great at high FSB overclocking particularry with quad core. With the FSB bump of penryn i'm not sure it would be my board of choice anyway.

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

---

:up: no need to upgrade just yet then.

@I)ickie

most people with quads are asing QX CPUs but since E6600 with 9xmulti will be available for cheap very soon you'd want a decent FSB if you are an extreme clocker.....for 24/7 i don't think there will be many Q6600 CPUs running 3.6GHz lol

even QX CPUs are sorting averaging around 3.3-3.4GHz on 24/7 systems....due to the heat output....

but if you stick it under DICE or LN2 you'd probably be safer with P35 boards unless there will be another revision which supports even higher quad OCs.... :)

How about P965? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

---

lol maybe this will add a little more weight to my post :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

lol ^^^^ you do know that ANY motherboard will kill RAM if you run high vdimm
evga statemment basically said that...look like you didn't read it properly :rolleyes:

---

Yeah, I know :)

The statement said 2.4v will kill RAM on any mobo...which is a little excessive, you can get to DDR2-1000 to DDR2-1100 on 2.2v...

Chipset support and actual board design is not the same. Remember BX rev 302 and earlier also were 975 but they didn't support Conroe without extra hard mods

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

@I)ickie

most people with quads are asing QX CPUs but since E6600 with 9xmulti will be available for cheap very soon you'd want a decent FSB if you are an extreme clocker.....for 24/7 i don't think there will be many Q6600 CPUs running 3.6GHz lol

even QX CPUs are sorting averaging around 3.3-3.4GHz on 24/7 systems....due to the heat output....

but if you stick it under DICE or LN2 you'd probably be safer with P35 boards unless there will be another revision which supports even higher quad OCs.... :)

---

I agree that with the current quad cores it's not so much a prob cause their default fsb is 1066 and as you say their heat output is limiting overclocks. Since the better 680i boards can usually muster around the 400fsb mark max most of the time with a multi locked CPU you will hit a CPU or cooling limit before board limit.

However the transition to 45nm of penryn will mean lower heat output and higher potential clocks. Taking this into consideration and the fact that penryn is reported to be 333fsb as opposed to 266 and you are hitting some serious limitations. max of 67fsb overclock unless you are using a QX.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

---

On current boards? Obviously 680i will run penryn, 865 runs conroe. But will current 680i boards vrm work with penryn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I)ickie

However the transition to 45nm of penryn will mean lower heat output and higher potential clocks. Taking this into consideration and the fact that penryn is reported to be 333fsb as opposed to 266 and you are hitting some serious limitations. max of 67fsb overclock unless you are using a QX.

---

we all hope you're right about penryn :D
wouldn't it be nice to run they at 4GHz 24/7 :eek: :D
i guess we'll see

maybe fugger can tell us about the CPUs......i know they are in the wild but not sure who's got any heh

I remember seeing on anandtech that a motherboard was modded in order to support penryn, but I cant remember if it was a 680i or not and unfortunately I cant find the article as of now. It is reasonable that it would work because the 680i boards support the higher FSB, but that may mean you are already pushing the boards and their overclocks will be hurt. I really wish I had a time machine because im still torn between getting a new pc now and throwing a penryn in later or waiting to get the new motherboards etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nistomax

I remember seeing on anandtech that a motherboard was modded in order to support penryn, but I cant remember if it was a 680i or not and unfortunately I cant find the article as of now. It is reasonable that it would work because the 680i boards support the higher FSB, but that may mean you are already pushing the boards and their overclocks will be hurt. I really wish I had a time machine because im still torn between getting a new pc now and throwing a penryn in later or waiting to get the new motherboards etc.

---

i think that was a badaxe you are talking about

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

i think that was a badaxe you are talking about

---

I second that, that is what I recall also.

Is it only 680i boards or do 650-SLI boards also support 45nm?

Penryn should still use the VRM11.0 spec, its first Nehalem that uses 11.1

So the only issue I can see should be something like missing 1333FSB support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shintai

So the only issue I can see should be something like missing 1333FSB support.

---

Which is already there.

yeah yeah....but the FSB limitations are still with the 680i...so how will you gain any benefit from a penryn using a 680i chipset?

maybe a 45nm quaddie will be a bit cooler i suppose.

anyway; it wouldn't surprise me if a penryn will function in a 680i board (hey i am hoping they will)...so please someone be a guinea pig :D and plonk a penryn in their 680i :surf:

i sure as hell arent going to fry a new yorkfield without some proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

---

great news :)

FSB 1333Mhz is unofficialy supported on 680i mobo ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trouffman

FSB 1333Mhz is unofficialy supported on 680i mobo ;)

---

it would be wouldn't it considering Penryn will work with it :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamsleath

yeah yeah....but the FSB limitations are still with the 680i...so how will you gain any benefit from a penryn using a 680i chipset?

---

Penryn + SLI

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813188019

FSB - 1333/1066/800MHz

Quote:

---

Yes, they will be supported on the 680i chipset

-EVGA Tech Team

-----Original Message-----
From: (Private)
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 6:34 PM
To: EVGA Tech
Subject: customer comment or question [ME-070529-784738]

Customer Comment or Question

Name: Warboy
Email Address: (Private)
Subject: nForce 680i Motherboards
Comment: Will the EVGA nForce 680i motherboards support 45nm Intel
processors when they come out?

---

didnt we already go over this once? i thought we did and came to the same conclusion:)

so the 1333 support on the current 650sli and 680sli is meant for those cpu released on july 22?

So, Is 680i the only board that is supposed to support Penryn? What about those with x975 chipsets? I don't want to replace my P5W DH just yet.....

so,just need update the BIOS to support penryn?

any VRM Mod??

Quote:

---

FSB 1333Mhz is unofficialy supported on 680i mobo

---

that is :banana::banana::banana::banana:, 680i Supports 1333 FSB officaly and was the first Chipset wich support it officaly.

My question in Penryn on 680i is the FSB, some 680i Board can't go to 1333 with Quadcores and 45nm QC will be the same too.
So 680i with 45nm QC is nothing for OC like nforce500 for Core 2 Duo.

Yes also curious if it runs on 975's too. I guess a mobo upgrade isn't out of the question but it might be nice to put that off but still get a Penryn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.X

So, Is 680i the only board that is supposed to support Penryn? What about those with x975 chipsets? I don't want to replace my P5W DH just yet.....

---

P35 and X38 motherboards support Penryn too.
x975 chipset can support Penryn, but your P5W DH won't.

Edit:
What is what?:
Wolfdale = desktop dual core?
YorkField = desktop quad core?

Penryn= server?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

@I)ickie

most people with quads are asing QX CPUs but since E6600 with 9xmulti will be available for cheap very soon you'd want a decent FSB if you are an extreme clocker.....for 24/7 i don't think there will be many Q6600 CPUs running 3.6GHz lol

even QX CPUs are sorting averaging around 3.3-3.4GHz on 24/7 systems....due to the heat output....

but if you stick it under DICE or LN2 you'd probably be safer with P35 boards unless there will be another revision which supports even higher quad OCs.... :)

---

This is very promising, well........I can only hope :-p.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xoqolatl

Penryn + SLI

---

:clap: :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

maybe fugger can tell us about the CPUs......i know they are in the wild but not sure who's got any heh

---

Yes that would be nice, but we know better than to ask since the people that have them here likely didn't find them on eBay (thus NDA'd).

I have noticed that Penryn ES chips are not available through other channels, and unless I'm mistaken, the Conroe ES chips were here a bit earlier in the year. So whereas Conroe was released around July 27th, I would expect Penryn to be Oct/Nov timeframe. I still have my money on Intel getting to retail before AMD with Barcelona/Agena, but earlier in the year I would have expected Penryn retail chips by July/August. Oh well.

I'll keep waiting for that awesome day when I come to the forums and there's a topic in the Intel forum titled "Penryn ES first benches!" or something. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andypro1

I'll keep waiting for that awesome day when I come to the forums and there's a topic in the Intel forum titled "Penryn ES first benches!" or something. :)

---

you sound excited

heh

it will be a good addition for sure.....from some hints heheheh :D but that could be from extra cache they have donno

the most important info will be OC capability but we have to be patient as i don't think there will be too many people talking about results just yet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

hey guys

Penryn is supported on 680i boards....."unofficially" ;) :D

Dinos22

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FUGGER

I can assure you Penryn runs on 680i

---

excellent, can't wait for penryn chips..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Envydia007

How about P965? :D

---

its quite possible .... unless im reading something wrong :rolleyes:

i wounder if my jinu117 phase unit will be able to hold a penryn

i sure hope so

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vassili

P35 and X38 motherboards support Penryn too.
x975 chipset can support Penryn, but your P5W DH won't.

Edit:
What is what?:
Wolfdale = desktop dual core?
YorkField = desktop quad core?

Penryn= server?

---

You say that x975 can support Penryn, yet my P5W DH won't? Why is that? Last time I checked it had a x975 chipset. Does is it have to do with voltage or something?

Maybe we can expect some ''unofficial'' support then? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamsleath

july 22nd...hopefully someone gets their hands on one b4 then


any guesses on what c2d will be the penryn of choice?

...besides e6850.

:sonic: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/....php?p=2218206

---

The e6850 is a 1333fsb conroe rather than penryn.

I would expect the 45nm chips to be a part of a new chip series rather than using the ?6??0 of the 65nm parts, otherwise your not left with any room to ramp up the clocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

There's some good :banana::banana::banana::banana: under that IHS. :D

---

Hello 4GHz? :D

FLG_Poncho - you probably know the answer to this (and hopefully aren't under NDA for this SPECIFIC question).

Is macro-Ops Fusion enabled for 64-bit in the Penryn series?

This was one of the significant drawbacks for Conroe/Kentsfield. When you went from 32 to 64-bit code there was a decent drop in performance b/c this wasn't available.

TIA

This just doesn't get any better umm, lets see G92, Yorkfield on 680i & Crysis
all in time for the jolly ol' red suit i think i'll probably have all the bells and whistles i want for my ultimate rig!!!:up:

This thread has more rumour and speculation every minute, it would make Fud
envious ;)

So now, it looks like it will run on the 680; we also know it will run on the P35
and the X38; furthermore, initial testing was done on a modified 975.

Are 965 and 975 (and 650) capable of running them, or do they require vrm
mods? How hard are these mods?
Could someone please clear this up?
Thx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank M

This thread has more rumour and speculation every minute, it would make Fud
envious ;)

---

I'll speculate that some of the speculation here is not really speculation at all. :)

I hope the RD600 will too, I don't want to switch motherboard anytime soon.

RD600 will not officially support penryn as Ati doesn't have a 1333fsb licence. Quite whether it will be able to unofficially run them is another thing altogether.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by billdavis

i wounder if my jinu117 phase unit will be able to hold a penryn

i sure hope so

---

If it can hold a Kentsfield, Penryn will be no different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank M

Are 965 and 975 (and 650) capable of running them, or do they require vrm
mods? How hard are these mods?
Could someone please clear this up?
Thx.

---

apparently the 'Santa rosa' Desktop PM965 will support it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown

apparently the 'Santa rosa' Desktop PM965 will support it

---

they will support mobile chips you mean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onewingedangel

The e6850 is a 1333fsb conroe rather than penryn.

I would expect the 45nm chips to be a part of a new chip series rather than using the ?6??0 of the 65nm parts, otherwise your not left with any room to ramp up the clocks.

---

:confused: so what is a penryn?:shrug:

wolfdale. 2cores

yorkfield. 2x2cores, or "native" quad core :shrug:

45nm.


...so the the 6850 etc are just revised step 1333fsb??? c2d :shrug:


what about ridgefield?

im so confused (vinny barbarino voice)

Penryn is a collective name for revised Conroe uarch and 45nm process. Conroe was such a name, too, but it was also a codename of specific core; Allendale, Kentsfield and Clovertown are analogic to Wolfdale and Yorkfield.
Also Yorkfield is not a native quad core - native means there are four core on single silicon piece (like AMD's K10). Kentsfield, CLovertown and Yorkfield consist of two silicon pieces on one PCB under one IHS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

Not sure... I'm more chipset/platform focused, though I would guess that it's the same as previous Conroe CPUs. As I understand it there wasn't a drop in performance going from 32 to 64 bit.... just not as much of an improvement compared to other 64 bit CPUs. A lot of theories exist for this.... and the one I side with is that Intel doesn't want to take marketshare from the Itanium line so they focus more on 32 bit performance. Just a guess though. :D

---

The MacroOP fusion in long(64bit) mode is disabled because the instructions are some longer(48bits in average) and the 24byte fetcher is unable to fetch enough instructions which can be fused. This has nothing to do with Itanium, because Core2 and Itanium are different architectures, are using different OS-es and software and are not competing anyhow. If Itanium has a competitor on the 64bit field that would be Opteron 8xx/8xxx.


On topic, I wouldn't use Penryn on a board without P35.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xoqolatl

Penryn is a collective name for revised Conroe uarch and 45nm process. Conroe was such a name, too, but it was also a codename of specific core; Allendale, Kentsfield and Clovertown are analogic to Wolfdale and Yorkfield.

---

Actually, Penryn is the codename for the mobile version of the 45nm shrink Core microarchitecture, the successor to Merom.

Conroe never covered the whole family (Merom was used initially), and only refers to the desktop version of 65nm Core µarch MPU.

Long story short:
(market) 65nm Core µA -> 45nm Core µA

(mobile DC) Merom -> Penryn

(desktop DC) Conroe -> Wolfdale
(desktop QC) Kentsfield -> Yorkfield

(server DC) Woodcrest -> ???
(server QC) Clovertown -> Harpertown

mmm i'v since read some of the penryn desktop thread and it is all as clear as mud now :)

anyone have specific details on why a penryn would NOT function in motherboards other than p35?

i mean the p35 is just better all round and has wicked quad core clocking potential doesnt it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

Bios and CPLD code.... that's it provided the board supports Core2Duo CPUs.

---

Are you sure that's it? AFAIK, there are conflicting rumors about penryn needing a new VRM version on the mobo (kind of like only some of the later 975 boards support Conroe), which no BIOS code could correct.

nvm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

hey guys

Penryn is supported on 680i boards....."unofficially" ;) :D

Dinos22

---

any chipset that supports c2d will support 45nm chips afaik.
the important thing is the vrm spec of the mainboard, not the chipset i thought?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

Yes I'm sure. Everybody that I've talked to, as well as every board that I've enabled 45nm CPUs on just needed updates to the Bios and/or CPLD code. The only VRM update in the future is VRM11.1, and that won't happen until the Nehalem architechture. The Spec for Penryn calls for VRM11.0

---

Good news! :woot:

if that vrm thing is the same then hopefully a bios update will magically appear sometime (abracadabra...woosh)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamsleath

mmm i'v since read some of the penryn desktop thread and it is all as clear as mud now :)

anyone have specific details on why a penryn would NOT function in motherboards other than p35?

i mean the p35 is just better all round and has wicked quad core clocking potential doesnt it?

---

while we're on topic of quad cores

there will be another revision coming out soon Rev.D with even better quad core OC potential :) :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

Can it support Penryn? With a bios fix.... yes. Will it support Penryn? That's 150% up to Asus. The board is capable, provided it supports Conroe, but it needs to have it's software updated in order to run Penryn. Now.... look at it this way: If you were Asus, or any company for that matter, and see on the horizon a CPU that is badass and that everybody will want.... do you try and capitalize on it and force people to purchase a new board? Or do you make it so those people can upgrade without putting another dime in your pocket? A shady thing to do? Meh.... maybe, but that's the reality. I love when people blame INtel for new sockets, chipsets that don't support new CPUs, etc. It has little to do with INtel since the motherboard companies want you to have to buy new boards.... well, intel does as well but to a lesser degree. Intel makes it money from the OEMs that will buy new chipsets regardless.

---

let's hope not. but you miss the fact that some brands might support penryn with a simple Bios-Update and do you think the disappointed Asus-board-owners would buy the next Asus? I don't think so and if you look at it this way such a behaviour could easily backfire ;)

all my Boards up to now were from Asus, but if my P5W-DH doesn't support Penryn but other 975X do, then it was the last Asus I bought ;) I'm sure I'm not the only one who would react in this way. we got several good brands out there, so why not try another?

Please change the thread title because is not just i680 that will support Penryn.

There are many motherboards that supports 1333.

OK, so what do you do if you have to buy a new board right now? Do you pay more for a maybe not very good P35 board, or do you buy a cheaper and kick-ass P965 board like the DFI or QuadGT and hope that somehow they will support Penryn? :confused:

haven't heard of any current P965 board with VRM required to run Penryns:confused:

Wasn't one of the points of this thread that the VRM for Penryn is in fact the same as for Conroe (VRM 11.0) and only Nehalem will need an update to 11.1? In that case what's to stop people modding the BIOS to support Penryn, even if Intel and mobo manufacturers won't offer official support?

little birdie was not 100% clear whether all 680i boards have VRM 11.1......so i can't answer that question...

http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/12619

Quote:

---

Ragones told me existing nForce 600-series mobos already support Intel's upcoming 45nm Penryn processors and 1333MHz front-side bus speeds.

---

Thanks FLG Poncho.

You heard it guys, no need to argue the point any longer :horse:

I want to see Intel official statement before I believe it.

But apart from the fact that 680 runs penryn fine, we still dont know anything, right? Its still not clear if it runs on 965 or 975 :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neon Biker

Wasn't one of the points of this thread that the VRM for Penryn is in fact the same as for Conroe (VRM 11.0) and only Nehalem will need an update to 11.1? In that case what's to stop people modding the BIOS to support Penryn, even if Intel and mobo manufacturers won't offer official support?

---

This is what I have been able to gather, Intel demoed Penryn initially on 975 or 965, the P35 has official support, and with this rumor (and it is currently a rumor as I understand), it appears that the VRM 11.0 spec for Penryn is valid... I have not noticed anything official from Intel though....

Jack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

I work for Intel and I'm currently working on enabling 45nm CPUs on current server/workstation platforms... I'm also working on the design for the reference board for Nehalem and I can tell you.... Penryn DOES NOT need 11.1 and that 11.1 isn't even available yet and won't be for another couple months which means that the reference boards that are currently being used for Penryn validation DO NOT have 11.1 and won't at launch.

---

Thank you very much FLG_Poncho, it is greatly appreciated :D

FLP_Poncho -- thanks for clearing it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

I work for Intel and I'm currently working on enabling 45nm CPUs on current server/workstation platforms... I'm also working on the design for the reference board for Nehalem and I can tell you.... Penryn DOES NOT need 11.1 and that 11.1 isn't even available yet and won't be for another couple months which means that the reference boards that are currently being used for Penryn validation DO NOT have 11.1 and won't at launch.

Now...that doesn't mean that Penryn will work on retail 965, 975, or 680 platforms. Yes... the hardware is capapble but it needs software updates (Bios/CPLD) to make it work and whether or not manufactures enable it is up to them and their agreements with Intel. Don't count on it working... hope that it does but prepare yourself in case it doesn't.

---

Thank you very much for your statement. So Penryn will work fine on all 1333FSB mainboards that have a updated Bios/CPLD.
That should put an end to all the speculation.

Yeah, we pretty much knew that already. The question remains which boards (if any) will have official support and if they won't will someone be able to do a BIOS mod? :confused:

EVGATech_JacobF has confirmed that EVGA will be releasing the BIOS needed to run Penryn on the 680i.

http://evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=57172 post #13 sums it all up :)

now I hope that the p5n32-e plus supports penryn and gets a new bios update.

what about the p5n-e sli?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FLG_Poncho

I work for Intel and I'm currently working on enabling 45nm CPUs on current server/workstation platforms... I'm also working on the design for the reference board for Nehalem and I can tell you.... Penryn DOES NOT need 11.1 and that 11.1 isn't even available yet and won't be for another couple months which means that the reference boards that are currently being used for Penryn validation DO NOT have 11.1 and won't at launch.

Now...that doesn't mean that Penryn will work on retail 965, 975, or 680 platforms. Yes... the hardware is capapble but it needs software updates (Bios/CPLD) to make it work and whether or not manufactures enable it is up to them and their agreements with Intel. Don't count on it working... hope that it does but prepare yourself in case it doesn't.

---

good to see an Intel guy confirming older VRM spec works provided bioses support the newer CPUs :)

someone needs to update your account status too i think ;) :)

...so now that the ball is in the motherboard makers' court; i'd say fat chance...unless the mobo makers want to keep selling "old" 965/975/680 motherboards.

i'd give it a 50/50 chance of a bios update at this point in time.

if there is a higher marketshare in 965/975/680/650 boards over newer p35/38 boards then it would make sense to make the older boards compatible with newer intel chips... but that's just wot i think.

i dont think there is a big enough performance difference with penryn chips to "force" everyone to dump their old platforms for a p35/38...

i'd say the mainstream does not turf out a computer once a year, but could easily be tempted into plopping in another faster cpu; but that's the whole point of this thread is it not?

dumping an old mobo isnt that much of a big deal these days cos most of them cost less than a mid-to high-end cpu.

intel should be promoting wide compatibility with new cpu's to increase sales, while i would think that mobo makers will probably be trying to sell more new boards...but to the mobo manufacturers; i dont think they could care less what they sell, but that they sell XX thousands of YY units at ZZ price.

If the majority of buyers already have 965/975/680, then i doubt whether they will go out of their way to kill off p35/38 sales.

if you have a relative product monopoly you can treat the customers like offal and what can the customer do? they can either buy it or not buy it.

i don't think there will be too many of them jumping into Penryn support

afterall they have to sell newer ones coming out :rolleyes:

Do you think there will be many jumping into Barcelona support? According to Anand, there will be lots of heavy BIOS tweaking to accomodate, while for Penryn, BIOS is only updated for recognition.

i thought barcelona was to be compatible with existing AM2 boards.

....but i havent heard anyting about a new nvidia SLI chipset for Intel Penryn.

I think there is a new Nvidia SLI chipset planned for Phenom, but havent heard any details

Barcelona will be with BIOS update. So will Penryn. Penryn BIOS updates are said to be only to recognize the CPU.

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=3006
AMD's partners just recently received their first "production quality" Barcelona samples, and as expected, the current boards required some heavy BIOS work before the new chips would even work, much less perform up to the expectations set by AMD.

Cool makes me happy I went with the EVGA 680i A1:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dinos22

i don't think there will be too many of them jumping into Penryn support

afterall they have to sell newer ones coming out :rolleyes:

---

I so hope your wrong on that dinos22, as there will be alot of peed off people that paid $450+(aud) for there 680i boards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brother Esau

Cool makes me happy I went with the EVGA 680i A1:D

---

Thats good that atleast one company is coming on board or out in the open to say they are supporting it. I just hope Gigabyte get off there backsides and do something abort the GA-N680SLi(rev1) board.