The Problematic South Bridge

While it's hardly talked about outside of Taiwan, ATI's South Bridge is quite buggy. The chip that is responsible for providing the motherboard's SATA and USB ports, as well as PCI slots is no where near final and many manufacturers are skeptical of ATI's ability to finish their own South Bridge in time. Note that ATI's own South Bridge does not support SATA-II or NCQ, regardless of actual bugs with the chip.



Luckily, ATI has partnered with ULi to offer working South Bridges that are compatible with ATI's CrossFire North Bridge. We've tested ULi's South Bridges and they seem to be problem-free, and our sentiments are echoed by many motherboard manufacturers who have decided to use ULi South Bridges with their ATI CrossFire motherboards.



However, ATI is pushing most of their partners to use ATI's own South Bridge despite its problems and is convinced that the problems will be sorted out in time. So a number of manufacturers at Computex are showing off CrossFire solutions with ATI's South Bridge, despite their complaints to us about the South Bridge.

At least this time around, it may be better for motherboard manufacturers to use ULi's South Bridge until ATI has had more time to get all of the kinks out of their solution. ULi's South Bridges have been in use for the past generation of ATI's chipsets, thanks to issues with ATI's South Bridges, and so far, we have not heard of any complaints.

ATI should be focused on the overall platform, not necessarily building up support for their South Bridge. Although, we do think that it is a bit embarrassing to have to turn to another chipset vendor to provide working South Bridges for your motherboard partners. It would be one thing if this were ATI's first chipset, but it most definitely is not.


CrossFire vs. SLI Performance
Comments Locked

57 Comments

View All Comments

  • Bloodshedder - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    Kind of makes me wonder about compatibility with All-in-Wonder cards.
  • RadeonGuy - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    why didnt you run it on a FX-55 and 1gig of memory

  • Quintin - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    interesting....
  • ksherman - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    #6, Id love too, but I dont have the money right now and the cards are not availible...
  • Brian23 - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    #9, #10, and #11: That will never happen. The traces between the GPU and the memory need to be UBER short. The socket would increase trace lengths too much. Plus there is so many kinds of graphics memory with different bus widths.
  • Waylay00 - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    What would be better is a motherboard that has a built in GPU socket and you could buy the GPU's just like CPU's. Then there would be no need for video cards, but rather just video RAM and the GPU core.
  • Waylay00 - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

  • UNCjigga - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    What I really want is a graphics card with extra sockets for a 2nd GPU and more RAM. So I can start with one board with a single GPU and 256MB RAM, then I can upgrade either the existing GPU with a faster one, and/or upgrade the RAM from 256MB to 512MB, and/or slap a second GPU into the extra socket and effectively double performance. That would rock.
  • arfan - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    Good Job ATI
  • bob661 - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    I wonder what the REAL price will be on the Crossfire cards.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now