Slashdot Mirror


Balance Technology Extended (BTX) Explained

Anonymous Coward writes "The folks over at TweakTown have just posted an article which talks about Balance Technology Extended (BTX) - Intel's upcoming new form factor which will replace the aging ATX form factor standard we've grown used to. BTX is meant to offer better cooling and quiet computing through its smart design."

63 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Pronunciation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Buttocks"?

    1. Re:Pronunciation? by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I was thinking more along the lines of BeTamaX.

  2. Yeah yeah yeah... by dotwaffle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Who bets this will be the new marketing feature to "power users"? Why don't we just stick with ATX? It's suited us fine for years, computers run too hot these days, maybe we ought to concentrate on stability and quality rather than quantity and TLA's...

    1. Re:Yeah yeah yeah... by cmowire · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have memory riser cards. They are called DIMMs, SIMMs, and RIMMs, you young whipper-snapper. You do not know the pain of plugging in, chip-by-chip, DRAM chips, in a specific and defined order.

      It's most likely the case that, unless you are talking about a NUMA system (which is really, at this stage of the game, only for high-end server systems where a standard architecture is not yet a good idea) electrical interference, impedence, power concerns, speed of light, etc. all work together to make you really only want a few memory sockets, say 4 tops. Otherwise, it just won't work without hurting performance in a major way.

    2. Re:Yeah yeah yeah... by Skater · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know someone has to say it...

      In MY day, we had to remember the every bit ourselves!

      --RJ

    3. Re:Yeah yeah yeah... by operagost · · Score: 2, Informative
      computers run too hot these days
      Why don't you read the article, then? Part of the design includes improvements to cooling.
      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  3. Cooling is needed on video cards by superpulpsicle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have had many AMD processors overheat, but I have never had any intel do so.

    Graphics card on the other hand require some serious cooling adjustments. I don't imagine BTX will really solve the heart of the cooling problem... the video card.

    1. Re:Cooling is needed on video cards by TelcusFreshbreeze · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I would think that rather than this new form factor reducing the (if any) overheating problems of intels current chips, they would be able to ramp up the clock speed of future chips because they can be sure of a cooler environment for these chips to run in.

      (E.G. New Pentium 3Gazillion Mhz*)

      * Only suitable for BTX mainboards.

    2. Re:Cooling is needed on video cards by djohnsto · · Score: 5, Informative

      It was my understanding (from articles about last year's IDF where this was intro'd) that the BTX design basically mandates a wind tunnel from the front of the case, over the CPU / chipset, out the back - with one "wall" of the tunnel typically being implemented by a video card. There was talk that both the CPU *and* the video card could revert to passive heatsinks, with large (slow rpm) fans driving the air through the tunnel. Regardless of the specifics, I'm positive that the BTX form factor will help video card cooling.

      --
      Dan
    3. Re:Cooling is needed on video cards by mp3phish · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The BTX Specification will no doubt help with video card and north bridge cooling, allowing passive, very large heatsinks on both. The problem will lie in CPU cooling...

      The problem with BTX, and that ATX has no problem, is the CPU cooling. In ATX, the video card is the problem, in BTX, the problem lies with the CPU. They make the CPU the end of the tunnel, where all the hot air accumulates before it is exhausted out of the case. Most high end video cards already get hotter (temperature wise) than cpu's in ATX computers, and heat wise, already produce equal or marginally less total heat, depending on the system. Doubling the heat that the CPU has to deal with is NOT going to help BTX become widely accepted in the enthusiast market. Remember, its the enthusiasts that will decide if BTX is worth a crap or not. Because none of the OEM's (except white boxers) use standard case design anyway.

      I imagine BTX standards will be modified to change this early in its life, just like they did to the ATX 1.1 spec when it first arrived. There is no possible way you can put a high end video card and CPU in the same wind tunnel and expect any reasonable cooling performance for any reasonable noise and dust levels. It just isn't going to happen. Until the video card and CPU are seperated into seperate cooling compartments (like the current AGP + Extra PCI Slot ATX cases do for the video card) BTX will stay in the low end of the market. You just can't cool a CPU with air that has already been heated up by 5-15C by the video card.

      On top of all this, the BTX specification disallows today's norm of large, slow spinning variable 120mm fans in the front and back of the case. Insted, they would rather everyone have a single fan cooling the entire computer. This specification needs a lot of work before it is ready for prime time. That's for sure.

      --
      Your ignorance is infinitely greater than you realize.
    4. Re:Cooling is needed on video cards by eofpi · · Score: 2, Informative
      None of the OEM's (except white boxers) use standard case design anyway.
      Every name-brand computer I've been inside in the past couple years had an ATX-type layout (most were actually microATX, but same basic layout).

      You also seem to think the airflow is from back to front. I got the impression it was the other direction. Hence, the CPU isn't where the heat problems will be. It's the graphics card.

      On the whole, BTX strikes me as an excuse to design a new specification to deal with Prescott's outrageous heat output, rather than taking an existing suitable spec (like WTX) and updating it for PCI-Express. WTX was designed to deal with processor heat outputs up to 200W and system heat outputs up to around 600W (it was designed for dual processor workstations). That would be more than sufficient for even the most decked out enthusiast systems.

      --
      Y'know, you blow up one sun and suddenly everyone expects you to walk on water.
  4. Quiet PC's are a good thing by ePhil_One · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This sounds like a good initiative. I really hope it catches on and we can see even more mass market focus on quieter PC's. I've been thinking of buying pre-built systems just to get a quieter computer.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
  5. Blame the form factor... by schwep · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Heaven forbid Intel reduce the 100W portable heater to a lower wattage. Clearly only the case & motherboard are the only components not "smartly" designed.

    1. Re:Blame the form factor... by exley · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why don't we blame physics instead for making it so hard to keep transistors and circuits made from them cool as speed & complexity increase.

    2. Re:Blame the form factor... by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I say Intel should take the Dothan design, add SSE3, and make a dual-core processor outta _that_. More processing power than Northwood or Prescott, and half the power consumption.

    3. Re:Blame the form factor... by addaon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because Via, Apple, IBM, and others presumably use the same physics without problems?

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    4. Re:Blame the form factor... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Insightful

      why? in this case, they are not to blame...what to know how I know?

      I know because I use 2 different platforms...I use x86 AND PPC......the 970 is running at 24 Watts at 2 ghz now...that is a 50% reduction in power, and it is expected to be no more than 35 or so for 3 GHz in the summer.

      whose fault is it again?

      I think it is so cute when a single platform user thinks he knows stuff about technology :-)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    5. Re:Blame the form factor... by addaon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. So we don't blame the physics exactly because it makes more sense to blame Intel for making design choices that don't reflect real-world priorities.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    6. Re:Blame the form factor... by damien_kane · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not that they made bad design choices... it's that they didn't abandon them years ago like everyone else did.
      I mean really, how many passenger aircraft do you see anymore that are:
      a) made of wood and string
      b) use some sort of cloth for the wing
      c) can actually fly at low (i.e. 10mph in a headwind) speeds?
      The whole problem is that Intel is still using the x86 architecture (8 bit) with a bunch of kludges thrown in to make it support a lot of the new functions and ideas we've come up with since the 70s.

    7. Re:Blame the form factor... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The whole problem is that Intel is still using the x86 architecture (8 bit) with a bunch of kludges thrown in to make it support a lot of the new functions and ideas we've come up with since the 70s.

      Do you know why? It's because that's what the customers want. Intel has tried to move away from the x86 a couple of times now, and each time they have failed (or in the latest case, are likely to fail soon). Dozens of rivals have come along with a wide variety of alternative architectures, and they have basically all failed with the exception of the Power PC. Even the vaunted PPC architecture commands single-digit market share despite its assorted technical advantages.

      Now AMD, who lately seems to realize what customers want better than even Intel, has kludged yet another layer of compatiblity onto the x86, and by most accounts the customers love it. The latest 64-bit x86 CPUs are still assembly-source compatible with the first microprocessor design ever started, the 8008 (although the 4004 beat it to production). As customers demand compatiblity again and again and again, I expect that the x86 will never go away.

      Personally, I think its cool that the x86 architecture is still at or near the top of the heap despite 30 years of complaints from ivory tower naysayers.

  6. Re:Slashdotted... by gumbi+west · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I actually think they just left the max_connections at the default 100 and despite having (perhaps) plenty of capability to serve the pages, they are not. Evidence is that the .php is being executed rapidly.

    Hmm why should php make more than one pool worth of connections?

  7. Article text by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Warning: mysql_connect(): Too many connections in /home/httpd/vhosts/tweaktown.com/httpdocs/template s/tt_top.php on line 22

    Warning: mysql_select_db(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL-Link resource in /home/httpd/vhosts/tweaktown.com/httpdocs/template s/tt_top.php on line 23

    Warning: mysql_query(): Access denied for user: 'apache@localhost' (Using password: NO) in /home/httpd/vhosts/tweaktown.com/httpdocs/template s/tt_top.php on line 26

    Warning: mysql_query(): A link to the server could not be established in /home/httpd/vhosts/tweaktown.com/httpdocs/template s/tt_top.php on line 26

    Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /home/httpd/vhosts/tweaktown.com/httpdocs/template s/tt_top.php on line 27

    --
    Everything seemed to be going so nice
    'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
    1. Re:Article text by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Funny, my boss just asked me how well mysql scales.

      --
      It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
  8. More/better info by Bushcat · · Score: 4, Informative

    More info, greater bandwidth, fewer ads, etc at Form Factors and, of course, Intel.

    1. Re:More/better info by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Taking down an IIS server is like tripping a retarded kid.

      You big meanie.

      --
      It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
    2. Re:More/better info by Bushcat · · Score: 4, Funny

      4 users >> 2 users (except for large values of 2)

  9. Maximum. by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean maximum connections, dude. I have no idea how minimum connections would even be implemented.

    "No! No, you can't disconnect! I have to keep some of these open! Aaaargh!"

    --grendel drago

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
    1. Re:Maximum. by PacoTaco · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oops, I made a thinko. This is the worst place to do it too.

  10. Just another by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 3, Informative

    half cocked attempt to keep the intel/MS upgrade spiral happening.
    Some informed information is avaialable here.
    However this is also half cocked.

    1. Re:Just another by glwtta · · Score: 4, Funny
      half cocked attempt to keep the intel/MS upgrade spiral happening. Some informed information is avaialable here. However this is also half cocked.

      Well, at least they have a full cock between the two of them.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  11. PDF link by leapis · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can download a copy of the BTX spec in PDF from this site.

    1. Re:PDF link by blair1q · · Score: 4, Funny

      No you can't.

      Not until they return in the morning to reboot whatever got melted.

  12. Intels never overheat by gumbi+west · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, you never owned a Pentium 60, did you... I could fry a barquedo on the case of mine.

    1. Re:Intels never overheat by red+floyd · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean the Intel coffee warmer?

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    2. Re:Intels never overheat by multipartmixed · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC from my super-special "Intel Training" when these things came out, the P60 was rated to operate at temperatures as high as 75C. The wild thing was doing the temperature test -- the "approved method" was to load the DOS edit program, tap the alt key, and wait a while. It seems that the editor went into a very tight loop when the menu thingamagig was up.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  13. Too bad... by natrius · · Score: 5, Funny

    Too bad they don't have a BTX server.

  14. Formfactors.org by BSDevil · · Score: 5, Funny

    HTTP 403.9 - Access Forbidden: Too many users are connected

    So this article has now taken down two distinct sites. Anyone willing to see if we can slashdot Intel?

    --
    Cue The Sun...
  15. Some Other Links by GoodNicsTken · · Score: 4, Informative
    Here are a few links:

    Try This

    Or This

    Or This

  16. Links to similar data on other sites by -ParadoX- · · Score: 3, Informative
  17. Text from article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Introduction

    The computer industry is constantly evolving and building upon technology with as much mind for the future as possible. However with such a constantly changing industry, standards which we rely on do not always anticipate the changes that occur in the future. That had been the case for the AT form factor and the issues with it were addressed by the creation of the ATX Form Factor all those years ago - the design specification which computer companies abide by when designing and manufacturing their products for the PC.

    Now, as ATX and its closest cousins begin to show its age from the advent of new technologies like Serial ATA and PCI Express, a new form factor is seen as a need by many companies and Intel has the answer - it's called Balanced Technology eXtended (BTX). BTX, in its basic principle design, is very similar to that of ATX, but there are a slew of changes that can and will be utilized to show that it has the potential to improve the system as a whole in terms of acoustics and heat dissipation.

    Intel has been kind enough to provide us with some technical information and pictures on BTX. Let's see what the future holds for us!

    The BTX specifications call for a new location for the system processor. The relative position, at a locale close to the top and front of the motherboard, allows for a new way of cooling not only the processor but the highest heat producing components of the system through the use of a "thermal module."

    The thermal module consists of a duct, seal, heatsink, fan, and clip. The duct encloses the heatsink area and forces the air inducted through the massive fan over the heatsink and processor directly to the upper back of the system in a tower case. After the airflow provides cooling for the processor, it continues through the system to the graphics subsystem, whether it is on a riser card or directly into a PCI Express slot, providing additional cooling to the video card. Supposedly, airflow then trickles throughout the rest of the system to the memory and the various other internal components.

    The thermal module of BTX represents how the LGA-775 Prescott will have to be cooled. BTX will more than likely be coming to the market at the same time as the LGA-775 Prescott processors with such a higher heat production. The first motherboards we will see with BTX will probably be high-end solutions that target the wealthiest enthusiasts and workstation systems then as usual we'll see more affordable systems come onto the scene shortly afterwards.

    BTX, unlike any prior standard form factor, was developed to support three different system sizes. With BTX, we have the standard BTX, microBTX, and picoBTX forms. At the IDF of Fall 2003, the reference systems Intel demonstrated were in the microBTX and standard BTX forms. With the microBTX form occupying only 12.9 Liters and regular BTX form system not much larger, Intel has been able to push acceptance of BTX with OEM manufacturers with some ease.

    PicoBTX, the smallest of the BTX forms, is the most interesting of the BTX form factors, in my opinion. Intel will be demonstrating 6.9 Liter systems based around picoBTX, smaller than any small form factor PCs on the market. The 6.9 Liter system will be approximately 3.1 Liters smaller than the smallest SFF PCs currently on the market today from such companies as Shuttle. This compact size will push the evolution of the compact PC and increase the acceptance of BTX, specifically by SFF PC builders and users interested in buying SFF PCs - You can already imagine the SFF leaders of the industry rubbing their hands together.

    An interesting thing about the different sizes of BTX is how Intel specifications reduce the need to shift system components significantly. With BTX locating most essential system components in the upper portion of the motherboard, there is a simple move of removing a few peripheral slots with each reduction in size, bringing the total peripheral slots to one with picoBTX.

    Since BTX reference desig

  18. BTX factor and mounting holes by failedlogic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The BTX standard is emphasizing getting rid of serial and parallel ports and "legacy" hardware.

    Given this, I'm wondering if I will still be able to use my full tower ATX case on the BTX boards. I know there are standard BTX cases as well as the smaller form factors. The holes on the "back pannel" previously reserved for the serial ports and PCI cards are sure to give a lot of problems mounting BTX boards if the locations of the ports changes.

    Using the standard BTX format (and not the mini-BTX), I have a few questions:
    Will I be able to use my case on an ATX board? Will the mounting holes be located in the same location. Will AGP be on the BTX boards (specs I remember seeing emphasize PCI xpress).

    It would be a total waste if I (and many others) would need to throw away a good case. I hope AGP will still be on the BTX boards. I want to upgrade within the next year and my ATI 9600 pro would go to waste as well.

    1. Re:BTX factor and mounting holes by silverfuck · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the anandtech article linked many times elsewhere: "Just in case you were told otherwise, the BTX form factor is largely incompatible with the ATX form factor..."

      It looks from some of the pictures like the location of the slots will be entirely reversed, with the MoBo mounted on the other side of the case (Don't know if these pictures have been flipped however).

      Luckily it looks like you'll still be able to use your existing PSU in most cases, unless you're trying to build a miniature sized system.

      None of the articles I have seen even mention keeping an AGP port on the MoBo, but I suppose it could be possible for a manufacturer to put one in place of one of the PCI-X or PCI slots (with the correct spacing of course).

      This is all assuming that you have good reason to bother upgrading such a system to BTX - why not keep it as ATX for now and then build your next one as BTX? After all, it is a shame to lose half of your components just to change the form factor, as you said...

      --
      You know you've been IMing too long when you almost say 'lol' out loud to a non-geeky friend...
    2. Re:BTX factor and mounting holes by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well AGP is theoritically obsleted by PCI Xpress. See we actually have kind of a shitty situation right now. WE have only one slot that will work with performance graphics cards. That means if you have 2 or more monitors and want them all to have a performance graphics card (maybe you do engineering work, or maybe you're just a power gamer) you're SOL. PCI Xpress should cure that, you ought to be able to get a board with enough high-speed slots to have plenty of graphics cards, or other high performance devices. Also AGP sucks at talking back to the CPU. No big deal in the past, you pushed stuff to the graphics card and didn't care. Now, however, graphics cards are becomming highly programmable. It is becomming desirable to have efficient 2-way communication with them, which PCI Xpress should allow.

  19. Still using PS/2 style keyboard and mouse ports? by Gannoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Come on. Are there really people out there who are going to buy a brand new computer but still have a vital need for an old keyboard? Buy a freaking adapter and save some space.

  20. Related articles, justification by arrianus · · Score: 5, Informative

    The new form factor is probably not strictly necessary, but is useful, given the move to much smaller connectors (PCI Express, USB, SATA, etc.). Serial connections are primarily institute because they use fewer pins, and so save money. The costs of packaging on modern chips, with hundreds of pins and BBGAs, is enormous. You can save more money if you engineer the form factor to go with it.

    PCI Express also allows low-profile cards, so with BTX, you can make much smaller machines if you go legacy-free (no PCI, AGP, MCA, VESA, EISA, or ISA slots). Generally, boards are much more integrated now, use solely SMT components, small connectors, and are cheaper, but the overall system also requires less room. Observe the number of PCI cards that consist of a 1" sliver of PCB, right up to the back of the computer, and then extend to full PCI height. That's expensive, and wastes space. The height of PCI comes from the days of ISA, with through-hole parts and 25 pin connectors going to printers. The only big cards I've seen in the past many years are custom boards and graphics cards. Graphics cards have a funky horizontal option in BTX.

    To relieve the slashdotted server, a similar review:
    http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1 876
    The actual spec:
    http://web.newsguy.com/nstrom/BTX_Spec_1_0. pdf
    Intel's info about it:
    http://www.intel.com/update/contents/dt10031. htm

    1. Re:Related articles, justification by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm really not buying it as an idea. For one, the ATX could have been morphed into an improved ATX form factor.

      Heck, my Compaq workstation IS ATX (actually extended ATX due to mainboard size), but it also has three generalized cooling areas, the card cage (PCI 33/32, PCI 64/66 and AGP), CPU, memory and chipset duct and the drive area, each of these zones have their own appropriate cooling method. The thing has built-in cooling for 15k RPM drives - they are positioned cross-ways in front of the 12cm intake fan on the power supply. Since there is no output fan, the PS fan noise is nicely diffused too.

      I thought it was really slick when I looked over the maintainance guides, so I ended up picking one up second hand.

      Granted, it's no PowerMac G5 but I actually use more than three PCI cards, and have six drives in my machine, so that case isn't so useful to me.

  21. The G5 case is the best today anyways by Selecter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This is overdue X 10. The ATX case has quite a few problems -

    it's a tangled mess of power supply wires that reduce airflow and look like shit, the lack of a standardized layout of ports and such on the back means you have to make like 30 cut outs on each case to get it to work with every mobo on the market, and the process of adding even more ports in the mix like Firewire (1394) and such via cables and slot headers make the inside look even worse. Why the 733T wants to have windows on their cases is beyond me - now look at the inside of a freakin Dual G5 - THERE'Sa case to have a window for.

    The heat from the CPU(s) is exhausted INSIDE the case (!) leading to high temps and heat related failures.

    The Apple G5 case is the best designed case around IMHFO and the BTX is still behind it on a number of fronts. At least they are'nt going to exhaust the hot air from the CPU inside the freaking case any more. Jeeezzz. :/

    1. Re:The G5 case is the best today anyways by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Informative

      "The Apple G5 case is the best designed case around IMHFO and the BTX is still behind it on a number of fronts."

      It is far easier to design a case that works with a single power supply and a single motherboard than it is to design a case that works with a whole class of power supplies, motherboards, CPUs, and other technologies that haven't even been invented.

      ATX does a great job in many regards. Anyone can take any ATX compatible board and put it in an ATX compatible case. The power supply is standard, and so is the form factor.

      Do note that many PC companies use special thermal solutions that expel hot air directly out the back of the case already. Dell in particular comes to mind. BTX simply standardizes this so it works in whitebox PCs as well.

  22. Re:Still using PS/2 style keyboard and mouse ports by beyonddeath · · Score: 2

    I have to use ps/2 cause my kvm switch doesnt have usb support. just cause you dont need it doesnt mean others dont

  23. Re:I refuse to change by ShadowDrake · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are plenty of ways to get ATX silent.

    De-fan components. Heatsinks can be made sufficient for many video cards, chimpsets, and possibly CPUs (I'd bet in an otherwhise well-ventilated case, you could run a Duron at 1500 or so fanless)

    Mount hard discs in frames with sound dampening.

    Larger fans where fans are required.

    Cover holes with filter

    BTX won't solve the noise of a CD reader spin up, and it can't keep my fans oiled.

    --
    It's just like a fascist dictatorship, without the punctual rail service!
  24. Re:Still using PS/2 style keyboard and mouse ports by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Are there really people out there who are going to buy a brand new computer but still have a vital need for an old keyboard?

    Goddammit YES. The IBM Model M is the best keyboard ever made. I have 6 of them. Typing on one is an epiphany. The Stuff Of Legend.

    And they have a PS/2 connection.

    http://www.tavi.co.uk/ps2pages/ohland/keyboard.h tm l

  25. ATX, BTX expansion by owlstead · · Score: 4, Funny

    That does not leave much space for upgrades, CTX has already been taken by a computer monitor company, see the CTX website.

  26. Re:dead already? by parawing742 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've mirred it here:

    http://209.15.36.47/btx.htm

  27. Re:I refuse to change by mishac · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've heard that it is very difficult to reliably keep chimp-sets quiet.

  28. Re: Go home apple-shill by WuphonsReach · · Score: 2, Informative

    the lack of a standardized layout of ports and such on the back means you have to make like 30 cut outs on each case to get it to work with every mobo on the market

    That's a design feature in the ATX spec. It fixes the problem that the old AT-style cases had where you were forced into using expansion slot headers or punch-outs in order to provide access for connectors other then the AT-keyboard cable. If you look at any ATX motherboard on the market today, you'll see that they come with a ~1.5"x4" metal insert that fits into a standard cutout area on the back of the ATX-case and which matches up to whatever ports the vendor decided to put on the motherboard.

    Yes, the G5 is probably prettier on the inside... but you get what you pay for, but with lack of options (there's only one maker for motherboard that you put inside a G5). OTOH, with the ATX-spec, you can mix-n-match motherboards and cases to get exactly what you want. The downside is that you have to do cable/wire management yourself (rounded cables and a bit of wire-tie do just fine).

    --
    Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  29. Hardware review sites are useless by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every article is split across 10 pages.

    Every page has 10 ads.

    And there isn't even any original content; the articles are just rehashed press releases or IDF presentations. OK, occasionally they run some stock benchmarks on some stock hardware (all the sites have to use the same benchmarks; they wouldn't want to break away from the herd).

    The /. editors should do us a favor and just link to the Intel propaganda; at least Intel can keep their servers up.

  30. BTX problems, why its not better than ATX... by mp3phish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are some major problems with the BTX Specification. Some things are better than ATX, some are worse...

    1) BTX forces you to cool your video card, north bridge, memory, and CPU with the same fan/duct combo. the BTX specification allows ONE 80mm fan to drive the wind tunnel.

    This is a major design flaw. There is no possible way on earth that high end systems will be able to use the BTX form factor. Memory is getting hotter every year as clock ramps. North bridges too (not for athlon64, but other platforms it has) Video cards are already putting out more heat than even the hottest CPU's. You just can't push enough air with a single fan to cool all these components running under load unless you are using mid to low end hardware. It just won't happen.

    2) BTX doesn't leave room for anything larger than 80mm at the end of the fan duct. This is a MAJOR problem.

    This is actually a drawback from the ATX standard, where even the slimmest ATX cases have the physical room to house a 120mm fan in both the front intake, and rear exhaust. This means slower, lower powered fans pushing the same amount of air. This keeps your fans lasting longer, reduce maintenance needs, and reduce overall TCO. In the BTX specification, you are forced to use high speed 80mm fans to keep the system from overheating, even in a midrange setup. You simply cannot cool modern day video cards and northbridges, and memory banks and CPUs with just 1 80mm fan, no matter how efficient the ducting system is.

    Suggestions for improvement:

    1) Seperate the video card from the BTX wind tunnel. Put it at the bottom of the case, and make it part of its own tunnel. This would allow you to spin the fans dramatically slower and have overall cooler system.

    2) Resize the ducting so 120mm fans fit properly. There is nothing worse than an 80mm fan whining in your ear running at 5,000 RPM's when you could have a 120 or 92mm fan running half the speed.

    3) Do the same large fan combo for the video card tunnel.

    4) Integrate circuitry that monitors temperature of the exhaust air of these 2 compartments. Set reasonable thresholds for this temperature, and have the fans spin up to a higher speed when the temperature rises such that you know that particular compartment is under load. For instance, if you load up Doom3, the video card compartment exhaust will heat up, thus requiring more airflow and thust faster fan spinning. This is not currently available on any standard systems and so far the only consumer systems which ship with microchip controlled fans are apple computers (sadly). No, thermister fans do no good, as they are tuned such that they are always running full speed (even at lowest temperature) or always running low speed (even at highest temperature). you need something which allows the PC Builder to adjust the thresholds.

    4) Do away with all chipset mini fans and insted attach very large passive heatsinks. Be sure to make these heatsinks part of the wind tunnel of its repsective compartment.

    5)...

    6) Profit!

    --
    Your ignorance is infinitely greater than you realize.
  31. Balanced? by D.+Book · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think Intel's new form factor is more than a little imbalanced in that it's centred around the CPU. Just when we should be trying to strike a balance between performance and power consumption, Intel's design uses a "thermal module" that looks like it's custom made for a new generation of superhot CPUs like the >100W Prescott.

    This is not a good indication of where they're trying to take us. While there will always be performance freaks out there who will demand higher benchmark results even if it means central-heating-in-a-775-pin-socket, there has to be a more sensible middle ground for the rest of us, even if that means slowing down the pace a bit.

    AMD seems to have taken a slightly more sensible approach, with its Athlon 64 CPU peaking at less than 90W and implementation of a speed throttling technology they've branded "Cool 'n' Quiet". But it's still a pretty hot CPU at full speed.

    What we really need is better middle ground. For a desktop PC at the moment you can choose between very fast and very power hungry Pentium 4s and Athlons, or very cool but very slow VIA C3s or Edens. But there's not much in-between.

    Tests have shown that if you underclock/undervolt an Athlon XP, you can retain very good performance while drastically cutting power consumption (to P3 levels and below). Effectively, it's the opposite of overclocking. This setup is ideal for people who desire all the architectural benefits of the latest platforms, but don't quite require the CPU power. But despite this, it's still a very uncommon and unsupported approach.

    Instead of recruiting everyone in their race to the top and designing new form factors to cope with the power-hungry CPUs that result, why don't AMD and Intel offer us cheaper CPUs with more sensible power consumption for the mainstream, and give people a genuinely balanced choice? Why can't I buy a nice, cool-running Barton clocked at 1166MHz, or a 2GHz Northwood?

    On the other hand, things might get a bit choppy when Joe User tries to run Flight Simulator. So perhaps AMD does have the right approach after all with its Athlon 64: 2GHz when you need it, but a nice cool 800MHz when running web browsers and office programs.

  32. Re:Still using PS/2 style keyboard and mouse ports by IMSoP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, from what I've gathered, getting the drivers sorted for a USB input device (under, say, linux, or a bootloader) is one hell of a lot harder than just using PS/2. Of course, PS/2 ain't perfect - if it comes out the back, you're probably gonna need a reboot to get it back in sync - but having to set up a whole addressable, hot-pluggable, daisy-chainable bus before you can even type always seemed a bit much to me.

    But maybe there is an easier way, and I'm just ignorant - how exactly do PS/2-USB adapters work? I mean, a PS/2 device never has to deal with addressing does it?

  33. Have ya opened a G5? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Take a gander at those heatsinks. I mean damn, they are just HUGE. There are just realities when dealing with silicon transistors. Intel may have the highest consumption, but the other high performers aren't far behind. You just needs lots of fast transistors to get fast processing, and those give off lots of heat.

    Now that's not to say you can't make lower performance, lower power CPUs. Intel does that as well. However people generally want FAST (regardless of if they need it or not), so there is a drive to continue to increase processor speeds. Intel, AMD, IBM, et al are driven by market demand.

    1. Re:Have ya opened a G5? by True+Grit · · Score: 2, Interesting
      1. However people generally want FAST (regardless of if they need it or not)


      What will help the midrange/desktop market is the kind of tecnology MSI, for example, has put into their latest mobo's for the Athlon64 (K8T Neo). Dynamic overclocking allows the system to run really fast (up to 10% overclock in their implementation) only when its *needed* (when the system is under heavy load), otherwise the system will throttle *down* the CPU when its not being used (down to 800Mhz when idle, instead of always running at 2000+Mhz). With this kind of technology people could still get the speed they want, without shortening the life of their system by permanently overclocking it (when 85% of the time the extra speed is wasted anyway). Why its taking so long for this kind of idea (which originates from the mobile, battery-powered market of course) to reach the desktop is what amazes me, since it would solve a lot problems we have now (speed when its really needed, energy conservation and reduced heat dissipation otherwise).
  34. ATX not old, in EPR terms by Willard+B.+Trophy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So BTX means a whole new raft of cases? Great for landfill operators!

    If the computer industry had EPR (Extended Producer Responsibility, or sometimes called Product Stewardship), they might reconsider their headlong rush to create short lifespan products.

    After all, it's not the 3GHz Pentium 4 that we want, but it's the computing power that it provides.