Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD Aims At New Standard for Motherboards

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the little-quite-different dept.

AMD 156

alexwcovington writes "CBC reports that AMD is launching DTX, a new motherboard layout about the size of micro-ATX. Their goal is to provide a small, energy efficient board that's compatible with as much hardware as possible. In the DTX, they're hoping to produce a new standard for desktops, and somewhat reverse the decline in consumer interest. From the article: 'Most desktops still have motherboards that operate using a standard laid out in 1995 by Intel called ATX, which stands for Advanced Technology Extended. ATX was designed to allow everything from memory cards to mouse ports to have a standardized spot alongside the central processing unit on a typical desktop motherboard. While there have been other standards since, ATX remains the most common standard for desktops, though its design is not suited for smaller, more energy-efficient desktops, AMD said.' Ars Technica has further details on the board."

cancel ×

156 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Might be just me (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580448)

But this topic is worthless without pics.

Re:Might be just me (5, Informative)

n1hilist (997601) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580956)

Re:Might be just me (2, Insightful)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582554)

For some reason this just conjures images of the Apple Cube from a few years ago in my head...

photos to the rescue: (4, Informative)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581162)

dailytech.com [dailytech.com] and thetechlounge.com [thetechlounge.com] have some great photos:.

Re:photos to the rescue: (1)

Mr Thinly Sliced (73041) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582956)

Lol dude when I looked at this page [thetechlounge.com] and the thumbnail - I though JESUS CHRIST THATS A BIG MOTHERBOARD HES HOLDING.

Turns out, its four of them all together from the PCB fab I guess.

Needs IPP (0, Flamebait)

tritonman (998572) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580466)

It needs an Integrated Penis Port for enhanced pr0n viewing.

Re:Needs IPP (2, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580878)

Try a wall socket. It's more electrifying.

hmm BTX style? (3, Interesting)

master_kaos (1027308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580472)

Thing this will follow the form of BTX formfactor? I know in the summary it says to be compatible with as much hardware as it can - so I sure hope that includes the Case. The only way it will catch on is if it will fit in the current cases. With all the overclocking and heating and whatnot, we defiently do want faster and cooler hardware, so hopefully this will catch on.

Re:hmm BTX style? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580614)

"...so I sure hope that includes the Case. "

I have alway hoped that if a supplier could make the mobo in 2 section connected by flexable cable it would (assuming cost a performance are equal) really help create way more interesting cases.

Re:hmm BTX style? (2, Informative)

Ramble (940291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583420)

Performance decreases would be pretty big. Plus, you need to make interconnects and cut the boards into two which is bound to waste more space. Also, massive things like graphics cards are not going to fit.

Re:hmm BTX style? (1)

tchuladdiass (174342) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580678)

It will be compatible with ATX cases, however the main purpose is to provide a standardized form similar to those small Shuttle boxes, or "Book PC" boxes. Neither of those two are standardized, so this should hopefully go a long way to getting more small form factor boxes out there.

Re:hmm BTX style? (5, Informative)

archen (447353) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580680)

Cases are part of the problem. Intel realized this and that's part of what BTX is about, and I have to say the design really makes sense. Move air in a reasonable fashion through the case for more effective cooling. Current CPU cooling is totally asinine in the way you smash air directly against the heatsink to spill the hot air out in random directions throughout the case. It wasn't a problem back in the 486 days when you consider the microscopic fan size, but now it's truly beyond help.

I'm not sure who this thing is really targeted at. BTX at least was focused on replacing ATX as a better alternative. AMD admits that it wants to drive up desktop sales because laptops are now dominating computer purchasing more. They then cite that desktops are more upgradeable than laptops. Then it says the DTX will have ONE pcie slot. What is DTX trying to accomplish? A platform trying to capture the Mac Mini market I'm guessing (however big that is).

Re:hmm BTX style? (1)

jdp816 (895616) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581200)

"A platform trying to capture the Mac Mini market I'm guessing (however big that is)." One problem is that the Mac mini is much smaller than this board. The *case* of the Mac mini is 165x165mm. Even if you include the power brick for the mini it'll be smaller than just the DTX mobo alone. The DTX will not be a mini killer.

Re:hmm BTX style? (1)

Ucklak (755284) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581498)

I think the Mac Mini is the size of that heat sink with fan and a hard drive.

Re:hmm BTX style? (1)

jdp816 (895616) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582310)

Huh? I'm not clear on what you are saying. The mini does include a heatsink on the CPU, a 2.5" HDD, and slim laptop optical drive all stacked up in 2.25" of vertical space. And the G4 ones have a full size DDR-DIMM slot. THe Intel ones have dual DDR SO-DIMM slots. That's a lot packed into a case 6.5x6.5x2.25". I'm doubting DTX can get a board built that fits under 1.5" without the HDD and optical stacked on top of it, like the mini.

Re:hmm BTX style? (4, Insightful)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581512)

Cases are part of the problem. Intel realized this and that's part of what BTX is about, and I have to say the design really makes sense.

While the design of BTX did make more sense in particular for cooling, for Intel it wasn't just a "better ATX", it was a way to make the increasing power demands of the Pentium 4 acceptable as it was becoming near impossible to sufficiently cool them. Now that Intel has dropped Netburst, the need for BTX isn't there. Not that there's anything wrong with a better ATX, but the industry doesn't want to switch from something that works.

Then it says the DTX will have ONE pcie slot. What is DTX trying to accomplish? A platform trying to capture the Mac Mini market I'm guessing (however big that is).

They're trying to create a larger small form-factor market. Like all those cool Shuttle small form factor cases that cost more than normal sized ones. The idea behind DTX is to provide a standard that can lead to mass-produced, cheap, commodity cases and motherboards just like we enjoy with ATX, and with the minimal amount of retooling of existing manufacturing. There is certainly a demand for smaller, cooler, quieter computers which don't need a lot of expandability (and other than a video card, with networking and sound built in, what do most people need at minimum?), and AMD wants to bring commodity economics into that market (so they can sell more chips to it).

That's the point. Whether it will work, I don't know. The technical details aren't even out yet I don't think, and it remains to be seen if the industry accepts it.

Re:hmm BTX style?: Shuttle mini market (1)

amcdiarmid (856796) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581528)

I think this is more of an attempt to get into the Shuttle XPC market than the Mac-Mini market. Or if you prefer, a way to expand the XPC market - thus giving AMD a bigger piece of a bigger pie.

The poster who pointed out that the "Smashing of air over the processor" not being feasible hit it on the head. The Shuttles (and some other SFF makers) generally try to make a heatsink fan that pushes air out of the case.

There is an article on this at: http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36833 [theinquirer.net] with a pic of a mobo. Perhaps by the time the thing gets to market, the fan will have a housing to push air out of the case...

Re:hmm BTX style? (1)

jonadab (583620) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582332)

> Thing this will follow the form of BTX formfactor?

Unlikely. If it does, it's doomed.

> I know in the summary it says to be compatible with as much hardware as it can -
> so I sure hope that includes the Case.

To be compatible with as much hardware as possible, it would shoot for maximum ATX (or MicroATX) compatibility, not BTX. I know Intel wanted BTX to be the new standard, but the rest of the industry has pretty well ignored it to death and thereby consigned it to footnote status in the history books alongside MCA. If DTX follows in its path, we'll all still be using ATX or MicroATX in five years.

comments (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580478)

First Post!
In Soviet Russia DTX motherboard installs in you!
I for one, welcome our DTX overlords
Does it Run Linux?
Apple Rules?
Is the PS3/Xbox360/Wii Better? :-)

Signed, longtime Slashdot Anonymous Coward

Re:comments (0, Offtopic)

LandKurt (901298) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580990)

You forgot:

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these.

Re:comments (0, Troll)

spaceyhackerlady (462530) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581040)

In Korea only old people use ATX motherboards.

so, which of these advantages does it have? (5, Insightful)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580490)

I couldn't find any of these... But I could be missing something

(1) Does it provide something that is not encompassed by one of MicroATX, MiniITX or ATX
(2) Does combine advantages of any of the above listed form factors?

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (4, Insightful)

rm999 (775449) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580562)

I may be mistaken, but I don't think any of the current ATX implementations have this specific goal:
"The DTX standard will be designed to embrace energy-efficient processors from AMD or other hardware vendors, and allow an optimally designed small form factor system to consume less power and generate less noise," the company said in a release Thursday."

How AMD intends to implement this is beyond me. It seems that is more of a case layout and CPU issue than motherboard

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (2, Insightful)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580798)

ATX might not, but mini [wikipedia.org] and nano [wikipedia.org] ITX standards have been out for a long time, and seem to do exactly what AMD states as a goal.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (2, Insightful)

rm999 (775449) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581072)

Neither is targeted towards the consumer PC market. This is an important distinction.

I have found that one of the big cons of desktops is noise and heat. My laptop can do 99% of what my desktop can do, but somehow does it using a lot less power (and I consider myself a gamer, plus I use Matlab quite a bit for CPU and memory intensive applications). I support AMD in what they are doing, even though I think it is mostly a strategic move.

you can buy.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17582870)

mini ITX in (quite small) desktop, pizzabox or laptop config right now, or build your own custom case for it. It's a big enthusiast market and starting to be more and more OEM vendors push them, because it is more than adequate for most people's uses and they run cool and very quiet or silent at lo power requirements.

There's no need at this time for yet another mobo standard. If people need more than what a mini ITX can provide, they need a full tower and just be done with it. The bottom line is, you aren't going to turn that sportscar into a pickup, or the pickup into the family sedan, or any of them into a road tractor. There is no one size fits everyone standard out there, and adding more form factors is inventing for the sake of busywork more than any need. I mean, really, how many people have been losing sleep and pining away saying "gee, if there was just another form factor to choose from, I can't seem to have a computer that fits my needs!"

Answer is no one outside of AMD marketing. Heavy gamers want real towers with tons of slots and/or game consoles. Workstations demand towers. A basic computer for surfing, email, some tunes and vids can be done quite will with a normal low end atx or a mini itx.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (4, Insightful)

arivanov (12034) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581574)

Intel's BTX has the same goal (besides a few others) but for Intel. Airflow and component positioning with respect to airflow is part of the spec. IIRC it does not account for having industrial heaters (AKA modern videocards) in the case, but this can be taken care of by amending the spec. It is clearly a good hardware spec and it fixes most ATX problems.

miniITX has a similar goal in theory and it has the advantage of being nearly 100% backward compatible with ATX, but fails at making a good small factor PC as it does not specify an airflow across the MB. It is also severely limited in its expansion capabilities as it supports only 32bit PCI. Every single ITX MB out there has slightly different positioning of thermally active components and different airflow requirements. Why Via did not make the airflow and the thermals a part of the standard is beyond me as it often defeats all the advantages of having a quiet motherboard and multiple bad case designs give Via's otherwise excellent Eden based MBs an undeserved bad name. Classic example are older Cubid cases where the CPU and the disk overheat while the case emits hovercraft like noise because it has 3 fans to blow air from nowhere to nowhere. There was an even more horrible one which used a 1U rackmount PS with 40+db noise (forgot the manufacturer). And all this to power a 7W fanless CPU system...

So now AMD has joined the fray. By the way, it is still mostly vapourware as there is nothing on their website. Personally, I would like to see a spec, especially the thermal,ps,expansion and airflow part of it. Without this it is not possible to compare it to the existing competition. AMD has plenty of experience aquired via Geode as well as a clear picture of the failures in the miniITX, nanoITX and BTX specs so it should be able to make a better one if it wants to. I somehow doubt it. It is more likely going to end up as another marketing initiative like Live!

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581594)

How AMD intends to implement this is beyond me. It seems that is more of a case layout and CPU issue than motherboard

Your case is designed the way it is largely because of the motheboard spec. They all tie together. More importantly, without an appropriate motherboard standard you can't build a case with optimal layout and put anything but a custom-designed mobo inside.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1, Funny)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580600)

It's new and it's not made by Intel! What's not to love?

Maybe AMD should take a lesson from Kerry's failed presidential campaign.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (4, Funny)

ceeam (39911) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580860)

Hey! Since "Core" CPUs we love Intel again! Catch up with the times.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1)

Spazntwich (208070) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581560)

Since I'm obviously behind the times, since when is obvious sarcasm trolling?

I think slashdot's moderators are going senile.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580902)

2 expansion slots, one of which is PCI-E, and an XpressCard slot for Bluetooth and 802.11whatever. Designed for lower power apps.

Sounds like a scaled down version of mATX. mATX boards are big enough for 4+ expansion slots.. this makes it a bit smaller by getting rid of some traditional slots and adding an XpressCard slot.

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1)

chiefer (1050460) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581202)

As technology progresses, we see smaller and more powerful processors and circuits. We can only embrace the changes which will lead to more efficient and smaller forms (DTX, MicroATX). Smaller boxes will lead to more responsible disposal of these inevitably outdated (as time progresses) machines. By having smaller boxes and smaller components will lead to smaller waste when these boxes become extinct. I also don't see how the form factor will have any effect on the dB noise level of boxes. Noise is typically generated by cooling fans (CPU, case) and the powersupply. Perhaps to become DTX compliant, a powersupply will need to be lower than a predetermined dB level? The same for CPU cooling fans?

Re:so, which of these advantages does it have? (1)

Arthur Dent '99 (226844) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581212)

Hopefully it will combine the convenient small size of MiniITX with the power of normal ATX processors. Some time ago I was interested in using something along the lines of a MiniITX board to build my own in-car computer, but the performance of the processors was decidedly anemic. Apparently the clock speeds have improved somewhat since then, but are still nowhere close to the speeds available on a full-sized desktop.

I know there are tradeoffs when shrinking the size of systems down, but it would be really nice to have my cake and eat it, too. :-)

well then (2, Insightful)

User 956 (568564) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580518)

Their goal is to provide a small, energy efficient board that's compatible with as much hardware as possible.

If that's the goal, then with ISA, PCI, AGP, PCI-X, IDE33/66/100/133/SATA and a few hundred flavors of SIMMS and DIMMS, I can see this becoming a very large board indeed.

Re:well then (1)

Simon (S2) (600188) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580968)

If that's the goal, then with ISA, PCI, AGP, PCI-X, IDE33/66/100/133/SATA and a few hundred flavors of SIMMS and DIMMS, I can see this becoming a very large board indeed.
Their goal is to provide a small, energy efficient board that's compatible with as much hardware as possible.

That does not mean everything under the sun. That means as possible.
Is english your first language? Not mine.

Flame bait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17582414)

How was this modded insightful?

Parent poster is clearly on the rag, and should use the bandaid wrapped around his glasses to clean up his mess instead.

BTX (-1 Offtopic, but...) (1)

andrewd18 (989408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580522)

BTX, introduced a couple of years ago, has not caught on very widely, and Intel decided to shelve future development late last year. Part of the reason for that may be the fact that BTX has limited compatibility with products designed for the dominant ATX form factor.
I actually liked the BTX format, what with the better airflow over the GPU, CPU, and Hard Drives because they were all streamlined. I would have bought a BTX motherboard for my next box, but I guess Dell and friends weren't as committed to it as I was.

Re:BTX (-1 Offtopic, but...) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580638)

Actually, my brand new Dell XPS 410 is BTX.

Re:BTX (-1 Offtopic, but...) (1)

jabuzz (182671) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581186)

All the current Optiplex lineup 320, GX520, GX620, 740 (the would never happen AMD computer from Dell) and the 745 are BTX chassis as well. They are great cases, tool free entry, easy access to pretty much every component are really quite quiet.

6 posts and still no soviet russia line (5, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580542)

Am very disappointed. There is no "in soviet russia the motherboard .... you" post.

Re:6 posts and still no soviet russia line (5, Funny)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580676)

In soviet russia the motherboard POSTs you!

Happy now?

Re:6 posts and still no soviet russia line (5, Funny)

serialdogma (883470) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580832)

In soviet russia the motherboard is very disappointed in you.

Re:6 posts and still no soviet russia line (1)

mikael (484) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581800)

In soviet russia the motherboard belongs to the motherland?

MARt-E (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580574)

posts on Usenet are docum3nts like a some7hing done spot when done For

Reversals (4, Insightful)

mfh (56) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580576)

"and somewhat reverse the decline in consumer interest"

Let's hope for the sake of AMD, their level of excitement is greater than the submitter's. The new boards will have to deliver something effective if they are going to be of any use. Scale down component infrastructure, increase speed and decrease power requirements. Intel could stand to do the same, but still...

HP launched small form factor PCs called Slimlines, and I had a few customers buy them from me -- so far no complaints, but it will be nice to see these models reduced further and then pushed for speed as well, in the future.

AMD seem to really have their eye on the ball, IMHO.

Re:Reversals (1)

byteframe (924916) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580788)

Low voltage, low power, low noise, and low heat really seem to be catching on. Even on the high end, where its still proportional, IF a motherboard design that is interopable with existing standards can be pulled off and show even more gains, I'd very much wager it'll do better than BTX. If it also has designed for the high end market (dual cpus, and gpus) I think people will take to it. Plus, while I am an AMD fanboy (or at least until I can make my next purchase and reevaluate), I very much trust AMD, and their strategy of creating open standards, so that will also probably help their cause.

Bleh (1, Insightful)

ceeam (39911) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580684)

Why they even bother? Notebooks and rack servers have won. Not quite yet maybe but I don't know everyone who's gonna buy a new "big" desktop PC anymore. The death of CRT (totally happened already, right?) is just one step away from death of your typical desktop block.

Now - if they would come up with modular notebook design, mmmm.... Standardize on some internal configs (12", 15", 17") and sell cases with different design that I would be able to stuff with motheboard, RAM, HDD, optical drive, etc. Like current PCs. Wouldn't that be great?

Re:Bleh (1)

imboboage0 (876812) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580840)

Absolutely not. Although you may be mostly correct in the consumer market, this is not the truth at all. I don't see the gamer market completely moving to notebooks at all. They need modularity that notebooks do not provide. Same with heat dissipation. What about the HTPC market? Did you think about the development market? Workstations for corporations? I don't see everyone switching to notebooks anytime soon. Just my 2 cents.

Re:Bleh (1)

bigeeTea (1050470) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581456)

Not every company can afford to provide every employee with a laptop and port replicator. The market for cheap, small form-factor desktops is still alive.

Re:Bleh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581640)

Think about all those CRT for color-process, 10x more expensive, with calibrators etc. Or about PowerMacs and their counterparts in PC world. Desktops are still in use for many reasons, but they slowly shift from every home to more specific uses.

Re:Bleh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581704)

Why they even bother? Notebooks and rack servers have won. Not quite yet maybe but I don't know everyone who's gonna buy a new "big" desktop PC anymore. The death of CRT (totally happened already, right?) is just one step away from death of your typical desktop block.


I intend to build my next PC just like this one, full tower case, quality power supply, chassis fan etc... This PIII has lasted me over seven years and still outperforms plenty of new PCs (and it wasn't high-end in 1999, just quality).

I also intend to buy a new CRT when the time comes for the superior image quality and now relatively cheap price.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

All this mini crap is built to self destruct with heat. My CPU rarely tops 30C, it will probably run another 10 years just fine.

My hands are too large to manage stuff that is too miniature, these compact PCs are built by little female oriental fingers and probably can only be maintained by them as well. I have a hard time operating these new cell phones, the whole thing is too small, built for little girls. I often end up mashing several keys at a time when trying to operate the damn thing, or end up turning the sound or power off when trying to open it to answer it. Its just too small for a larege full grown man.

I want a man sized computer.

Re:Bleh (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581752)

In the consumer market your statement is questionable - plenty of people want a PC at a desk. Pound for pound a desktop is better value for money - and the fact that the big manufacturers still pump out many many more desktops than laptops vindicates this.

In the business world you are completely wrong. Expensive, easily breakable (spill coffee over keyboard - oh fuck - that's $1000 wasted - spill coffee over desktop keyboard - oh dear, that $10 wasted), not value for money, poor screen size, easily stealable - this comparative list of disadvantages goes on and on - to the extend that other than for folks on the move regularly and for the boss who can have one if he wants as an extra - the vast majority of business machines are desktops - pretty much sinks your hypothesis.

Re:Bleh (3, Informative)

Wdomburg (141264) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581838)

Two words - corporate sales. The market is a lot larger than retail and the preference is still for desktop machines (lower cost, lower theft). There is certainly demand for a lower cost alternative to current systems though. Expect the market to shift to SFF machines running "notebook" drives.

Even within the confines retail market, unit sales still favour desktop systems; notebooks have only outstripped desktops in terms of dollars spend due to the unit price being approximately $400 higher.

Ever heard of the Verified By Intel initiative? (1)

nevesis (970522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583504)

Intel actually proposed just that. From this website [intel.com] :

Verified by Intel® is a barebone program between Intel, ODM manufacturers and notebook ingredient suppliers that provides interchangeability of key notebook components for simplified sourcing, inventory management and build-to-order flexibility. Unlike most notebooks that use non-standard components, barebones that are Verified by Intel® are designed and tested for interchangeability of common building blocks, including: Hard disk drives, optical disk drives, keyboards, batteries, LCD screens, customizable notebook panels and AC adapters.

Now if VBI took off, I believe that there is a decent argument to abandon desktops. Currently though, there just isn't.

But alas, it probably won't succeed. Even though the major ODMs (who actually design and manufacture the notebooks.. including Quanta, Compal, ASUS, et al) are all for the VBI initiative -- the major OEMs (who manage notebook inventory and customer service.. including Dell, HP, Compaq, et al) are very, very, very much against it. (OEMs have ridiculous margins on custom notebook parts)

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580688)

...AMD hasn't been advertising with Slashdot since mid-December [slashdot.org] .

The obvious non-Linux question... (0, Offtopic)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580710)

Does it run Windows Vista? Or is that extra?

"standardized spots" (1)

unitron (5733) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580720)

Speaking of standardized spots for peripherals, is it just me, or when ATX forced everybody to switch to PS2 mice and a different IRQ, did they just not work as well?

Re:"standardized spots" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580856)

The PS2 mouse and keyboard ports were a boondoggle for sure. Who came up with the idea of making a connector appear round, if it can only be put in one way? I've seen too many systems destroyed by shorted mouse pins. At least the AT keyboard connector had big, sturdy pins.

At least USB eventually came around and saved us all from PS2.

Re:"standardized spots" (1)

wik (10258) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581152)

The PS/2 also had electrical problems with hotplug. [burtonsys.com]

You still can't tell which way is up with USB. Half the time, I end up trying to jam USB plugs in the wrong way. At least the sockets appear to be mechanically robust.

Re:"standardized spots" (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583174)

You still can't tell which way is up with USB.

But at least they wobble around and then fall out, so you've got that going for you.

KFG

Re:"standardized spots" (4, Interesting)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581514)

Who came up with the idea of making a connector appear round, if it can only be put in one way?

DIN Connectors [wikipedia.org] go back decades as a standard connector for audio equipment. This standard connector style showed up in the early computer world in the form of serial interfaces known as "SIO ports". For some reason (probably the wide availability of parts), IBM decided to use the DIN connector for their detachable keyboards.

When IBM redesigned the computer as the PS/2, they moved to the smaller DIN standard known as "mini-DIN" rather than devising a new connector. In addition, they added a dedicated mouse port to the PC, which helped solidify the mouse as a standard PC interface. Since the keyboard and mouse were both input devices, IBM felt it made sense to unify them into a single connector. Thus the keyboard connector was transferred to the mouse.

This is how we got the PS/2 mouse and keyboard interface we all know today. Unfortuantely, IBM hadn't considered that anyone would want to hotplug their mouse or keyboard like they had been doing with serial cables. As a result, the PS/2 standard was woefully inappropriate for the original task. Thus the USB standard was developed to provide a single, unified, hot-pluggable connector for all manner of serial device. (Including mice and keyboards.) The result is actually quite good, even though USB is a pain for hardware designers to implement.

Down with PS/2 (0, Troll)

Myria (562655) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580818)

I hope they can take this opportunity to eliminate PS/2 ports once and for all. Even now you still see computers with these ports.

The main reason I want PS/2 to disappear is to force keyboard and mice manufacturers to make USB versions - too many otherwise good keyboards and mice are PS/2 only.

Re:Down with PS/2 (2, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581254)

I completely disagree. I work with plenty of OS's that don't have USB support at ALL when you need it.... like at the installer phase.

There is more to this than using your new sparkly USB keyboard via Windows.

Re:Down with PS/2 (1)

djrogers (153854) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582494)

That's what BIOS support for USB HID is for. This has been around for a while, and would be included in any standard mobo that didn't incorporate PS/2 style adapters.

Re:Down with PS/2 (1)

Ten24 (974324) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583634)

I've personally had plenty of times where a system crash resulted in a reboot with no USB, very annoying when you need to log back into the system or BIOS. I have a PS/2 keyboard plugged in as well at all times sitting to next to the tower just in case.

Use a USB-PS2 converter. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581446)

There are lovely little converters, of which I have several, that allow you to use a USB mouse or keyboard on a PS2 port, so no real loss there. Now, I guess they use a few square cm of space, but is that such a big deal?

Besides, given that they probably wouldn't add more than the 10 USB ports I already have, I stick my keyboard & mouse over on USB to keep the ports free. Sure, you can use hubs, but too many of those get to be a pain.

Hmmm... (1)

kkohlbacher (922932) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580834)

I can't find a board anymore that doesn't have PATA connectors sticking out the side of the motherboard because there's no room left (but I suppose this grandfather technology will soon be cast with my 5 1/4 floppies and Zip drives).

But if a better solution is on the horizon, I embrace the foresight of smaller and better. Heck if we can put 2 processors on a chip half the size the standard was 5 years ago, why not embrace smaller motherboard technology.

./self> Now where's that JP1 jumper pin....?

They might fare better than Intel's dead BTX.... (4, Informative)

madhatter256 (443326) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580888)

With AMD now announcing this new form factor. They can take a look at what made the BTX standard fail. I just hope AMD doesn't do what Intel did that limited the BTX standard and that is to not shut out Intel from the DTX standard. The BTX was strictly for Intel CPUs since the 775 socket. The BTX was lay out was to simply have the CPU near the front of the desktop where the cool air enters the computer. THis was possible since the 775 CPUs still utilizes a northbridge to communicate with the memory. AMD couldn't apply itself to the BTX since its memory controller is on the CPU. DTX should allow Intel to be able to apply itself towards the standard if they want to see third party board makers and chipset makers create products for the DTX. If AMD achieves that, then the DTX has a chance taking over ATX.

The ATX is just way out of date but soo common and cheap that manufacturers continue to utilize it.

It is about time a big company like AMD, and soon Intel (they haven't officially announced any plans to start focusing on more efficient products), start focusing more on energy efficiency right next to better processing power.

Re:They might fare better than Intel's dead BTX... (1)

jabuzz (182671) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581244)

Really, do you wish to explain the existance of the Dell Optiplex 740 then? Shares the same BTX chassis options as the 745 which is the Core2 Duo option as well as the rest of the Optiplex lineup. Thing is the 740 is Dell's AMD offering for businesses.

Re:They might fare better than Intel's dead BTX... (1)

madhatter256 (443326) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581744)

Really, do you wish to explain the existance of the Dell Optiplex 740 then? Shares the same BTX chassis options as the 745 which is the Core2 Duo option as well as the rest of the Optiplex lineup. Thing is the 740 is Dell's AMD offering for businesses.
My bad. I completely left that system out as well as some other BTX form factor boards but did those boards really sell? I know the 740 is selling since Dell is pushing the BTX form factor towards business clientel. Manufacturers, in the past few months have been dropping that standard since it hasn't been selling well.

This FP 7or GNAA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17580934)

ofone single puny Is EFNet, and you CONSIDER WORTHWHILE paper towels series of exploding

How about the vertical (3, Interesting)

Xenolith (538304) | more than 7 years ago | (#17580998)

I see how this layout is smaller in the X and Y direction. Micro-ATX and mini-ITX have already conquered that, however. We need to get rid of the add-on cards, so it is smaller in the vertical. Expansion sockets, not slots, would seem to be the answer.

Re:How about the vertical (1)

tchuladdiass (174342) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581568)

So what you're asking for is a board that has pcmcia / pc card / expresscard slots, instead of the standard ones? According to the article, the dtx standard specifies an expresscard slot, but it would be nice if multiple ones were spec'd (along with pc card).

What would be even nicer, though, is an open laptop specification. I want to be able to get a laptop shell and fill it with off-the-shelf components, or put a laptop motherboard / power supply in a micro-sized desktop case.

Re:How about the vertical (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583658)

Low profile cards do exist, they are a little harder to find. They seem to be pretty common for server cards. I used to have slim computer that accepted PCMCIA cards. I never used those slots though.

Something they forgot to mention... (1)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581056)

... one of the main reasons that BTX went down the tubes is because manufacturers had to pay royalties to Intel. That is not the case with the new DTX.

    Personally, I would rather have seen something more substantially different from MicroATX, but I still think that there is a good chance of this catching on.

Put the CPU on the backside! (4, Interesting)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581148)

I cant for my life understand why all the computer manufacturers insist on having the CPU inside the box. Its the worst possible place to cool it. Not only is it hot in the box, its also very hard to get a good airflow going. By placing the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and let it protrude out from the case it would be very feasable to use passive cooling. One 10x20 cm cooling plate with fins is more than enough to cool away 120w if there is a free flow of air.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

White Yeti (927387) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581742)

What an idea! I've seen this on stereo receivers from the 70's and 80's (maybe still...don't know). The big power transistors are set into heat sinks located on the left and right OUT-sides of the case. The heat sink could be designed to provide physical protection for the CPU.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

OglinTatas (710589) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581796)

I always wondered why one couldn't run heat pipes to the chassis, and use that as a heat sink? The heat sink then has a minimum surface area of and unobstructed PC, (don't perch the monitor on top of it, or pizza boxes, etc.) and higher end cases could incorporate fins to increase the area even more. If one is really hardcore, one might put a waterbock on the heat sources and pump some fluid (mineral oil, to minimize leak damage and corrosion of the cooling system?) through channels in the case/heatsink.

Similarly, for a laptop, use the back of the screen as the heat sink, and again add fins as needed. Why one needs to dump the heat onto the desk surface or worse, the user's lap, is beyond me.

typo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581970)

#define waterbock waterblock

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

gomoX (618462) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582378)

That already exists and it costs a ton of money.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/01/15/noiseless_c omputing/ [tomshardware.com]

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

OglinTatas (710589) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582566)

So I'm not just a crackpot after all!

$1400 though... daaayum!

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581826)

"if there is a free flow of air."

That's a big freakin' "if". It's a much better idea to locate the CPU inside the case where you can control the airflow, rather than outside the case where people will jam it into a too-small cabinet and wonder why it keeps crashing.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (4, Insightful)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581956)

A very creative idea. But it isn't correct, I argue: We put the CPU inside the box because the box is a controlled environment. Many times I run computers with their boxes open, but only when I know that the external airflow is more than the internal airflow. However, having an industry standard with the CPU dependent on external airflow is not correct because people won't know how to properly place their computer, and thus this is a recipe for tech-ignorant people to burn their CPU. If you know what you are doing, then it is really better to have the CPU outside the box, but only if you are smart enough to set up your space in such a way where the CPU will receive more airflow externally (some people use a big room airfan or an aircondition blowing cool air directly against an open box).

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582036)

By placing the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and let it protrude out from the case it would be very feasable to use passive cooling.

This is true, but mounting the CPU outside of the case has downsides as well. The computer takes up more space and delicate parts are not protected against bumps, jolts, and other accidents (the infamous juice or beer spill) that tend to happen in the consumer environment. It would only take one errant toddler to bump into the exposed heat sink, which would then act as a lever against the exposed CPU, and that would be the end of that. No, for the majority of the people out there the box is the best solution.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17582852)

Yeah, sure, right ... It is a BOX. Things GO INSIDE IT.

Why don't we just put EVERYTHING on the outside because it is cooler - power supply, RAM, drives, video cards, etc. etc.

Then you could have more storage space inside for your unmentionables. Obviously they're too tight on your backside.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583082)

I cant for my life understand why all the computer manufacturers insist on having the CPU inside the box. Its the worst possible place to cool it. Not only is it hot in the box, its also very hard to get a good airflow going. By placing the CPU on the backside of the motherboard and let it protrude out from the case it would be very feasable to use passive cooling. One 10x20 cm cooling plate with fins is more than enough to cool away 120w if there is a free flow of air.


You've never owned a desktop form-factor computer, have you? Or a MediaPC, for that matter.

Before there were towers, there were desktops. And a lot of people tend to prefer desktops, for aesthetic reasons. I'm one of them. I haven't owned a tower case since 2 computers ago, and putting the CPU on the "backside" of the motherboard would make that impossible. No thanks.

Put the cooling on the backside! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17583122)

Hehe. Nice to know I was several years ahead of others. :) Anyway my idea didn't involve protruding from the case (it's not necessary). My case has the MB in an MB tray, and there's a inch and a half gap between the back of the tray and the case. Plenty of space for a cooling solution be it water, heat pipes, or air. And this case isn't even designed for that.

Re:Put the CPU on the backside! (1)

jhfry (829244) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583548)

I'll take this two steps further.

1. Place the CPU on the opposite side of the MOBO, with a little thermal paste and a couple of precision standoffs you could effectively couple it thermally with the MOBO backplane... which would of course be one big heatsink cooled by a blower forcing air behind the motherboard, between the backplane and the side of the case.

2. make most of the upgrades externally accessible. This is a bit more of a total redesign, but seriously, who really needs room for full length cards anymore... and can't we just do away with PCI altogether now. Lets replace it with an upgrade cartridge design thats about 4x4x1 and snaps into an external slot on the outside of the case, almost like a removable HDD caddy but smaller.

troolHkore (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581172)

perform keepIng [goat.cx]

YUO FAIL IT@! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17581258)

need your help! else up their asses Why not? It's Quick your replies rather to survive at all

I'd rather have a laptop standard board (5, Insightful)

amigabill (146897) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581284)

I don't see much point in yet another desktop standard. We've laready got a number of good standards there. ATX, MicroATX, BTX, Mini-ITX, Nano-ITX, etc...

What I'd really love to see is a motherboard standard for the laptop. Let me choose the motherboard, the CPU, and other features on it, and let me choose the shell, and let me choose the screen to put into the shell with this chosen motherboard. Why is thre no LTX?

That'd be wicked cool.

Re:I'd rather have a laptop standard board (2, Insightful)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582406)

I'm not convinced that there can be a standardized notebook form factor and still have a desirable computer, I think it might hurt innovation because it looks like the size of notebooks have been steadily shrinking, a form factor with all standardized parts would only allow you one size machine and be a fixed thickness.

Battery types change, CPUs change, graphics change, add-in cards change and so on. There are differing ranges of CPUs, some consume 5 watts and others take 30 watts, the cooling system needs to be different, or rather, you can use a smaller and lighter cooling system for the 5 watt chips. If you have less powerful graphics, then you can scede space to somthing else, more powerful graphics require better cooling. Then you have different size screens, some people want 2-3lb notebooks, others don't mind 5-6 lb notebooks, some want cheap and don't mind thicker, others may want to pay for thinner devices, which requires stricter engineering. Tower computers generally have standardized internal parts because they are so large and you can give huge space margins for just about anything.

Re:I'd rather have a laptop standard board (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583490)

It would probably make them both bigger and more expensive. I guess you would save money if you were replacing parts all the time, but that doesn't seem like it would be the most common behavior.

A guess: Ati? (4, Informative)

QueePWNzor (1044224) | more than 7 years ago | (#17581404)

AMD and ATI merged recently. ATI is pushing CrossFire, two cards together. Most non-full-ATX boards can handle this. Will the DTX? They want to share technology, and this would be the perfect (though risky) opportunity. Though, of course, it would not be exclusive. I have heard some crazy stories of how to cool down dual-ATI uber-cards, so maybe the "low power" aspect can help this, too. Just speculation, though.

Dell, Gateway, HP and Sony have all pretty much (1)

bealzabobs_youruncle (971430) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582166)

gone completely BTX, so I don't see this happening. BTX is great, provides much better air flow than ATX and meets most of the same goals AMD is after here. I know Gateway and Dell are shipping AMD based boxes in BTX chasis on BTX motherboards, so I just don't see this happening.

VGA? Not dual DVI (2, Informative)

gr8_phk (621180) | more than 7 years ago | (#17582316)

It looks like they accept 1 DVI and one VGA connector. It doesn't look like it will fit 2 DVI connectors. IMHO it should have been made to accomodate 2 DVI or one of each, but there doesn't appear to be room. I for one and finnished with VGA and will only use DVI-D in the future.

Re:VGA? Not dual DVI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17583600)

No one is going to need more than 1920x1080 pixels. One DVI port should be fine ;-)

How about including single voltage power? (3, Interesting)

Skapare (16644) | more than 7 years ago | (#17583260)

How about including in this design the single voltage [google.com] power supply design that Google wants? You can read the original Slashdot discussion here [slashdot.org] .

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?