BTX your thoughts.....

[Majeztik12]

Just wondering what all you Intel users thought of the new BTX formfactor. From what I have "seen" and read....well my thoughts are reserved. Lets here it.

 

[so_cal_forever]

Great innovation, but it needs to be played out well. Time will tell if manufactuers need to do a sudden release or a slow one. Personally, I think it's great and it'll really do some good for the industry and hardware life-prolonging.

 

[covertclocker]

Looks like a good idea on paper. But if you can't make airflow efficient cases, it defeats the purpose and could be a disaster for poorly ventilated rigs. Just my two cents and a bag of chips.

 

[Catsonar]

Wasn't it Intel that brought us the ATX stardard? cause if that is the case then, there you have it BTX is the future.

 

[mike_j_johnson]

Just read a very nice article on BTX since the NDA was dropped today. The article convinced me that it is a very good idea, and there are alot of good features about it.

One of them that stuck out with me was a standardized plug between the PC case and motherboard. If this is true, then we will no longer have to toil over impossible to understand motherboard manuals and pdf files trying to figure out how to hook up case lights, on/off & reset switches, internal speaker, etc. etc. I have always wondered why there never was a standard industry wide accepted plug.

Also there is a hint to more modular designs with cabling. If you are not using a cable, then unplug it from the device so its not just laying in the case. Air flow and breathing room is more important with BTX.

SATA HDDs and Optical drives will also be a help with air flow.

Getting rid of legacy devices on the motherboard should help too. The intel BTX board I read about didnt have a floppy connector actually on the board. Its about time people switch to USB memory sticks, or USB floppies. We need to get away from old tech. Again, simplicity and room for air to flow is king.

 

[FreiDOg]

AnandTech has a decent writeup on it.

Looks like a decent improvement for small form factors,
but I really don't see the apeal for normal sized boards / towers.

 

[lazyman]

Enthusiasts have been toying with water cooling; large high speed fans only to find the radiators and heat sink sizes growing on a monthly basis; water block becoming more expensive in search of speed that may be 6 to 12 months ahead of the out of the box processor and laptop performance could deliver.

Unlike auto racing industry; a well equipped / tweaked street legal machine maintains its value longer than a highly tweaked PC. Would the craze in recent 4 years continue? Average age group of PC enthusiasts is in the 20’s and mostly single males. In order to keep up with the latest ever changing processors; motherboard; graphic cards; water blocks; pumps, etc, a single male PC enthusiast may spend over $1,000 per year and hundreds of hours to stay on the hobby. Granted, there are many hobbies cost thousands more. Look around the people driving a brand new Corvette, average age is 50. Look at a young doctor or well doing young lawyer driving Porsche or Benz; because they don’t have time to do anything except driving to the hospital and office. After marriage with a young family growing, ordinary people just wouldn’t have the time and resource (money) to toy with PC.

As most of us know, a PC sitting at a home idles (shut down) 90% or better, while an office PC is on at least 8 hours per day. Not the enthusiasts PC; PC in general I am referring to. When I had my 8 to 5 job, I was so sick of starring at the monitor I seldom turn my PC on at home; an occasional games may be. Often, before I could finish a single section of the game, either my wife or one of the kids would be breathing on my neck only to find myself doing other things. Now the question remains, would the 12 to 15-year-old stop going to baseball, football and other sports after this internal craze and follow the footsteps of their older brother in the quest for water cooling/vapor chilling PC as a hobby we have seen?

Back to AMD, a brand name that was not quite acceptable for people in the corporate world. The K-2 became popular in 1997-98 timeframe totally missed the Y2K fiasco. It was not until 2000 and 2001 when buyers found the pricing attraction of AMD and I did not know anyone in the 30’s was using an AMD rig at home during this time (Okay, I am a slow kind of guy.) It was about the time Intel got its second screw up with the P4 423 socket allowing AMD stock to hit the second highest value. Intel regained its footing after the Northwood and hyper thread only to find its’ arrogant attitude taking over once more. The Prescott is a disaster; the unwillingness to go 64-bit forcing Microsoft (no difference than Dell) to side with their decision allows AMD to stay ahead. To make matter worse, AMD 90nm does not have the same thermal characteristic as Intel; this alone would cut cost for Dell. Hey, reducing cost is the same as increasing profit.

Now BTX; another Intel way to say forward march, all the thermal problem it created will be gone. Spend your hard earn money; invest in "me" and you shall receive something that is not only good for you but also good for your children.

Imagine all the re-toolings involve in an industry that has been fallen in profit.

If I think BTX is good; I would put money in Intel Stock. Anyone?

Take a good look at AMD stock recently.

My 50 cents of input.

 

[xonik]

That post should have been written six months ago. Now, many of those points are quite laughable.

Intel's 90 nm process is solid. We can see that clearly by the Dothan Pentium M, with its superior frequency scaling yet lower power dissipation.

x86-64 from Intel has arrived, even though a popular OS for it hasn't.

And the NetBurst architecture is done as far as the Intel brass is concerned.

And as for those stock comments, just who are you trying to appeal to? Most of us enthusiasts don't care about the stock prices of tech companies, and besides, we poke fun at the analysts who shape the stock prices more than anything.

 

[covertclocker]

Intels 90nm process for the Dothan is solid, but how many enthusiasts are citing Dothan for its lack of heat output, and look at how many enthusiasts are crying about heat that is enough to cook a turkey with from the Prescott. You sound like a trumpet for Intel, but lets be serious here. Intel constantly told AMD that the market is not ready for a 64bit enabled chip for the mainstream. Now granted no one really uses the 64bit asside for linux fans and people playing around with the Windows 2003 64Bit and XP Betas, how do you think Microsoft got off their duffs to get cracking on it? It certainly wasn't Intel. AMD's success with the Athlon64 line bolstered confidence that people are ready to go 64bit. And if they are not, they still have an upgrade path that will last them for years to come. Add that to the fact that their $1000 CPU doesnt hold a flame to AMD's mid level Athlon 64's in gaming performance. I will say that they are good for the office environment, but look at servers. The Xeon Architecture is convoluted at best. Add a few more Xeons to the board and you have a system bus log-jam. Not only is the bus scheme inefficiant, you have to bump memory bandwidth onto the northbridge.

With the Opteron HyperTransport and On-die memory controller, I challenge you to find an Intel server that would scale as well as an Opteron. Lets face it, Intels hubris got in the way of being a pioneer. AMD dared to be different and now its paying off in spades. With Dell looking to supply AMD chips in the server market, the outlook has never looked brighter for AMD. Call me crazy.... but I think Intel will be rellegated to AMD's status during the early days of their existance. I can see AMD being the new market leader in all sectors within 10 years if Intel continues what they are doing. End of rant

 

[Deadpool9]

i think the new form factor is a great idea. the only problem i have with it is the fact that i was going to buy a new case soon, but the btx form factor really hasnt made a huge appearance in the market yet. so i am putting off buying a new atx case due to the fact that i dont want to spend $200+ on a cool case with mods and such, just to turn around and dump it 6 months later.

 

[splinter3k]

I just got 50 HPs at work with BTX compliant cases, it lives up to the hype. PIV 3.4E with Radeon X600s and 1gig DDR, I put them throuh Prime95, 3D Mark 2003 and Sandra burn in or hours, heat dissiaption was excellent and the fans never kicked up to full speed. Take a good look at those shots on Anand's write up and that is what we bought, and the air flow desgin is excellent. If this crates more opportunity for small form factor then roll it out!

 

[xonik]

Intels 90nm process for the Dothan is solid, but how many enthusiasts are citing Dothan for its lack of heat output, and look at how many enthusiasts are crying about heat that is enough to cook a turkey with from the Prescott.

That may be the case now, but now that enthusiast boards for the Dothan are beginning to come out, you'll probably eat your words.

You sound like a trumpet for Intel, but lets be serious here. Intel constantly told AMD that the market is not ready for a 64bit enabled chip for the mainstream. Now granted no one really uses the 64bit asside for linux fans and people playing around with the Windows 2003 64Bit and XP Betas, how do you think Microsoft got off their duffs to get cracking on it? It certainly wasn't Intel.

Oh, really? You don't think that the maker of 70% of PC processors has any effect on the arrival of an operating system? You think that a company who makes 20% of the processors has enough muscle to push the biggest software company to make an OS for them? In a best case scenario, where 100% of potential buyers want AMD's 64-bit products, AMD doesn't have the production capacity to provide enough processors to make it worthwhile to Microsoft.

AMD's success with the Athlon64 line bolstered confidence that people are ready to go 64bit.

What makes you so sure? I don't hear any of my relatives and friends asking for 64-bit when I recommend computers to them, or build them.

And if they are not, they still have an upgrade path that will last them for years to come.

Both major companies can claim that--don't be silly.

...

With the Opteron HyperTransport and On-die memory controller, I challenge you to find an Intel server that would scale as well as an Opteron. Lets face it, Intels hubris got in the way of being a pioneer.

Intel has hubris? Explain that one to me. Their Pentium M was a dramatic departure from their controversial Pentium 4-M line, and one that demonstrates that Intel understood the weaknesses of their NetBurst architecture and made appropriate changes with impressive results. Their canceling of the Tejas project again shows that Intel is no fool, which doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. The move towards a more parallel design is smart, and AMD's approach is similar. The dropping of the clock frequency naming scheme again shows that Intel can swallow its pride. I don't feel the need to defend Intel, because you should see quite plainly that they aren't the arrogant company you think they are. Their decisions as of late makes this quite clear.

With Dell looking to supply AMD chips in the server market, the outlook has never looked brighter for AMD.

Okay, I have a bit of a problem with this. Dell is ALWAYS looking to feature AMD based systems, because it's good business. With their exclusive agreement with Intel, Dell has the power to negotiate with Intel and put the pressure on them by voicing their desires to feature AMD products. That forces Intel to sweeten the deal, and Dell profits by this. As an added bonus, it makes Dell look more friendly to people like you and me. Is Dell serious about buying AMD products in the future? You can bet they are, as the entire AMD64 lineup is quite solid. But like the old adage goes, they haven't put their money where their mouth is, yet.

Call me crazy.... but I think Intel will be rellegated to AMD's status during the early days of their existance. I can see AMD being the new market leader in all sectors within 10 years if Intel continues what they are doing. End of rant

But they aren't continuing what they are doing. End of rant.

 

[nomar]

If BTX motherboards don't have floppy controllers and XP doesn't have built-in SATA drivers, how would you install XP on a BTX system? Can BTX mobos make the A: drive a USB memory stick?

Any pics of BTX configurations?

 

[mike_j_johnson]

Boot from CD/DVD to install Windows. SATA drives are recognized at the BIOS level. You need drivers for RAID. When asked for a RAID driver in Windows setup, you can use a USB storage device for the RAID driver. I have done this before myself on an i875P chipset using the intel native SATA RAID and a USB Storage device (ie USB Memory Stick, USB Floppy drive, etc.)

 

[zandor]

I wanted more slots. Still only 7, and with SLI vid cards chewing up extra room that makes even less space for my cards. I've got 6 now, and I wish I could add one more but I just don't have the slots (6 slot mobo).
Other than that, it annoys me a bit because I've got this huge Antec 14 bay ATX case I rather like. Ah well, my next upgrade is likely to be AMD anyway, and AMD doesn't like BTX since it doesn't work well with thier integrated memory controller setup.
I have a suspicion that BTX may not stick. It's geared towards improved cooling for ever hotter CPUs, but Intel looks to be set to base thier future CPUs on the Dothan, not the P4's NetBurst architecture. If heat output drops in the next generation, the case for BTX is much weaker. With AMD and other manufacturers pushing against it, it may well fail.

 

[drewb99]

BTX is a lousy idea on paper AND in practice. Even the proposal alone alienates most manufacturers because literally NOTHING except for optical drives and hard drives will fit in a BTX case requiring mobo manufacturers, PSU manufacturers, ect. to re-tool their entire line, which isn't suprising coming from the company that for no reason at all putting pins on the motherboard instead of the CPU was a good idea. In practice, it takes the cold intake air and runs it over the CPU first thing- dispersing the hot air to every other componant in the case. Intel tried adressing this by adding a patchwork of ducts and extra fans, but it's pointless because just keeping ATX would solve all the problems BTX has.

 

[xonik]

for no reason at all putting pins on the motherboard instead of the CPU was a good idea.

You're wrong, the LGA mating scheme is used in many applications besides processors, in situations where a lot of current needs to be delivered in a small surface area. The Prescott and future dual core processors draw more current than any other desktop processor, and it got to the point where PGA/BGA packaging solutions couldn't deliver the required current. Therefore, LGA was substituted.

 

[drewb99]

I'm seeing Xeons and Opterons run fine and happy with the 'old' pin setup which use 15W and a few tenths of a volt more than Prescott easily, therefore it's a pointless move. Moreover, Prescott's dead because it was a power hog and ate much more power than other chips needed to get the same performance, so it's a bad comparison to desktop chips as a whole. Dual core chips needing more current? We'll see, but I think the preferred way to do things is to just build the socket bigger if there's an explicit need for power (i doubt it if transistors get good enough to stop leaking as much as they do & if 700+ pin sockets start to get more common). I'm not too opposed to the idea, but it seems more like Intel trying everything in the book to make their ho-hum chips work better at the expense of the groups that build the sockets & motherboards.

 

[0ldman]

I'm not impressed.

For small form factor, yes, it looks kinda nice. In trying to keep the CPU and other hot chips cool...
Enlight 7250... nuff said.

The only real systems I've seen were SFF, at least they do have PCIe vid card capability.

 

[xonik]

I'm seeing Xeons and Opterons run fine and happy with the 'old' pin setup which use 15W and a few tenths of a volt more than Prescott easily, therefore it's a pointless move. Moreover, Prescott's dead because it was a power hog and ate much more power than other chips needed to get the same performance, so it's a bad comparison to desktop chips as a whole. Dual core chips needing more current? We'll see, but I think the preferred way to do things is to just build the socket bigger if there's an explicit need for power (i doubt it if transistors get good enough to stop leaking as much as they do & if 700+ pin sockets start to get more common). I'm not too opposed to the idea, but it seems more like Intel trying everything in the book to make their ho-hum chips work better at the expense of the groups that build the sockets & motherboards.

That's a very short-sighted viewpoint, wouldn't you think? It's my impression that most computer enthusiasts want a socket/platform that lasts. The LGA socket will allow motherboards to deliver more and more power to future CPUs (yes, even the Dothan successor will eventually overshadow the Prescott in power requirements). And with dual-core CPUs in the near future, this demand is very real. As for today's Prescott, it certainly draws more power than Opteron and Northwood-era Xeons, the spec sheets don't lie. I don't know where you got that information.

Not only does the Prescott draw more power, but because it runs at a lower voltage, it draws more current than if it ran at a higher voltage (power = voltage * current).

You can't be serious when you ask if dual-core processors will draw more current. I'll leave this to the rest of the thread's viewers to judge the rationality of that statement.

A bigger socket, you say? What does that solve? It still requires the user to upgrade the mainboard to fit the new processor, and vice versa. Not only that, but it increases its real estate on the PCB. A vote for a larger sized socket is a vote for less features, larger boards, or lower stability. Take your pick...

You're right, the costs of LGA are shouldered on the board manufacturers. Was it Intel's intention? Maybe. Was it sound from an electrical engineering perspective? Absolutely.

 

[FreiDOg]

Not only does the Prescott draw more power, but because it runs at a lower voltage, it draws more current than if it ran at a higher voltage (power = voltage * current).

Actually, yea, if it ran at a higer voltage it would draw more current.
It would draw less current if it were run at a lower voltage.
MOSFET physics, the bigger the voltage between the source and drain, the higher the drive current. (you do get diminishing returns when running higher than saturation voltage).

Increasing current comes from adding transistors, not from lowering the supply voltage.

You can't be serious when you ask if dual-core processors will draw more current. I'll leave this to the rest of the thread's viewers to judge the rationality of that statement.

Well, dual core probably won't incrase current draw signifigantly because it's expected the dual core offerings will use low voltage cores.

That's a very short-sighted viewpoint, wouldn't you think? It's my impression that most computer enthusiasts want a socket/platform that lasts. The LGA socket will allow motherboards to deliver more and more power to future CPUs (yes, even the Dothan successor will eventually overshadow the Prescott in power requirements). And with dual-core CPUs in the near future, this demand is very real. As for today's Prescott, it certainly draws more power than Opteron and Northwood-era Xeons, the spec sheets don't lie. I don't know where you got that information.

Well Dothan probaby isn't overtaking Prescott, but if the Pentium-M Arch is adopted (back) to the desktop chips, eventually we may see it in that 100+A club.

And an LGA socket is the best design for a 100+A chip scale on.
But right now 90nm Athlons are ~45A IDD max, Dothans are 21A IDD max, Socket478 delivers 90A IDD max to support the 3.2E. It might be short sighted to say LGA isn't needed, but it's also a long ways down the road before the more power conservative chips need to move off PGA.

 

[xonik]

Some interesting stuff. Come to think of it, the MOSFET design does make sense in the way you described it. This is one of those things where you have to differentiate between correlation and direct relationship

As for the dual cores, it would take a heck of a voltage reduction if the current draw wouldn't be increased significantly. After all, there will be about double the transistors, and while less than double the transistors will be on at any given point, it's still a lot more transistors.

 

[FreiDOg]

for intel there will probably be current jump to dual core. Just judging by how poorly Prescott has performed with respect to power management on the desktop. While we haven't seen an attempt at a low volt Xeon in quite some time, it just doesn't seem like Nocona would be well suited to low power operation.

AMD does have some proven low power Opterons, Opteron HE up to 2.0ghz is a 55W (39A IDD max + a few W for I/O power), if we assume they get the same ~20% drop in IDD max going to 90nm, it's probably about a ~31A core. So low to mid 60A for a dual core, considering 'normal' desktop chips right now are 57A (the FX55 on strained silicon is 67A), that's a fairly minor increase to go to dual cores.

 

[whitewale]

Boot from CD/DVD to install Windows. SATA drives are recognized at the BIOS level. You need drivers for RAID. When asked for a RAID driver in Windows setup, you can use a USB storage device for the RAID driver. I have done this before myself on an i875P chipset using the intel native SATA RAID and a USB Storage device (ie USB Memory Stick, USB Floppy drive, etc.)

Hmm, the last time I checked I couldn't convince a WinXP setup to accept anything but drive A. So you would have to try to set your USB storage device to drive A on a bios level, not something I'd see your average system builder do.
In regards to BTX - I can't see that scheme work well for high end machines. Blowing warm air over a 6800 GT or 800 XT sounds like trouble to me, requiring ducted air intakes for the graphic cards (for which at least in the cases I've seen is little space).
Great scheme for your run of the mill office machine, so Dell is sure to sell millions of it.

 

[wizzackr]

BTX is a lousy idea on paper AND in practice. Even the proposal alone alienates most manufacturers because literally NOTHING except for optical drives and hard drives will fit in a BTX case requiring mobo manufacturers, PSU manufacturers, ect. to re-tool their entire line, which isn't suprising coming from the company that for no reason at all putting pins on the motherboard instead of the CPU was a good idea. In practice, it takes the cold intake air and runs it over the CPU first thing- dispersing the hot air to every other componant in the case. Intel tried adressing this by adding a patchwork of ducts and extra fans, but it's pointless because just keeping ATX would solve all the problems BTX has.

i'm with you on this, well put. hopefully AMD and all major mobo/case manufacturers will not follow suit and let BTX die just like WTX...

 

[wwparrish]

Useless I hope it dies a quick death.

 

[splinter3k]

Yeah, because change is bad! What's really funny is that one day AMD will bump up against a thermal issue and most of you will change your tune in a heart beat. Too late, Dell, HP and Shuttle are all shipping BTX products, apparently Intel has more muscle than Internet message boards.

 

[mike_j_johnson]

Yeah I find it funny when people bitch about new technology. We wouldnt be using the machines we are today if the "bitchers" always got their way lol.

SATA, PCI Express, BTX, Widescreen LCDs, LGA775/Socket 939, Dual core CPUs, 64bit computing, etc. And the list goes on, but who needs all that new stuff when what we have now works?? right?? lol

 

[splinter3k]

Seriously true, we all upgrade motherboards on a steady basis, how tough is it to buy a new case once in a while? Worst case scenario what are we talking about, $100?

 

[0ldman]

Show me the benefits of BTX and I'll jump aboard. So far all I've seen have been small form factor, which hasn't really impressed me. A not quite silent case with high temps... whoo hooo...

It is the entirely different format that I don't like, as well as the apparent heating of the other devices by the air output from the CPU fan.
I want my CPU to be the last thing in line or in a line of its own as in the Enlight 7250 case.

I'm all for improvement, but BTX doesn't appear to be better, just different.

 

[xonik]

Well, I for one am sick of the conjecture, and I'd like to see if BTX offers what it says it does. I'm not directing this at you, 0ldman, but it seems that there are a lot of armchair thermodynamics experts who really don't know about this thing. I guess we need to see some actual data taken for this design, to see if Intel has dropped the ball or is actually onto something here. Without that data, I think our discussions will continue fruitlessly.

 

[0ldman]

Agreed.
The only real example was on Anandtech and SFF. Temps sucked, but it was SFF.

As far as temps by design go, its kind of a toss up anyway. Its not directly comparable, but look at engine design, example, Ford 302. In older models, you cooled the block first(cooler), then heads(hotter), then back to the radiator to start the cycle again. Worked fine. On the later model 302's (5.0's) they cooled the heads first, the hottest part of the engine. The good part was the entire engine hit operating temperature faster, heater starting working faster, better oil viscosity, etc... the bad part was the late model 5.0 was more likely to run hot if anything went wrong.

As I've said several times, the Enlight 7250 series cases are great for near silent systems. The air duct over the processor keeps fresh air on the CPU, the PSU fan keeps case ventilation, and there is case fan should you need it. Nearly silent (the CDROM is usually louder) and case temps near ambient. BTX has to beat that as far as I see it.

 

[xonik]

No OEM is going to pay the money for the extra qualities of the Enlight 7250 case. On the other hand, they might be willing to embrace an industry push by Intel which leads to similar improvements. If you look at the ATX spec and nothing else, then compare it to the BTX spec, you'll find a much greater level of attention to thermal and acoustic characteristics. One could argue that if an ATX case could match the performance suggested by the BTX spec, a BTX with a similar level of thought put into it would perform better. But of course, it's all conjecture, isn't it?

 

[Synful Serenity]

I'm not doubting the thermodynamic benefits, nor endorsing it...I won't know until we have the chance to know. But I question whether it was necessary to flip the board over and render ATX obsolete. Perhaps compartmentalizing the CPU in existing ATX cases and exiting the air directly out of the case as some have done, could have been an option. Of course, that might be too expensive, but then again no one can be sure. I just think they jumped the gun here and didn't fully explore making modifications to existing ATX architecture, and that maybe making ATX non-compatible with BTX had some marketplace benefits to Intel. OF course, if this is true, this is at our detriment and expense having to throw out our existing cases, which we may have spent a good deal of money upgrading and modding. I hope AMD doesn't follow their lead.

If BTX succeeds, that is fine...but I hope we still have an ATX option if we want it. My comp has had the same case from 1995 when it was a Pentium 100MHz all the way to today with a P4, and I see no reason to junk it now.

 

[0ldman]

No OEM is going to pay the money for the extra qualities of the Enlight 7250 case. On the other hand, they might be willing to embrace an industry push by Intel which leads to similar improvements. If you look at the ATX spec and nothing else, then compare it to the BTX spec, you'll find a much greater level of attention to thermal and acoustic characteristics. One could argue that if an ATX case could match the performance suggested by the BTX spec, a BTX with a similar level of thought put into it would perform better. But of course, it's all conjecture, isn't it?

Its a fairly cheap $28 case. Easily copied.