Whatever happened to BTX?

L

Liquid_Cooled

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
793
so whatever happened to BTX? I thought it was suppose to replace ATX, since quite a few cases are BTX compatible. I think I read somewhere that either AMD or Intel decided not to use BTX at the last moment.

Does anyone know if the new AMD AM2 or Intels Conroe will use BTX?
 
thats what i was thinking too. i noticed Hewlett Packard (i think?) is the only OEM using the BTX standard.
 
Liquid_Cooled said:
thats what i was thinking too. i noticed Hewlett Packard (i think?) is the only OEM using the BTX standard.
Click to expand...
Dell also sells a BTX-based unit.
 
Intel was going to be using the new form factor for better airflow. Someone realized this was a bad idea and canned it.
 
BTX was just another Intel attempt at innovation, kinda like RAMBUS, works in some situations, but all in all is stupid. The ATX design is still quite good especially with the PSU's with the bottom mounted 120 fans. I doubt we'll be seeing any pick up in BTX design in the near and mid future. Maybe 2 or three years down the road.
 
Yea, usually once something in the hardware world takes off, you'll definately notice. Seems though to become the norm, it has to be almost mandatory to upgrade to.

But look how long ATX has been around. :rolleyes:
 
I don't think BTX is totally bad, but I think it tried to change too much. IMO, the only problem with ATX is that typically the RAM, video card, and PSU create a "box" around the CPU, and it's harder to get the hot air out of all those pockets.

I like the idea of RAM slots parallel to the top of the MB and creating a "wind tunnel"-like effect. But the whole moving-everything-around-and-flipping-upside-down thing was a bit much.

BTW, AMD was opposed to BTX because their processors would not work with a strict BTX spec--the traces from the socket to the RAM slots was too great.

 
Mohonri said:
BTW, AMD was opposed to BTX because their processors would not work with a strict BTX spec--the traces from the socket to the RAM slots was too great.
Click to expand...


Correct, also the fact that Intel was dominating the decision making board who knew about this and also enforced the BTX spec to their likings.




Personally I think BTX will be scrapped if it's not already on the drawing boards to be scrapped.
 
Intel is full of dumbshits, rather then trying to build a better CPU, they created a whole new chassis and cooling system design to help cover up prescrapp and demoting that ATX was no longer the standard for future PC needs even though the rest of the industry runs just fine on ATX specc. The industry hated and basically refused to support BTX including*cough* AMD. As a result, they basically swallowed their pride and scrapped it for the most part.

With the major design modifications that ATX has ungone including PSU, fans, ducts ect..ect... BTX shows no promise of a "better" chassis standard.
 
It hasn't been scrapped. Intel has said they didn't expect to supplant ATX right away. It's a new design, which is meant to slowly replace ATX. That of course, is relative to their new focus on chips that won't be as hot as current CPUs.

The reference image in this story doesn't seem to make traces that much longer than current mobos from CPU to RAM: http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=2386

BTX will come eventually.

-bZj
 
IceWind said:
Intel is full of dumbshits, rather then trying to build a better CPU, they created a whole new chassis and cooling system design to help cover up prescrapp and demoting that ATX was no longer the standard for future PC needs even though the rest of the industry runs just fine on ATX specc. The industry hated and basically refused to support BTX including*cough* AMD. As a result, they basically swallowed their pride and scrapped it for the most part.

With the major design modifications that ATX has ungone including PSU, fans, ducts ect..ect... BTX shows no promise of a "better" chassis standard.
Click to expand...

Intel is not a just a processor company. Why shouldn't they develop new technologies? And why would they want to "cover up" their highly successful CPU line?
 
Maximus825 said:
Intel is not a just a processor company. Why shouldn't they develop new technologies? And why would they want to "cover up" their highly successful CPU line?
Click to expand...

They used their corporate power to muscle down amd into the BTX standard. Their processors are overheating and they are facing tough competition... the only way for them to come right doing this was to create a ducted air solution such as mounting the cpu near the front of the case.

AFAIK, they can develop lunar landing modules for all I care, just don't enforce it and tell everyone "okay, were the big tough guy on the block, do as we say or we will just overrun you!"
 
Down8 said:
It hasn't been scrapped. Intel has said they didn't expect to supplant ATX right away. It's a new design, which is meant to slowly replace ATX. That of course, is relative to their new focus on chips that won't be as hot as current CPUs.

The reference image in this story doesn't seem to make traces that much longer than current mobos from CPU to RAM: http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=2386

BTX will come eventually.

-bZj
Click to expand...


Just like RDRAM, 603 socket, or their infamous pre 478 socket.


This is another concept that will be scrapped because other companies are too busy to conform to Intels standards that they have forced everyone else to use. Corporate bullying at its finest.


The bottom line is that there is NO need to impliment BTX... no need.
 
Ockie said:
Just like RDRAM, 603 socket, or their infamous pre 478 socket.


This is another concept that will be scrapped because other companies are too busy to conform to Intels standards that they have forced everyone else to use. Corporate bullying at its finest.


The bottom line is that there is NO need to impliment BTX... no need.
Click to expand...

It's funny that you list the standards that didn't catch on while completely ignoring all those that did and are in use today... Not every idea is a winner, but that doesn't mean you should stop coming up with new and innovative technologies.
 
Maximus825 said:
It's funny that you list the standards that didn't catch on while completely ignoring all those that did and are in use today... Not every idea is a winner, but that doesn't mean you should stop coming up with new and innovative technologies.
Click to expand...

QFT. Intel invented PCI, PCI Express, and USB, among other things :D

Its good that Intel is coming up with new ideas. Without them, we may still be stuck with with ISA. You should thank Intel, if it wasnt for them we would all still have to manually set IRQ and I/O Adresses.

Icewind you shouldnt badmouth Intel so much. So Intels CPU's arent as fast as AMD's right now, doesnt mean they will stay that way forever. Look at the last 4 years of CPUs, each company managed to outdue each other. (Pentium 3, K7 T-Bird, Pentium 4A, Athlon XP, Pentium 4C, A64, ________). Who are you to say that Intel "is full of dumbshits"? You obviously havent heard of the upcoming Conroe.....
 
I don't see the problems with btx... if intel didn't make it would you still be so adament about how bad it is? come on! better airflow is good! it doesn't matter what processor is unning under it.
 
The funny part is that your praising ATX, yet bashing Intel for trying to replace it....I mean who came up with ATX anyways?!?! :rolleyes:
 
The reason Intel designed the BTX formfactor was to help lower temps. Since they where driving their proc with faster clock speeds, generating more heat. So a non issue for AMD. From what I gather a non-issue for Intel, since their proformance is no longer driven as much by clock speed. I could be wrong but, thats what I have heard and gathered.
 
tenpinsniper said:
The reason Intel designed the BTX formfactor was to help lower temps. Since they where driving their proc with faster clock speeds, generating more heat. So a non issue for AMD. From what I gather a non-issue for Intel, since their proformance is no longer driven as much by clock speed. I could be wrong but, thats what I have heard and gathered.
Click to expand...

yep, they were trying to use BTX because of the Pressys, but since their CPUs are cooler now, they can contiue with ATX, i think

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Cebit2005/Day2/images/msi_k8nmb.jpg

the only AMD btx mobo ive seen
 
tenpinsniper said:
The reason Intel designed the BTX formfactor was to help lower temps. Since they where driving their proc with faster clock speeds, generating more heat. So a non issue for AMD. From what I gather a non-issue for Intel, since their proformance is no longer driven as much by clock speed. I could be wrong but, thats what I have heard and gathered.
Click to expand...
Correct. The new (Pentium M-based) Intel CPUs aren't like the 100+ Watt TDP Prescott CPUs. In terms of energy efficiency they are about equal to, if not better than AMD's offerings. With <50 Watt TDPs, there's no need at all for BTX.

Also, the one aspect of BTX which everyone seemed to be raving about (improved cooling) has been accomplished by big OEMs in ATX systems for a while now, through the use of ducts, whereby the air after going through the CPU's HSF is immediately forced outside the case.

At this point BTX is a solution in search of a problem.
 
pincho said:
yep, they were trying to use BTX because of the Pressys, but since their CPUs are cooler now, they can contiue with ATX, i think

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Cebit2005/Day2/images/msi_k8nmb.jpg

the only AMD btx mobo ive seen
Click to expand...

The placement of the ide/sata ports on that are awful. My work currently buys intel 915ghm (BTX) mainboards and they are a little better, but still not good.

http://www.intel.com/design/motherbd/mh/pix/d915gmh_lg.jpg

The only complaint we have had back from users is that the blowing out of hot air into thier face is annoying,, lol.
 
N H O said:
i think i saw an AMD based gateway comp that used BTX
Click to expand...
Yeah they have a special BTX style mobo, MSI makes it I believe (they supposely have plans to release a consumer version).

IMO, BTX is Intel's response to their own Prescott heat problems and so BTX will probably stay in the OEM arena as a psuedo prorietary form factor.
weebob said:
The placement of the ide/sata ports on that are awful. My work currently buys intel 915ghm (BTX) mainboards and they are a little better, but still not good.
Click to expand...
What I don't understand is why place the IDE and SATA connectors in the airflow path, couldn't they stick them alittle down near the DIMM sockets?
 
yeah i know, whats the poin t of making a Form Factor which centralizes on cooling the most outta your rig, when theres going to be cables blocking the airflow? i ahve not seen any good wiring jobs for BTX.
 
weebob said:
The placement of the ide/sata ports on that are awful. My work currently buys intel 915ghm (BTX) mainboards and they are a little better, but still not good.
Click to expand...
The IDE and SATA ports may be bad, but it's not nearly as bad as having the entire POWER CONNECTOR in the middle of the airflow. Nothing quite like a 3/4" diameter bundle of wires to block a breeze...

 
Mohonri said:
The IDE and SATA ports may be bad, but it's not nearly as bad as having the entire POWER CONNECTOR in the middle of the airflow. Nothing quite like a 3/4" diameter bundle of wires to block a breeze...

Click to expand...

fair point...
 
Mohonri said:
The IDE and SATA ports may be bad, but it's not nearly as bad as having the entire POWER CONNECTOR in the middle of the airflow. Nothing quite like a 3/4" diameter bundle of wires to block a breeze...

Click to expand...

Depends. If you buy a quality mobo from a manufactuer like Asus, they have been placing P1 power connectors in the upper portion of the motherboard for years, basically negating any airflow interferance. Now Abit and MSI on the other hand *cough* :rolleyes:
 
Ockie said:
Correct, also the fact that Intel was dominating the decision making board who knew about this and also enforced the BTX spec to their likings.




Personally I think BTX will be scrapped if it's not already on the drawing boards to be scrapped.
Click to expand...
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/06/03/msi_amd_btx/

Of course, if AMD had come out with BTX, it would be the best thing evar !!111!111. I find it had to believe that people think "Yeah, Intel decided on BTX because of Prescott running so hot." That would mean a) Intel knew that they could never produce a cooler chip and b) Intel expected BTX motherboards, cases, and powersupplies to become the defacto standard overnight and c) Intel knew that the motherboard, case, and powersupply vendors would bow to Intel, sacrifice 5 blonde haired, blue eyed WoW virgins, leave offerings of food and drink on Intel's driveway to the Silicon Gods, and expect them to pump alllll of these BTX goodies out in a week. Come on.

And "Correct, also the fact that Intel was dominating the decision making board who knew about this and also enforced the BTX spec to their likings." I'm sure you know Intel was "dominating the decision making board who know about this and also enforced the ATX spec to their likings", right? And we all know how ATX has never caught on......

(A good example of this is when Intel developed PCI-E, and the "standards people" including AMD, bought off on it. Intel says, "Hey, we gots us here a gooder idea, PCI-Express." Booooooo, Intel is pushing another standard, boooooo, they're flexing their muscles, Prescott is hot, We the People don't use 8x AGP to full potential, they pay people off, etc, etc) And no, Intel didn't 'do' PCI-E on their own.

Someone explain to me how having the hottest component (be it AMD or Intel) next to the coolest air source is a bad idea.

Back to the original question, BTX is, and will be, a slow transition from ATX. You have 3 core components (case, powersupply, motherboard) that are affected by this. Those companies will not, and are not expected to, re-tool all at once to make BTX goodies. The major OEMS (Dell, Gateway, HP) are slowly transitioning, we have cases that offer the ability to do it, and slowly we are seeing btx mobo's showing up.
 
i thought the video card gpu was the hottest part. i didnt reall like the btx standard, it just looked wrong if cooling was the priority. there could have been better ways i think. it didnt seem to take into acount tower configurations.


i think there needs to be some directional tubing invention for the inside of cases to direct airflow,

or maybe hard drives on bottom front, external disc drives on top of front and big suckhole between them aimed right at the cpu,

or have the psu double as a blowhole for the case.

simpler things could have been done. than btx.
 
Ocean said:
i thought the video card gpu was the hottest part. i didnt reall like the btx standard, it just looked wrong if cooling was the priority. there could have been better ways i think. it didnt seem to take into acount tower configurations.


i think there needs to be some directional tubing invention for the inside of cases to direct airflow,

or maybe hard drives on bottom front, external disc drives on top of front and big suckhole between them aimed right at the cpu,

or have the psu double as a blowhole for the case.

simpler things could have been done. than btx.
Click to expand...

exactly. also like turning the gpu upside down, so the fan is on the top, like ASUS has done with one of its cards.
 
JetUsafMech said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/06/03/msi_amd_btx/

Someone explain to me how having the hottest component (be it AMD or Intel) next to the coolest air source is a bad idea.
Click to expand...

They can't!

Please note? After your [Bill&Ted]Most Excellent Post[/Bill&Ted] the Go-along-with-AMD-at-any-cost posters stopped posting. Intel worked on or got the first PCI, AGP, ATX, SATA, USB, and etc... just to name a few.

BTX is one of the best examples of, "If you don't have it and your competitors do, bad mouth it". Both Intel and AMD uses that method of negative PR. BTX wasn't just meant for Hot Prescott or the 150W TDP Tejas, there's much more. It was meant to;

1. Place Hot RAM, CHIPSET, Video Card and PROCESSOR so that ONE fan could cool them all.
2. This would then leave the whole insides of the case cooler and QUIETER.
3. Do away with cheap noisey Chipset coolers.
4. Neatly placed PSU/Drives so they do away with Wire and Cable clutter.
5. Make working on the inside a lot easier for DIYers and OEMs.
6. Last but least, allow the Video Card to now draw in much cooler air. The Video card also now faces up instead of down. So there's no need to reconfigure it.
7. Easier Routing of electrical lines.

All of these improvements over ATX SHOULD make or have made many of the very people bad mouthing BTX very happy. Who should be happy to see or use BTX? DIYers, Overclockers, Quiet PC Freaks, SFF users (Micro BTX) and most of all Modders, this is your dream Form Factor!

Since AMD and partners would have to spend money on R&D on even the smallest retro fit, they bitched so they wouldn't have to. Of course they didn't want to tell their F@ns; "We don't want to spend the Money on this very good Idea". So you then get this kind of Crap; "Our processors run cooler than Intel's so we don't need BTX". So their worshippers just take that and run with it. Never even taking the time to look at Dothan and Yonah or how it would help even with overclocking AMD processors.

Tech Report
Build or Buy.org
Extreme Tech
BTX Mobo
Micro BTX

So in a way, they're dissing; "DIYers, Overclockers, Quiet PC Freaks, SFF users (Micro BTX) and most of all Modders". Oh and Intel does make bloopers as well, they said; "slapping on a Memory controller will not make much of a difference", "adding 64bit to x86 will have little affect on the Desktop", "We don't need Hypertransport" and etc........
BTX is a very good idea and the sooner the market moves to it, the better. Sorry for the RANT!

Donnie27
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top