What's happened to BTX

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.

For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876

What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
already happening?
38 answers Last reply
More about what happened
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Franklin" <franklin_lo@mail.com> wrote in message
    news:9568CA91D2F7031E75@130.133.1.4...
    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    > it
    > already happening?

    What's the rush? Nothing really changes, except that the mainboard is
    essentially flipped upside down. There are lots of little changes in BTX,
    but nothing that couldn't have easily have been incorporated into
    TX. -Dave
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Franklin wrote:

    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
    > already happening?

    It's pretty much DOA. Case makers and motherboard makers are not getting
    onboard. There's nothing wrong with ATX, and AMD has proven that CPU's
    don't have to run at the temperature of the sun, despite Intel's claims
    otherwise, the extra cooling benefit is moot at this point.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Dave C." wrote:
    >
    > "Franklin" <franklin_lo@mail.com> wrote in message
    > news:9568CA91D2F7031E75@130.133.1.4...
    > > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    > >
    > > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    > >
    > > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    > > it
    > > already happening?
    >
    > What's the rush? Nothing really changes, except that the mainboard is
    > essentially flipped upside down. There are lots of little changes in BTX,
    > but nothing that couldn't have easily have been incorporated into
    > TX. -Dave

    I hope that it will result in smaller PC cases. The height of a fairly
    standard ATX case is determined by the length of the mboard plus the height
    of the PSU. This results in a front with space for 2x3.5" + 4x5.25" units.
    Anybody installed 2 floppy drives, 2 CD-ROMS and 2 DVD drives?

    The depth of the ATX case is determined by width of the ATX server version
    of the mboard plus the depth of the drive units since they don't overlay the
    motherboard. As a result, my new PC is the size of a large travel suitcase :-)
    But never mind, it all look impressive (compared to my old AT). I understand
    that the BTX will be rather similar to the old AT!
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Johannes H Andersen" <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote in
    message news:414C8D2A.64CCD2D0@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com...
    >
    >
    > "Dave C." wrote:
    >>
    >> "Franklin" <franklin_lo@mail.com> wrote in message
    >> news:9568CA91D2F7031E75@130.133.1.4...
    >> > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >> >
    >> > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >> >
    >> > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed?
    >> > Is
    >> > it
    >> > already happening?
    >>
    >> What's the rush? Nothing really changes, except that the mainboard is
    >> essentially flipped upside down. There are lots of little changes in
    >> BTX,
    >> but nothing that couldn't have easily have been incorporated into
    >> ATX. -Dave
    >
    > I hope that it will result in smaller PC cases.

    It's supposed to allow for smaller PC cases. But if you read more about it,
    you realize that the same small sizes could be achieved in ATX boards if you
    were to cut off all the expansion slots. Essentially, that's what the
    smallest BTX board is . . . it's just a board with no expansion slots (or
    hardly any). -Dave
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:54:48 +0100, Franklin <franklin_lo@mail.com>
    wrote:

    | Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    |
    | For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    |
    | What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
    | already happening?

    Nothing official yet, but it wouldn't be the first thing to be
    cancelled due to lack of interest. ;-)

    Larc


    §§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Franklin's log on stardate 18 ruj 2004

    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed?
    > Is it already happening?

    I saw an IBM ThinkCentre with 915G chipset and it has several interesting
    things implemented, but I'm not very impressed. Some things are improved
    to improve cooling efficiency but everything else is, to say the least,
    strange. Perhaps bigger difference will be noticed on brand boards, but
    until that time, as I said, not very promising. I can send you some
    pictures, if you wish.


    --
    Prvo smo pili Stock. Kada je nestalo Stocka, presli smo na Vlahov. Kada je
    nestalo Vlahova, presli smo na pivu. Kada je nestalo pive, presli smo na
    Islam...
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:31:50 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
    <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote:


    >I hope that it will result in smaller PC cases. The height of a fairly
    >standard ATX case is determined by the length of the mboard plus the height
    >of the PSU. This results in a front with space for 2x3.5" + 4x5.25" units.
    >Anybody installed 2 floppy drives, 2 CD-ROMS and 2 DVD drives?

    If the cases got smaller, the only dimension I wouldn't want
    smaller is the height. Anything but a full tower will
    usually fit under a desk, and if it's ON the desk, what
    difference does it make how tall unless you have very low
    flying aircraft?

    It is very easy to use all the bays you mention.

    For example, 2 optical drives, a front bay fan controller,
    and a removable hard drive, fill the external 5.25".
    External 3.5 can easily be filled with a floppy and flash
    card reader. So, there isn't even room for 3 optical drives
    for some people unless the case is a full tower.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:02:10 -0400, "Dave C."
    <mdupre@sff.net> wrote:


    >It's supposed to allow for smaller PC cases. But if you read more about it,
    >you realize that the same small sizes could be achieved in ATX boards if you
    >were to cut off all the expansion slots. Essentially, that's what the
    >smallest BTX board is . . . it's just a board with no expansion slots (or
    >hardly any). -Dave
    >

    Mostly it looks like it just puts more airflow past Intel's
    CPUs, which they already knew would exceed 100W.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    kony wrote:
    >
    > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:31:50 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
    > <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote:
    >
    > >I hope that it will result in smaller PC cases. The height of a fairly
    > >standard ATX case is determined by the length of the mboard plus the height
    > >of the PSU. This results in a front with space for 2x3.5" + 4x5.25" units.
    > >Anybody installed 2 floppy drives, 2 CD-ROMS and 2 DVD drives?
    >
    > If the cases got smaller, the only dimension I wouldn't want
    > smaller is the height. Anything but a full tower will
    > usually fit under a desk, and if it's ON the desk, what
    > difference does it make how tall unless you have very low
    > flying aircraft?

    As a home builder, I don't really mind a large case, but the size of the
    steel case also add to the weight of the thing. The computer I use at work
    is a proprietary Siemens about half the size and very quiet.

    > It is very easy to use all the bays you mention.
    >
    > For example, 2 optical drives, a front bay fan controller,
    > and a removable hard drive, fill the external 5.25".
    > External 3.5 can easily be filled with a floppy and flash
    > card reader. So, there isn't even room for 3 optical drives
    > for some people unless the case is a full tower.

    I do have a sneaking suspicion that these devices such as fan controllers
    and card readers are there to fill a cosmetic void, so to speak, so that
    you don't have to look at all those empty panels. Just think of all the
    modding that's going on.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    it
    > already happening?

    Gateway in the US has just started shipping BTX format PC units.

    I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why change
    something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and quiet
    PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.

    --
    Regards,
    Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)

    Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    http://www.discogs.com
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why
    > change
    > something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and
    > quiet
    > PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.
    >

    EXACTLY!!! -Dave
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Delayed; probably until 2005.

    --
    DaveW


    "Franklin" <franklin_lo@mail.com> wrote in message
    news:9568CA91D2F7031E75@130.133.1.4...
    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    > it
    > already happening?
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Franklin" <franklin_lo@mail.com> wrote in message
    news:9568CA91D2F7031E75@130.133.1.4...
    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    > it
    > already happening?

    from i can see BTX will let us use smaller cases... but will make it a pain
    in the backside for people regularly opening their case etc.

    picoBTX looks tiny so much so that the graphics card and everything are
    installed totally different.

    it is gonna be a pain even to just add a new memory module!

    from the looks that is... maybe it isnt
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > > For example, 2 optical drives, a front bay fan controller,
    > > and a removable hard drive, fill the external 5.25".
    > > External 3.5 can easily be filled with a floppy and flash
    > > card reader. So, there isn't even room for 3 optical drives
    > > for some people unless the case is a full tower.

    > I do have a sneaking suspicion that these devices such as fan controllers
    > and card readers are there to fill a cosmetic void, so to speak, so that
    > you don't have to look at all those empty panels. Just think of all the
    > modding that's going on.

    I agree in part with what you say. LED fans, illuminous wiring etc, etc. The
    Coolermaster AeroGate / Musketeer or whatever they're called are a good
    example of this, as they do seem to be a bit over the top.

    However, a basic fan controller is handy bit of kit to have if you're
    running a high-spec PC. Just turn all the fans up to the max when you load
    up Doom3 or render that 400Mb+ plus Photoshop file, whisper quiet for all
    the other tasks.

    Card readers? I've got a USB model hidden in my desk drawer, I don't use it
    often enough to warrant the use of a drive bay.

    --
    Regards,
    Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)

    Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    http://www.discogs.com
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Johannes H Andersen" <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote in
    message news:414CAE38.CA1AD7A2@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com...
    >
    >
    > kony wrote:
    > >
    > > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 19:31:50 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
    > > <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > >I hope that it will result in smaller PC cases. The height of a fairly
    > > >standard ATX case is determined by the length of the mboard plus the
    height
    > > >of the PSU. This results in a front with space for 2x3.5" + 4x5.25"
    units.
    > > >Anybody installed 2 floppy drives, 2 CD-ROMS and 2 DVD drives?
    > >
    > > If the cases got smaller, the only dimension I wouldn't want
    > > smaller is the height. Anything but a full tower will
    > > usually fit under a desk, and if it's ON the desk, what
    > > difference does it make how tall unless you have very low
    > > flying aircraft?
    >
    > As a home builder, I don't really mind a large case, but the size of the
    > steel case also add to the weight of the thing. The computer I use at work
    > is a proprietary Siemens about half the size and very quiet.
    >
    > > It is very easy to use all the bays you mention.
    > >
    > > For example, 2 optical drives, a front bay fan controller,
    > > and a removable hard drive, fill the external 5.25".
    > > External 3.5 can easily be filled with a floppy and flash
    > > card reader. So, there isn't even room for 3 optical drives
    > > for some people unless the case is a full tower.
    >
    > I do have a sneaking suspicion that these devices such as fan controllers
    > and card readers are there to fill a cosmetic void, so to speak, so that
    > you don't have to look at all those empty panels. Just think of all the
    > modding that's going on.

    If you want small.. go to ITX .. It's small and would work for so many
    people..
    The problem is that most people want to spend about 25$ on a case AND power
    supply. If they look at some of the 100$(usd) or above solutions t hen they
    might just be surprised at some of the "ATX Like" systems that are out
    there.. I personally like the power supply out of the way of the motherboard
    cause it makes life easy when it comes to cleaning, inspecting, and
    installing.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > Mostly it looks like it just puts more airflow past Intel's
    > CPUs, which they already knew would exceed 100W.

    Whereupon later architectures will be based upon P-M:
    o So the big thermal need for BTX has partly evaporated
    o Top Prescott P4s exceed 115W, latest P-M vastly less watts

    That said, servers will probably retain high wattage CPUs:
    o BTX isn't a good solution for them - it's a desktop solution
    o Intel server boards have often been custom board/case design
    o Example - Dual-Xeon managing Dual-PCI in a 1U form-factor

    Nothing to stop a case being ATX/BTX, it's just "lego".
    The BTX PSU is an L shaped incarnation of ATX, more a pain.

    Pico-BTX is interesting for small footprint, near Mini-ITX with
    broader chipset & processor support. The BTX board offering
    has quite a small area for dual-CPU - perhaps a E-BTX like E-ATX.

    Motherboard obsolescence by case is overshadowed by RAM/Socket.
    For all we know LGA may be relatively short-lived - it's not very robust,
    so BTX is just another variable in the usual system design changes.

    BTX does try to "Dell-ise" the generic PC - for better & for worse.
    Better to buy the solution now than try to "future proof" which can be
    both expensive & self-defeating in terms of IT development anyway.
    --
    Dorothy Bradbury
    www.stores.ebay.co.uk/panaflofan for quiet Panaflo fans & other items
    www.dorothybradbury.co.uk (free delivery)
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:52:59 GMT, Johannes H Andersen
    <johs@ezouvwnmzusxsizefitterzxursaxzoe.com> wrote:


    >> If the cases got smaller, the only dimension I wouldn't want
    >> smaller is the height. Anything but a full tower will
    >> usually fit under a desk, and if it's ON the desk, what
    >> difference does it make how tall unless you have very low
    >> flying aircraft?
    >
    >As a home builder, I don't really mind a large case, but the size of the
    >steel case also add to the weight of the thing. The computer I use at work
    >is a proprietary Siemens about half the size and very quiet.


    I'm all for heavier cases though, find it disgusting how
    tinfoil-like some are and prefer a case at least large
    enough that it has a cross-brace. My feeling is that a case
    doesn't get moved that often, and when it IS being moved, it
    ought to be plenty sturdy to not shift/deform at all.

    Small I can understand, but depends on the system, since
    office boxes generally have far fewer components than an
    enthusiast's box.

    >
    >> It is very easy to use all the bays you mention.
    >>
    >> For example, 2 optical drives, a front bay fan controller,
    >> and a removable hard drive, fill the external 5.25".
    >> External 3.5 can easily be filled with a floppy and flash
    >> card reader. So, there isn't even room for 3 optical drives
    >> for some people unless the case is a full tower.
    >
    >I do have a sneaking suspicion that these devices such as fan controllers
    >and card readers are there to fill a cosmetic void, so to speak, so that
    >you don't have to look at all those empty panels. Just think of all the
    >modding that's going on.


    Naw, my main box is a pretty bland, even intentionally
    understated case... I even hid the LEDS and an IR sensor
    behind a small smoked plastic window that looks like it's
    merely a 1" black case badge.

    Fan controller is hidden behind front bay door and is very
    useful... the case is positive pressurized from front and
    side filtered intake so the fan controller allows gradually
    increasing fan RPM to compensate for filter dust
    accumulation, or to put it another way, to keep positive
    pressurization so dust only accumulates in the filters which
    would otherwise gradually cause a drift to negative pressure
    (partly due to being low-flow, quiet fans, only slightly
    pressurized to begin with) causing dust to come in all the
    little holes/cracks/etc.

    As for the flash card reader, if you have digital camera or
    anything else with a flash card, IMO it's easily worthwhile
    to have a reader and spare flash card or two/three/etc, even
    moreso these days with 1GB cards dropping to sub $100
    prices, it's another alternative for a very reliable and
    easily transportable storage device, in addtion to the
    devices you may have that use cards.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    BTX = Bit The (what's a word for "dust" that stars with X?)
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Tone-EQ" <tony.cue@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:2r3oe3F15u7etU1@uni-berlin.de...
    >> Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >>
    >> For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >>
    >> What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is
    > it
    >> already happening?
    >
    > Gateway in the US has just started shipping BTX format PC units.
    >
    > I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why
    > change
    > something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and
    > quiet
    > PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    > Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)
    >
    > Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    > http://www.discogs.com
    >
    I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    machines. If the Prescott generates a lot of heat now, at 3.2 MHz, what do
    you expect the heat generation of faster processors will be ? This may well
    be the only reason for the dual core path that both AMD and Intel have
    embarked upon. Which may make BTX unnecessary.

    PWY
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "PWY" <pyork22@*mail.com> wrote in message
    news:iA73d.12323$n%3.946440@twister.southeast.rr.com...
    >
    > "Tone-EQ" <tony.cue@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
    > news:2r3oe3F15u7etU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > >> Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    > >>
    > >> For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    > >>
    > >> What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed?
    Is
    > > it
    > >> already happening?
    > >
    > > Gateway in the US has just started shipping BTX format PC units.
    > >
    > > I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why
    > > change
    > > something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and
    > > quiet
    > > PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Regards,
    > > Tony. (tony.cue(at)tiscali.co.uk)
    > >
    > > Discogs: building the definitive database of electronic music...
    > > http://www.discogs.com
    > >
    > I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    > one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    > machines. If the Prescott generates a lot of heat now, at 3.2 MHz, what do
    > you expect the heat generation of faster processors will be ? This may
    well
    > be the only reason for the dual core path that both AMD and Intel have
    > embarked upon. Which may make BTX unnecessary.
    >
    > PWY
    >

    I would expect them to get about 130/140w from a 6.2 ghz machine..
    I dont think BTX is the answer.. the type of restrictions that intel put on
    the ATX and BTX form factor means that some exotic based cooling methods
    cant really be used (or else it's not in spec)
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Matt wrote:

    ....
    > Witness newegg's only BTX case:
    >
    > Cooler Master CM Stacker Full-Tower CASE, Model "STC-T01-UW" -RETAIL
    > http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProductDesc.asp?description=11-119-042&DEPA=1
    >
    > It is both ATX and BTX. Looks like a nice case, but costs $175 shipped.
    ....

    Which is about $10 for each kg of this truly Big Tower;-)
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > Is the pinout the same?

    24-pin, "moved along 20-pin" if that description makes sense.
    So nothing remarkable there.

    Intel is great at creating new connectors, pin-outs & such like.
    It also created the WTX form-factor which was a lead balloon.
    --
    Dorothy Bradbury
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

    On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 15:48:28 -0400, Ruel Smith <NoWay@NoWhere.com>
    wrote:

    >Franklin wrote:
    >
    >> What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
    >> already happening?
    >
    >It's pretty much DOA. Case makers and motherboard makers are not getting
    >onboard. There's nothing wrong with ATX, and AMD has proven that CPU's
    >don't have to run at the temperature of the sun, despite Intel's claims
    >otherwise, the extra cooling benefit is moot at this point.

    Was reading a business mag the other week, there was a quote from the
    CEO of AMD. He basically said: ..right now people aren't interested
    in Intel's products.

    I'd agree with that. Intel's management took a wrong turn back at
    rambus and haven't figured out how to get right yet. Probably blew
    all their good engineers out the door over the past few years with
    their P4 nonsense.

    Another company down the drain thanks to their marketing dept crack
    whores. All those stock options up the nose ;)
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

    <reader_1> wrote in message
    news:l7s1l0pdhfo67s258kg1hiib7dfof3gnn8@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 15:48:28 -0400, Ruel Smith <NoWay@NoWhere.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Franklin wrote:
    > >
    > >> What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed?
    Is it
    > >> already happening?
    > >
    > >It's pretty much DOA. Case makers and motherboard makers are not getting
    > >onboard. There's nothing wrong with ATX, and AMD has proven that CPU's
    > >don't have to run at the temperature of the sun, despite Intel's claims
    > >otherwise, the extra cooling benefit is moot at this point.
    >
    > Was reading a business mag the other week, there was a quote from the
    > CEO of AMD. He basically said: ..right now people aren't interested
    > in Intel's products.
    >
    > I'd agree with that. Intel's management took a wrong turn back at
    > rambus and haven't figured out how to get right yet. Probably blew
    > all their good engineers out the door over the past few years with
    > their P4 nonsense.
    >
    > Another company down the drain thanks to their marketing dept crack
    > whores. All those stock options up the nose ;)
    >
    >

    To be honest, I think Rambus (In its current development) really does kick
    ass.. But the problem is of course the cost..
    I wonder if their new kit will eventually make it out (I doubt it) .. as
    Spansions memory sales are doing far better than those on the intel side (I
    find that a bit odd myself) I wonder where they will start cutting corners.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    PWY wrote:

    >>
    > I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    > one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    > machines. If the Prescott generates a lot of heat now, at 3.2 MHz, what
    > do you expect the heat generation of faster processors will be ? This
    > may well be the only reason for the dual core path that both AMD and
    > Intel have embarked upon. Which may make BTX unnecessary.
    >
    > PWY

    5 MHz? Wow they are actually considering to make slower CPU's? Slower
    than the old 286 even.... Yo do know that Mega is less than Giga?
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Franklin wrote:

    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
    > already happening?
    BTX = A few centigrades cooler CPU's. 10's of centigrades WARMER
    everything else.....
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "PWY" <pyork22@*mail.com> wrote:
    >"Tone-EQ" <tony.cue@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
    >news:2r3oe3F15u7etU1@uni-berlin.de...
    [snip]
    >> I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why
    >> change
    >> something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and
    >> quiet
    >> PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.
    >>
    > I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    >one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    >machines.

    Not just yet though, they've dropped plans for the 4GHz P4:

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/14/intel_kills_4gh/


    Tim
    --
    Copyright, patents and trademarks are government-granted, time-limited monopolies.
    Intellectual property does not exist.
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Tim Auton" <tim.auton@uton.groupSexWithoutTheY> wrote in message
    news:8v83n0tv4fhseeqtqt7prilif7l14as1em@4ax.com...
    > "PWY" <pyork22@*mail.com> wrote:
    >>"Tone-EQ" <tony.cue@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
    >>news:2r3oe3F15u7etU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > [snip]
    >>> I don't see what the all fuss is all about, ATX and mATX is fine, why
    >>> change
    >>> something that works well? It's not that difficult to build a cool and
    >>> quiet
    >>> PC utilizing the fastest processor from either AMD or Intel.
    >>>
    >> I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    >>one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    >>machines.
    >
    > Not just yet though, they've dropped plans for the 4GHz P4:
    >
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/14/intel_kills_4gh/
    >
    >
    > Tim

    Yes, I saw that. Unless AMD decides to pump some serious gigahertz into
    their processors soon, BTX may never be needed. I understand the next move
    by both companies will be to dual core processors so unless these run hot,
    BTX will probably be postponed at least. Just conjecture on my part though.

    PWY
  29. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "Ykalon" <ykalon@softhome.net> wrote in message
    news:Hrfcd.6333$d5.53086@newsb.telia.net...
    > PWY wrote:
    >
    >>>
    >> I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that no
    >> one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5 MHz
    >> machines. If the Prescott generates a lot of heat now, at 3.2 MHz, what
    >> do you expect the heat generation of faster processors will be ? This may
    >> well be the only reason for the dual core path that both AMD and Intel
    >> have embarked upon. Which may make BTX unnecessary.
    >>
    >> PWY
    >
    > 5 MHz? Wow they are actually considering to make slower CPU's? Slower than
    > the old 286 even.... Yo do know that Mega is less than Giga?

    Yes, I know, in fact I retired recently largely because I found myself
    making these little slips.
    Fifty years of running a mind in high gear seems to take it's toll.

    PWY
  30. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    PWY wrote:

    >
    > "Ykalon" <ykalon@softhome.net> wrote in message
    > news:Hrfcd.6333$d5.53086@newsb.telia.net...
    >
    >> PWY wrote:
    >>
    >>>>
    >>> I have seen this topic discussed a number of times and it seems that
    >>> no one realizes that Intel may well be looking ahead to 4 MHz to 5
    >>> MHz machines. If the Prescott generates a lot of heat now, at 3.2
    >>> MHz, what do you expect the heat generation of faster processors will
    >>> be ? This may well be the only reason for the dual core path that
    >>> both AMD and Intel have embarked upon. Which may make BTX unnecessary.
    >>>
    >>> PWY
    >>
    >>
    >> 5 MHz? Wow they are actually considering to make slower CPU's? Slower
    >> than the old 286 even.... Yo do know that Mega is less than Giga?
    >
    >
    > Yes, I know, in fact I retired recently largely because I found myself
    > making these little slips.
    > Fifty years of running a mind in high gear seems to take it's toll.
    >
    > PWY

    Well, don't worry about it. NASA's got contractors doing backwards blueprints.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    > Yes, I saw that. Unless AMD decides to pump some serious gigahertz into
    > their processors soon, BTX may never be needed.

    Even if AMD and Intel pump some serious gigahertz into their processors
    (ever), BTX will never be needed. -Dave
  32. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    PWY wrote:

    > Yes, I saw that. Unless AMD decides to pump some serious gigahertz into
    > their processors soon, BTX may never be needed. I understand the next move
    > by both companies will be to dual core processors so unless these run hot,
    > BTX will probably be postponed at least. Just conjecture on my part
    > though.

    Dual core processors will definitely be hotter. You basically have 2
    processors, each putting out heat.
  33. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Franklin wrote:
    >
    > Last year Intel announced, BTX, the follow-=on to the ATX form factor.
    >
    > For example, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1876
    >
    > What has happened to BTX? Has it been dropped? Has it been delayed? Is it
    > already happening?

    Why this massive crossposting, and then you don't participate in the
    subsequent thread? You have done this before, haven't you?
  34. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    David Maynard wrote:
    > Well, don't worry about it. NASA's got contractors doing backwards
    > blueprints.

    Is that got something to do with reverse engineering, or something?

    Yousuf Khan
  35. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:

    > David Maynard wrote:
    >
    >>Well, don't worry about it. NASA's got contractors doing backwards
    >>blueprints.
    >
    >
    > Is that got something to do with reverse engineering, or something?

    Has to do with returning solar probes crashing into the ground instead of
    deploying the capture chute.

    >
    > Yousuf Khan
    >
    >
  36. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
    news:10n6m8v5mbmks55@corp.supernews.com...
    > Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >
    >> David Maynard wrote:
    >>
    >>>Well, don't worry about it. NASA's got contractors doing backwards
    >>>blueprints.
    >>
    >>
    >> Is that got something to do with reverse engineering, or something?
    >
    > Has to do with returning solar probes crashing into the ground instead of
    > deploying the capture chute.
    >

    I suppose that dropping the probe from a high altitude bomber to test it
    before spending the money to send it on the mission was deemed unnecessary
    or too expensive? Hindsight is truly 20/20.

    PWY
  37. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    "PWY" <pyork22@*mail.com> wrote:
    >"David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
    >news:10n6m8v5mbmks55@corp.supernews.com...
    [NASA crasha]
    >> Has to do with returning solar probes crashing into the ground instead of
    >> deploying the capture chute.
    >
    >I suppose that dropping the probe from a high altitude bomber to test it
    >before spending the money to send it on the mission was deemed unnecessary
    >or too expensive? Hindsight is truly 20/20.

    They actually did do that and it worked. You can't get the 3g, 10g, 3g
    (or is that -3g, -10g, -3g ;-) deceleration profile the sensor was
    designed to respond to by dropping something from a bomber.

    Still, you'd have hoped someone would have noticed in some other way.


    Tim
    --
    Copyright, patents and trademarks are government-granted, time-limited monopolies.
    Intellectual property does not exist.
  38. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    PWY wrote:

    >
    > "David Maynard" <dNOTmayn@ev1.net> wrote in message
    > news:10n6m8v5mbmks55@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    >> Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>
    >>> David Maynard wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Well, don't worry about it. NASA's got contractors doing backwards
    >>>> blueprints.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Is that got something to do with reverse engineering, or something?
    >>
    >>
    >> Has to do with returning solar probes crashing into the ground instead
    >> of deploying the capture chute.
    >>
    >
    > I suppose that dropping the probe from a high altitude bomber to test it
    > before spending the money to send it on the mission was deemed
    > unnecessary or too expensive? Hindsight is truly 20/20.

    Yes, hindsight is 20/20 when you're looking back observing 'the thing' that
    went wrong.

    Looking forward it's an infinite number of 'possibilities'.
Ask a new question

Read More

AMD Hardware Intel Homebuilt Overclocking Product