Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Sat Sep 20, 2014 3:39 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: amd and btx...will it happen?
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:01 pm 
BANNED
BANNED
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 15
im trying to build a new rig...just i hear alot about btx being the thing of the future....and i dont want to put my new rig in a atx case if btx is comming around the corner. That and i hear amd isnt really all for this btx stuff. anybody know anything about this?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:04 pm 
Team Member Top 50
Team Member Top 50
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:14 pm
Posts: 2108
Location: I'm Not sure
i doubt that AMD will go to BTX any time soon because its just Intel trying to save there own ass from there own problems


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:06 pm 
Northwood
Northwood

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:38 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: Room112
im pretty sure ATX will still be around when BTX format becomes dominant.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:35 pm 
Thunderbird
Thunderbird
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 3:51 pm
Posts: 844
keymaker wrote:
im pretty sure ATX will still be around when BTX format becomes dominant.



IF.... AMD dosn't dosn't seem particularlly eager for BTX alot of Case and MB makers are not super thrilled.


the only one really Pumped BTX is Intel (and that is mainly because Intel's latest chips are Hot like a Nuclear reactor)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: amd and btx...will it happen?
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:07 pm 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:10 pm
Posts: 6657
Location: Houghton, MI (Michigan Technological University)
Coolmanchu wrote:
im trying to build a new rig...just i hear alot about btx being the thing of the future....and i dont want to put my new rig in a atx case if btx is comming around the corner. That and i hear amd isnt really all for this btx stuff. anybody know anything about this?
AMD is a ways off from having to use btx. the only reason Intel is pushing it is because they werent smart nough to design a processor that was cool enough. amd is a long way from having their procs reach the temp of the press-hott.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:09 pm 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:24 pm
Posts: 4329
Location: Aggieland, TX
BTX is in the future sure, but dont expect to see it anytime soon.

And even if BTX is released, I bet ATX will still be alive and kicking alongside BTX.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:25 pm 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:10 pm
Posts: 6657
Location: Houghton, MI (Michigan Technological University)
SomeGuy wrote:
BTX is in the future sure, but dont expect to see it anytime soon.

And even if BTX is released, I bet ATX will still be alive and kicking alongside BTX.
oh, very much so. i was looking at building a pc back in 99-00 and was looking at starting off with a barebones system. most of the systems i was looking at then were still the at formfactor, even after many years of atx availability. atx and btx will peacefully coexist for many years to come.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 8:54 pm 
Klamath
Klamath

Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:50 pm
Posts: 312
It's not only BTX that I'm after, but also DDR2, which I haven't found in any AMD mobo's yet. With PCI Express on the way, I'm eager to have a mobo that has both these features. What harm can AMD have in going with a BTX form? So what if they aren't "hot" enough yet, atleast they'd be prepped for the future. Perhaps they will make a socket 939 board in BTX for AMD.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 9:01 pm 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:10 pm
Posts: 6657
Location: Houghton, MI (Michigan Technological University)
I Am Weasel wrote:
It's not only BTX that I'm after, but also DDR2, which I haven't found in any AMD mobo's yet. With PCI Express on the way, I'm eager to have a mobo that has both these features. What harm can AMD have in going with a BTX form? So what if they aren't "hot" enough yet, atleast they'd be prepped for the future. Perhaps they will make a socket 939 board in BTX for AMD.
amd is not going with either btx or ddr2, they dont need either of them. Intel needs btx due to their inability to design a cool running processor. Intel also needs ddr2 because the p4 has a voracious appetite for memory bandwidth. the athlon64 just doesnt need the bandwidth ddr2 can provide to perform on par with Intel. in fact, i doubt youd see much, if any, of a performance boost if you put the athlon64 fx-53 on a ddr2 board if it stayed at the same frequency. so in the end amd is designing much more efficient chips that dont need new expensive technologies to perform just as well as their Intel counterparts.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:16 pm 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:24 pm
Posts: 4329
Location: Aggieland, TX
I Am Weasel wrote:
It's not only BTX that I'm after, but also DDR2, which I haven't found in any AMD mobo's yet. With PCI Express on the way, I'm eager to have a mobo that has both these features. What harm can AMD have in going with a BTX form? So what if they aren't "hot" enough yet, atleast they'd be prepped for the future. Perhaps they will make a socket 939 board in BTX for AMD.


It can actually cause a good deal of harm

Many people dont want to have to upgrade their case, power supply, etc, just to move to BTX (unless they plan on changing those components anyway).

AMD doesnt need BTX yet, its that simple.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:18 pm 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 5:24 pm
Posts: 4329
Location: Aggieland, TX
athlon11 wrote:
I Am Weasel wrote:
It's not only BTX that I'm after, but also DDR2, which I haven't found in any AMD mobo's yet. With PCI Express on the way, I'm eager to have a mobo that has both these features. What harm can AMD have in going with a BTX form? So what if they aren't "hot" enough yet, atleast they'd be prepped for the future. Perhaps they will make a socket 939 board in BTX for AMD.
amd is not going with either btx or ddr2, they dont need either of them. Intel needs btx due to their inability to design a cool running processor. Intel also needs ddr2 because the p4 has a voracious appetite for memory bandwidth. the athlon64 just doesnt need the bandwidth ddr2 can provide to perform on par with Intel. in fact, i doubt youd see much, if any, of a performance boost if you put the athlon64 fx-53 on a ddr2 board if it stayed at the same frequency. so in the end amd is designing much more efficient chips that dont need new expensive technologies to perform just as well as their Intel counterparts.


Hehe, well, you should remember that I dont think heat is the big issue right now. It is AN issue, maybe a major one, but definitely not the only one.

Also, remember that Intel's Northwood procs run plenty cool, so the "inability" to make a cool running proc is a little off. Lets not forget AMDs Thunderbird procs either (I had one! If you thought Prescott was hot...).

(not an Intel fanboy)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:46 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:56 am
Posts: 1076
Location: Powder Springs, GA
i'm runnin on a thunderbird 1.4 right now. It runs between 39C and 41C.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:52 am 
Team Member
Team Member

Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 7:30 pm
Posts: 1691
Location: Houston Texas
its most likely amd is having heat problems going to the 90 nm transistion too though.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:28 am 
Boy in Black
Boy in Black
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 1:40 pm
Posts: 24339
Location: South of heaven
It's my thought that two form factors can not live piecefully in parallel. It's my own forcast that AMD will go BTX in the future:
  • It's not a bad design at all. Why not adapt it?
  • If Intel keeps pushing it, and they have already, then motherboard/case/powersupply builders will HAVE to adopt it if Intel products are already a large portion of their income
  • Along with the above, they'll already have the changeover part done. It won't be so hard to change an AMD board to BTX if the manufactuer has already been doing it for a while for Intel products.
  • If they don't, the individual manufactuers won't like building two standardized lines and will plead with AMD to make the switch
  • If we buy it, they will come.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:30 am 
Boy in Black
Boy in Black
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 1:40 pm
Posts: 24339
Location: South of heaven
Azn wrote:
its most likely amd is having heat problems going to the 90 nm transistion too though.


That, and they've yet had to deal with the raw clock speed they're going to have to reach at some point.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:35 am 
Boy in Black
Boy in Black
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 1:40 pm
Posts: 24339
Location: South of heaven
SomeGuy wrote:
Also, remember that Intel's Northwood procs run plenty cool, so the "inability" to make a cool running proc is a little off.


or that the new dothan temps are very nice, even with more cache and more speed. Besides, the new E0 stepping has hope for controlling the power loss


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:54 am 
INFINITE vCORE
INFINITE vCORE
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 467
Location: Middletown, DE
There are some other benefits to BTX besides cooling...

My fave is this: The layout reduces latency, because the NB. SB, RAM, and CPU are more logically laid out :)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:37 am 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:10 pm
Posts: 6657
Location: Houghton, MI (Michigan Technological University)
Chumly wrote:
It's my thought that two form factors can not live piecefully in parallel. It's my own forcast that AMD will go BTX in the future:
  • It's not a bad design at all. Why not adapt it?
  • If Intel keeps pushing it, and they have already, then motherboard/case/powersupply builders will HAVE to adopt it if Intel products are already a large portion of their income
  • Along with the above, they'll already have the changeover part done. It won't be so hard to change an AMD board to BTX if the manufactuer has already been doing it for a while for Intel products.
  • If they don't, the individual manufactuers won't like building two standardized lines and will plead with AMD to make the switch
  • If we buy it, they will come.
eventually amd will move to btx, but not yet. even today you can still buy brand new at style cases and power supplies even 10 years after the atx spec came out. im also not saying that btx is a bad thing, im just saying that at this time amd does not need it and has announced that they are staying with atx for the time being.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:38 am 
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
Bitchin' Fast 3D Z8000
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:48 pm
Posts: 241
Location: Whispering Evil Things in your ear...
athlon11 wrote:
Intel needs btx due to their inability to design a cool running processor.


And because its a better design. OEMs (Read: Dell) have been designing computers to maximize air flow long before the Prescott came along, so BTX just relieves them of some of that R&D burden.

athlon11 wrote:
Intel also needs ddr2 because the p4 has a voracious appetite for memory bandwidth. the athlon64 just doesnt need the bandwidth ddr2 can provide to perform on par with Intel.


The Athlon 64/Opteron are also far more sensative to latency, so until DDR2 can be shipped in volume at lower CAS ratings (or AMD's need for bandwidth compensates for the high latency), so adopting DDR2 now would most likely HURT the K8's performance.

athlon11 wrote:
so in the end amd is designing much more efficient chips that dont need new expensive technologies to perform just as well as their Intel counterparts.


AMD also doesn't have the clout to push new technologies like Intel, so they can't afford to be as cutting edge.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:40 am 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2004 2:10 pm
Posts: 6657
Location: Houghton, MI (Michigan Technological University)
SomeGuy wrote:
athlon11 wrote:
I Am Weasel wrote:
It's not only BTX that I'm after, but also DDR2, which I haven't found in any AMD mobo's yet. With PCI Express on the way, I'm eager to have a mobo that has both these features. What harm can AMD have in going with a BTX form? So what if they aren't "hot" enough yet, atleast they'd be prepped for the future. Perhaps they will make a socket 939 board in BTX for AMD.
amd is not going with either btx or ddr2, they dont need either of them. Intel needs btx due to their inability to design a cool running processor. Intel also needs ddr2 because the p4 has a voracious appetite for memory bandwidth. the athlon64 just doesnt need the bandwidth ddr2 can provide to perform on par with Intel. in fact, i doubt youd see much, if any, of a performance boost if you put the athlon64 fx-53 on a ddr2 board if it stayed at the same frequency. so in the end amd is designing much more efficient chips that dont need new expensive technologies to perform just as well as their Intel counterparts.


Hehe, well, you should remember that I dont think heat is the big issue right now. It is AN issue, maybe a major one, but definitely not the only one.

Also, remember that Intel's Northwood procs run plenty cool, so the "inability" to make a cool running proc is a little off. Lets not forget AMDs Thunderbird procs either (I had one! If you thought Prescott was hot...).

(not an Intel fanboy)
even though i never had a thunderbird i remember when they were out and the people who said how hot they ran. i wasnt refering to all Intel chips either, i should have made that clear but i didnt, i was refering to the prescot and how they cant seem to get it to run cool.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group