Replies to post #41829 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[upc]

The fact that the design does not support an integrated memory controller is bad news for Intel. It probably suggests that BTX does not have a long future ahead of it, unless Intel intends to continue to leave performance on the table.

AMD systems are already much quieter than their Intel counterparts, because they don't require a turbojet to remove the excess heat generated by Prescott.

upc

[Dan3]

Re: BTX and AMD...

BTX is basically Intel copying what Antec started shipping last year as the Performance 1 and Sonata cases.

120mm fan in the rear plus an option for a second 120mm fan in the front to provide good cross flow ventilation without making noise.

We've been using these Antec cases for dual Opteron workstations for many months. To get the MSI-9131 in it you have to bend the leading edge of the motherboard tray, but the IWill/Arima HDAMB fits without modification.

Intel hasn't come up with anything by themselves for quite a while now. They copy Antec's case designs and call it "BTX", they copy AMD's 64-bit architecture and call it EM64-T, they copy AMD's NX security design and call it whatever it was they decided to call it.

I wouldn't worry about BTX - I can testify that it's been a fine case design for dual Opteron systems for almost a year, now.

[j3pflynn]

alan81 - There's nothing magical about BTX - there are no laws of physics that preclude AMD or MB makers modifying BTX slightly to allow for their needs. They'll do what they have to to make sure they keep a competitive product. As long as the board mounting holes are the same, pretty much everything else is negotiable. Just look at the variety of component placements on current ATX MBs - they run the gamut; even the I/O connector placement has varied a goo bit, they just have to include their own rear I/O template.
Paul

[Jules2]

Posted by: alan81
In reply to: None
Date:8/9/2004 10:11:28 PM
Post #of 41847

BTX and AMD...
I have posted this question in a few places, and have not yet got what I would consider a "good" answer.
We are finally seeing some BTX systems, and the initial reviews indicate that they are almost 10db (which is quite a lot) quieter than the old ATX design. I have also read that the design does not support an integrated memory controller due to the relative placement of the DRAM and the CPU.
What is AMD's answer to this? The best I have heard is:
(A) BTX actually sucks so it will not become a standard
(b) If it does become a standard, AMD will develop a solution that allows hammer in that form factor.
Are there any other thoughts on this? Do you believe AMD could develop a solution that allows hammer to be used in the BTX form factor? If BTX really reduces noise (from both CPU, case fans, and graphics boards) by 10db it seems that is pretty compelling.

Alan
I do not have a device to measure sound. Having said that my A64-3400 is barely audible now, even when it's got a helleva load on it. It's much quieter than any of the machines that come in here unless it's a like machine, I see few like machines tho. So far the A64 derivatives seem to go home and stay. Nessecity is the mother of invention someone once said. Hell if it aint broke dont fix it!
JMHO

Regards

Jules

[CombJelly]

"Do you believe AMD could develop a solution that allows hammer to be used in the BTX form factor?"

Sure. It is just a matter of layout. The question with BTX is whether or not it will get enough volume to be economical, given that cases, power supplies and motherboards have to be changed. ATX A64 systems can just as quiet, if not quieter than a BTX system, so there isn't any real advantage to use them. As long as ATX is cheaper, there isn't any pressing reason to change.