BTX appears deader than a doornail

broly8877

Senior member
Aug 17, 2004
461
0
0
Many OEMs have a good amount of their PCs using BTX though.

Main reason was for Tejas / Intel's hot CPUs... with Core 2, well, you know.
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
pretty much dead. after market case makers aren't biting. with stuff like the p180, why bother.
 

her34

Senior member
Dec 4, 2004
581
1
81
even though there's no more tejas, i'd still like to see btx take over:

1) pci cards face right side up
2) controlled air flow between cpu and gpu allow for better and quieter cooling
3) with gpu's facing right side up, you could have fans that are perpindicular to the card instead of parallel, again leading to better and quieter cooling
 

Lord Evermore

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
9,558
0
76
Originally posted by: her34
3) with gpu's facing right side up, you could have fans that are perpindicular to the card instead of parallel, again leading to better and quieter cooling

They still wouldn't be likely to do that, it would just be too likely to bump into something like the main cooler shroud, and what about an SLI board, where you've still got another card sitting on one side or the other for it to hit, and slots in between that are rendered unusable. BTX doesn't take SLI into account at all of course, no cooling provided to other slots.

It just becomes a mire of various systems that are slightly incompatible with each other, and more people complaining to tech support. Besides, dual-slot coolers already should provide pretty close to the same performance, unless you want to make the heatsinks themselves take up even more space.

As for PCI slots facing right side up, they could have just made the PCIe spec point them in the right direction, if it mattered. If a device is supposed to take up only a certain amount of space, it shouldn't matter which way it's facing in terms of combinations of PCI and PCIe slots. I don't think the chips and components on a card will get significantly better cooling simply from facing upward, compared to the cooling action of airflow, and if you have more than two cards, you just change the direction that the heat is radiating from one into the other.

Of course if you look at manuals, the tech makers all seem to think we have actual desktop machines laying flat on the desk. The cards are vertical there, so the PCI orientation doesn't matter.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: broly8877
Many OEMs have a good amount of their PCs using BTX though.

Main reason was for Tejas / Intel's hot CPUs... with Core 2, well, you know.

Haha it's no longer "broke" so no need to fix it.. ATX is just fine for 65W conroes.
 

RebateMonger

Elite Member
Dec 24, 2005
11,586
0
0
If I had my way, we'd still be using VESA slots instead of PCI...AGP...PCI-X...and PCI-E. And "AT" cases instead of that worthless ATX "upgrade". There are very few jobs that an AT case and a 32-bit VESA bus couldn't handle that our current setups can.
 

dexvx

Diamond Member
Feb 2, 2000
3,899
0
0
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: broly8877
Many OEMs have a good amount of their PCs using BTX though.

Main reason was for Tejas / Intel's hot CPUs... with Core 2, well, you know.

Haha it's no longer "broke" so no need to fix it.. ATX is just fine for 65W conroes.

If we had the attitude "not broke so dont fix it", we'd be stuck on ancient hardware. BTX has better ventilation, that is a fact.

Quadcore Kentsfield will once again push 100+W.
3Ghz + X2 K8's are pushing 130+W already

Power consumption has only gone higher over the decades and it is inevitable again. When the 486's were pushing 10W, people back then were like "OMFG 10W !!$@!$!@%". Now we're hitting 100W and ppl are doing the same.