New PC Need MicroATX Recommendation

[Nick119]

Hey guys,

I'm completely new to Micro ATX Motherboards and micro systems alone. Are there any reccommendation on what I should get as far gaming goes. First of all AMD or Intel and then which motherboard? And is there any advice I should know before jumping into this? Thanks a lot.

 

[21stHermit]

So why mATX? Generally no cost savings. What is your budget?

I'd just go to NewEgg's Advanced search, select a mATX size, and the other attributes that you need. Each MB will have many reviews to help you decide.

I think there's no doubt that a C2D will outperform a Athlon, but an A64 may still be cheaper . . . pick you poison.

 

[Skott]

Many things to think about just like with an ATX build. Will you OC or not? If so you'll probably want to look at the ASUS P5K-VM or the Gigabyte DS2R since they are currently the two best Intel OCing mATX mobos. If you don't plan to overclock you have many choices for a mobo. Case choice is important. If you plan to OC you'll want a case with really good cooling ability and something big enough to hold a good size hsf to cool the pcu. This is especially important if you plan on having a Q6600 quad because they run pretty hot even in stock form. Will you want a SFF cube case or a tower type case? There are many mATX cases to choose from. These are just some of the things you have to consider and thats on the Intel side of it. Basically the same applies to the AMD mATX side of it as well.

For more info about SFF systems I'd say visit some sites that specialize in such technolgy or have a better mATX section than AT. AT's SFF section is a bit lacking unfortunately. Not enough mATX users post there IMO. Hopefully that'll change though. HF has a pretty good SFF section on its website. There's the SFFClub as well. I'm sure there are many others as well. Those are the two I'm most familiar with.

 

[hans007]

i dont think there really is any need for full ATX if you are not going multiple video cards.

with the amount of stuff integrated into boards now, that and most full ATX boards are just decked out with useless pci-e x1 slots, all you really get with full ATX is one more PCI slot (since almost all microATX boards have 2 , and most full ATX have 3).

that said, you cant get the P35 chipset on microATX but the G33 is more or less the same especially if you disable the video with a real card (if you look at their spec sheets they even have the same die size, so its likely the P35 actually is a G33 with the video part disabled).

The gigabye board that some of the other posters have mentioned is apparently very very good, so if you are goin gto do core 2 duo with microATX i'd recommend that one. Theres 2 versoins of it, one has raid one doesnt , I believe that the only difference.

 

[GEOrifle]

Thise two MOB's are really very nice, whatever guys said above GIGABYTE has litle more features and cost $20 more, but ASUS got 1 year replacement warranty from NEWEGG.
Maybe upcoming INTEL's X38 chipcet will have better mATX MOB choice?

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Skott
For more info about SFF systems I'd say visit some sites that specialize in such technolgy or have a better mATX section than AT.

AT was supposed to have a mATX motherboard roundup... gonna be posted any day now... 7 months and counting...

Originally posted by: hans007
i dont think there really is any need for full ATX if you are not going multiple video cards.

QFT

There is nothing inherent in the mATX form factor that makes it inferior to full ATX except for three fewer slots. There are two main differences.

#1 Motherboard manufacturers were almost steadfast in their refusal to make more "enthusiast-like" mATX boards. They were aided by #2, but suffice to say that IMO the only reason we have decent mATX boards out these days is because of increased interest in HTPC (Intel Viiv, AMD Live, MS Windows MCE).

#2 Perception. People keep thinking that "mATX" automatically means "performs less" or "inferior." This was aided by #1 because though they could have if they wanted to the board manufacturers just didn't make "good" mATX boards.

Times are a changin', and I hope you, you and YOU (points to all the doubters) can put aside your misguided perceptions and see mATX for what it truely is... a viable platform for performance, gaming and yes even overclocking... just in a smaller package.

Or are you guys trying to compensate for something, hmmmmm???

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Problem with a smaller form-factor is the limited space for good CPU, GPU, MOSFETs, NB/SB, and RAM cooling. Cost is also another major hurdle. MicroATX needs to be cheaper by 20% to attract value buyers. People may not need three PCI slots, and two PCI-E x 1 slots, but folks would rather have them on the MB for possible future expansion.

 

[chucky2]

For an AMD build, I think the Gigabyte GA-MA69GM-S2H is about the perfect mATX motherboard right now.

If only 690G had supported more PCIe lanes, then the NIC and Firewire could have been on the PCIe bus instead of the PCI bus...but really, that's nitpicking (but possibly relevant in theory if you put a high bandwidth card in the PCI slot and used all 3 heavily at once)...

JMHO...

Chuck

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
MicroATX needs to be cheaper by 20% to attract value buyers.

What, $55 for an overclockable* mATX board not cheap enough for you?

*Okay, this won't do 500MHz FSB, but will do 333-350MHz with a FSB1066 (E6x00) chip or BSEL modded FSB800 chip (E4x00).

Pair this cheap board with a cheap E4500 for an easy 2.7-3GHz (even sans BSEL mod) overclock, for under $200.

EDIT:

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Problem with a smaller form-factor is the limited space for good CPU, GPU, MOSFETs, NB/SB, and RAM cooling.

What the heck is this nonsense? The "top" of mATX boards have EXACTLY the same amount of available space as regular ATX boards. Want to know how much space a mATX board has/takes up? Look at a "regular" ATX board. Now, pretend the bottom three PCI/PCI-E slots did not exist. Voila, a mATX board! This instantly makes tower cases a few inches shorter, plus most mATX cases try to be a bit more compact.

Indeed IMO mATX cases can be even smaller. I haven't put a FDD into one of my systems in years, and rarely to never have more than one optical drive and HDD.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Yes, $55 is too expensive for an ancient 945 chipset and only two DIMM slots. The horizontal positioning of the 20-pin power plug is a pain to install. It also affects air flow across the heat sink. I see some OST caps (okay stuff, but I prefer all Japanese caps). There's no extra space between the PCI-E 16x slot and the PCI-E 1x slot. This may take-out the PCI-E 1x slot if you have a large video card. Even if there is no interference, air flow to the GPU will be limited with the use of a PCI-E 1x device.

Finally, due to the smaller form-factor, there is little spacing between the two RAM slots for good air flow.

I paid $55 for Abit IP35-E capable of 488MHz FSB. It's also available now at MWAVE for $70 AR. The board comes with P35 chipset and future Peryn support. Abit uses MOSFET-driven on-board fan control system will full support for 2-pin/3-pin/4-pin fan. No need to pin-mod the CPU. Board is equipped with low-profile solid caps around CPU area to provide clearance for a large CPU cooler and all Japanese electrolytic caps. NB heat sink is also much bigger to handle the additional heat load of C2Ds.

Feel free to set up a poll between the $55 AsRock and the $70 Abit IP35-E. I'd wager that 95% of the users would go with the Abit board.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The horizontal positioning of the 20-pin power plug is a pain to install. It also affects air flow across the heat sink. I see some OST caps (okay stuff, but I prefer all Japanese caps). There's no extra space between the PCI-E 16x slot and the PCI-E 1x slot. This may take-out the PCI-E 1x slot if you have a large video card. Even if there is no interference, air flow to the GPU will be limited with the use of a PCI-E 1x device.

Finally, due to the smaller form-factor, there is little spacing between the two RAM slots for good air flow.

You are nit-picking a particular ASRock board which I had the misfortune of choosing as an example.

Can you pinpoint any one of the detriments you listed as inherent to micro ATX as a form factor and not just certain micro ATX board designs?

I've seen regular ATX boards where:
- Dual channel RAM slots were next to each other instead of spaced apart
- Slots (whether PCI or PCI-E 1x) were adjacent to PCI-E 16x slots
- ATX power (20 or 24 pin) were in disadvantageous locations
- Capacitors were not the best on the market

There are obviously some boards with good layouts and some with bad layouts, regardless of form factor.

As of today, is there a micro ATX board that is in all ways except for losing three slots equal to any and every regular ATX board as well as potentially being cheaper?

The answer is no.

Does this mean that micro ATX boards inherently cannot be in all ways except for losing three slots equal to any and every regular ATX board as well as potentially being cheaper?

The answer is no.

I will repeat:

There is nothing inherent in the mATX form factor that makes it "inferior" to full ATX except for three fewer slots.

(I put quotes around "inferior" because I personally feel that oversized motherboards with excess unused space is "inferior." )

Can a motherboard manufacturer build a micro ATX motherboard that has all solid Japanese capacitors, can overclock like crazy, has a terrific layout and is based on the most modern and highest performance chipsets?

Yes.

Will they?

At this time, no. Why? Because manufacturers don't think a board like that will sell in enough numbers to justify such a design.

With people like you* they're probably right.

*I don't mean that to be derogatory, rather "people who simply would not consider mATX as a viable form factor for themselves."

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Cost is also another major hurdle. MicroATX needs to be cheaper by 20% to attract value buyers.

I just had another thought. Why does mATX need to be 20% cheaper? Why should only "value buyers" be interested in mATX? I see plenty of interest in the new G33 chipset boards costing up to $150 and plenty of interest in high dollar mATX cases like the QMicra. Even moderate cost cases like the Antec Aria (now the NSK4400 or something like that) and the Aspire X-Qpack and countless variants have been wildly popular. Somehow I don't see "value buyers" interested in paying $100 for a case/PSU if they're splitting pennies on the motherboard, yet people are buying them.

If smaller means it should be cheaper, then why don't we have $200 notebook computers? (besides the OLPC)

BTW, mATX cases aren't just cubes or slimlines. Here's a Silverstone case that is a mini tower measuring 15" x 7.7" x 14.9", has awesome airflow, takes a standard ATX power supply, can hold 6 drives and looks really nice.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The horizontal positioning of the 20-pin power plug is a pain to install. It also affects air flow across the heat sink. I see some OST caps (okay stuff, but I prefer all Japanese caps). There's no extra space between the PCI-E 16x slot and the PCI-E 1x slot. This may take-out the PCI-E 1x slot if you have a large video card. Even if there is no interference, air flow to the GPU will be limited with the use of a PCI-E 1x device.

Finally, due to the smaller form-factor, there is little spacing between the two RAM slots for good air flow.

You are nit-picking a particular ASRock board which I had the misfortune of choosing as an example.

Can you pinpoint any one of the detriments you listed as inherent to micro ATX as a form factor and not just certain micro ATX board designs?

I've seen regular ATX boards where:
- Dual channel RAM slots were next to each other instead of spaced apart
- Slots (whether PCI or PCI-E 1x) were adjacent to PCI-E 16x slots
- ATX power (20 or 24 pin) were in disadvantageous locations
- Capacitors were not the best on the market

There are obviously some boards with good layouts and some with bad layouts, regardless of form factor.

As of today, is there a micro ATX board that is in all ways except for losing three slots equal to any and every regular ATX board as well as potentially being cheaper?

The answer is no.

Does this mean that micro ATX boards inherently cannot be in all ways except for losing three slots equal to any and every regular ATX board as well as potentially being cheaper?

The answer is no.

I will repeat:

There is nothing inherent in the mATX form factor that makes it "inferior" to full ATX except for three fewer slots.

(I put quotes around "inferior" because I personally feel that oversized motherboards with excess unused space is "inferior." )

Can a motherboard manufacturer build a micro ATX motherboard that has all solid Japanese capacitors, can overclock like crazy, has a terrific layout and is based on the most modern and highest performance chipsets?

Yes.

Will they?

At this time, no. Why? Because manufacturers don't think a board like that will sell in enough numbers to justify such a design.

With people like you* they're probably right.

*I don't mean that to be derogatory, rather "people who simply would not consider mATX as a viable form factor for themselves."

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Cost is also another major hurdle. MicroATX needs to be cheaper by 20% to attract value buyers.

I just had another thought. Why does mATX need to be 20% cheaper? Why should only "value buyers" be interested in mATX? I see plenty of interest in the new G33 chipset boards costing up to $150 and plenty of interest in high dollar mATX cases like the QMicra. Even moderate cost cases like the Antec Aria (now the NSK4400 or something like that) and the Aspire X-Qpack and countless variants have been wildly popular. Somehow I don't see "value buyers" interested in paying $100 for a case/PSU if they're splitting pennies on the motherboard, yet people are buying them.

If smaller means it should be cheaper, then why don't we have $200 notebook computers? (besides the OLPC)

BTW, mATX cases aren't just cubes or slimlines. Here's a Silverstone case that is a mini tower measuring 15" x 7.7" x 14.9", has awesome airflow, takes a standard ATX power supply, can hold 6 drives and looks really nice.

Hehehehhh...then you pick another small-factor board and we will compare it to the Abit IP35-E ATX board. I doubt that many users will see my comments as "nit-picking".

A little bit of marketing 101. It doesn't matter what you or I think about microATX. It's what people will buy once they factor-in price and performance. If you have a good understanding of heat transfer and thermodynamics, then you'll realize why it's more economical for vendors to built a high-performance ATX MB. All else being equal, smaller size will always cost more $ to manufacture.

Notebooks are designed for portability. Very few desktop PCs will stay mobile. It's also more costly to cram a lot of components into a small volume. Name a notebook that's capable of keeping up with a modern high-performance desktop. You're off-topic with this line of reasoning.

Why 20% cheaper? Because most PC builders are not interested in putting a MB into a TINY case. We like to tinker with our rigs. A larger control volume permits better cooling of internal components due to the lower internal back pressure.

 

[hans007]

i have one more thing to add.

the 945 gc or 946gz chipsets are still good chipsets. most benchmarks say they perform at the same level as the 965 or g33 series.

the main differences as they still use ich7 so they have like 8usb instead of 10 or 12.

the g33 ich9 also has 6 sata on some versions of the south bridge.

other than that really 945g is still very good (well unless you need to o/c a lot or 1333 bus support). it also has native IDE as ich7 was the last with that. the upcoming G31 chipset is actually a 946gz with ich7 and 1333 bus support.


i would avoid the 945gz series if you plan to use a real video card. the 945gz doesnt have official pci-e x16 support, so all the boards on the market, have taken the 4 x1 slots from the south bridge to make a x16 slot with x4 bandwidth. this works, but limits performance of higher endish cards (i'd say 7900gt or above probably would be negatively affected).

the new silverston sg03 is also a nice case (i've seen it at frys... its quite expensive at $150 though) and the case i personally use for my system is the antec nsk3300 (about $85).

if you have a lower budget theres plenty of nice cases in the $50 range.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
A little bit of marketing 101. It doesn't matter what you or I think about microATX. It's what people will buy once they factor-in price and performance. If you have a good understanding of heat transfer and thermodynamics, then you'll realize why it's more economical for vendors to built a high-performance ATX MB. All else being equal, smaller size will always cost more $ to manufacture.

I do agree with your "marketing 101." People (enthusiasts, not OEMs) are buying more ATX so manufacturers make more ATX boards.

What does heat transfer and thermodynamics have to do with all this? Above the 4th slot, micro ATX and regular ATX can be exactly the same (whether they're made that way...). Also, with the exception of slimline cases, most mATX mini tower cases have almost the same amount of ventilation with their ATX counterpart. Are you trying to say that losing the bottom 2 inches of a motherboard somehow makes it cost more to build and run hotter?

I do disagree with you on your statement of smaller size equaling higher cost. Smaller volume equals higher cost.

BTW, no need to quote my entire post, which is right above your post.

hans007, thanks for the information on the various chipset "flavors."

 

[gorobei]

the gigabyte and asus are probably the best option right now. You can wait for the intel(x/g)38 chipset to come out, it's supposed to have a better igp capable of DX10. That's what most of the MB manufacturers are waiting for and why only a few are using the G33 chipset. You can then get a x38 board, or a G33 board which should be lower in price.

As far as smaller MB size making it more expensive, that's not quite true. Designing a smaller board with fewer components reduces the price and labor costs more than having to use components rated for higher temp(which most don't bother to do). The main reason for not wanting to make mATX is the wastage in PCB substrate. The base sheet is designed to be cut into something like 6(? not sure of exact numbers) ATX boards with some odd milimeter wide edge trim strips left over. Since the mATX size only knocks off a couple of inches, there is no way to fit in an extra board into the unused excess space. so there is no manufacturing advantage (i.e. more boards per sheet) to making a smaller board. Because mATX is associated with barebones business systems with few performance features, the price they can charge is lower. So most MB makers will choose to make the full ATX board which they can charge more for.

[The DTX form factor improves on this by making the board even smaller than mATX, allowing manufacturers to fit 9(?) boards on one sheet. Smaller systems may become more popular then.]
[the same issues apply to LCD monitors in the other direction. It's actually cheaper to make a wide screen 19" 16:10 than a 4:3, just because the substrate can be cut into more wide aspect sections than normal ratio sections.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Surface area of MB...AsRock = 86.4 sq in, Abit = 115.8 sq inch. The small-form factor board is narrower and shorter than a standard ATX MB. That's a 25% reduction in surface area! Surface area is very important for an air-cooled PC. Some MB manufacturers also included heat-pads on the back of the MB to dissipate the heat from the CPU and chipset regions. To achieve the same level of air flow in a smaller case, the fan(s) must work harder to overclock the internal case resistance. Translation...more noise level.

Sales of notebook is higher in the US (higher volume). So why do notebooks cost more $? Again, I don't need to convince you about the short-fall of MicroATX boards. Setup a poll and let the users give you the true answer.

 

[Binky]

SerpentRoyal - Your use of terms like "we" is laughable (e.g. "We like to tinker"). You don't represent the entire computer-using community. Matx boards have a very useful place, primarily with people who want smaller, integrated, and (mostly) unoverclocked systems.

These boards are targeted at certain buyers and they may have less of certain features like overclocking that are unimportant to some people. You may care about open space and cooling efficiency, but not everybody does. There are many people out there that don't care at all how hot the computer is running - as long as it keeps running. You may not care about the larger size of your computer, but I think that many laptops are purchased only because they are small and integrated, and not because they are portable. Size is very important to some buyers.

If you honestly think that everybody NEEDS a full ATX system you really need to think about whether you're considering your needs or what other people might need from a computer.

Personally, I live in both camps. I have a mid-tower overclocked desktop for games and general use, a media center computer that is micro atx, and a laptop for travel and work. The micro atx system runs very hot, is extremely cramped, but does exactly what I need it to do. They all work perfectly for what I need from them.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Yes, $55 is too expensive for an ancient 945 chipset and only two DIMM slots. The horizontal positioning of the 20-pin power plug is a pain to install.

Actually, its EASIER to install the ATX power cable in this configuration compared to 'vertical' positioning like this and this (Epox boards were almost always this way). Many times I've had to contort the ATX power cable to insert it in the latter position, because the wires are an unequal distance from the cabling's origin at the PSU.

Its more difficult to access or install ATX connectors placed along the edge of the board below the memory slots, not only because the board edge flexes more during insertion, but because this quadrant or corner of the board is usually the most densely crammed with cabling after everything is installed in a case. This is more problematic in cases that are not as deep from front to back as others. In those mid-towers, a full ATX motherboard has very little space between the board and 5.25" drive rack/cage. e.g. imagine two 5.25" optical drives installed in this mid-tower using Bays 1 & 3 to ensure adequate ventilation between the two (notice the hard drive has no power cable connected). I never put optical or hard drives back-to-back due to heat issues.

ATX connectors located in the general area seen on the ASRock board do result in the power cable being routed directly over the CPU fan, which obviously could affect air flow or even result in the cable making contact with the HSF. However, that is a cable management issue, not an access issue. Its actually one of the best locations strictly for ease of access and installation. A plastic tie, rubber band, or other cable management solution can easily solve the problem by routing the power cable away from the CPU to one side or the other.

Finally, due to the smaller form-factor, there is little spacing between the two RAM slots for good air flow.

Are you looking at the right board? The RAM slots are certainly better spaced than this board. Given that you consider two RAM slots instead of four RAM slots to be a short-coming, I assume you might want to populated all four RAM slots on the ABIT board, which would have worse air flow than the ASRock due to ZERO spacing between adjacent RAM slots.

Feel free to set up a poll between the $55 AsRock and the $70 Abit IP35-E. I'd wager that 95% of the users would go with the Abit board.

Hmm...pitting a regular priced motherboard against one that currently has a killer rebate offer (expires tomorrow). See any problem with that comparison? How about the ABIT at its regular price of approx. $120. I'm sure that would influence the results a bit. Besides, the forum is disproportionately overclocking/gaming/performance enthusiasts, precisely the audience that doesn't buy mATX boards for reasons having nothing to do with heat or thermal management issues.

BTW, I would have preferred this board over the ASRock.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The small-form factor board is narrower and shorter than a standard ATX MB.

This page January 05, 2006 - The Impossibly Small PC: Nano-ITX has this image which shows the sizing of the various form factors. Please note that micro ATX as a form factor can be exactly as wide as standard ATX, and the actual size difference is at the bottom where the last three ATX slots are located.

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Surface area is very important for an air-cooled PC.

Huh? If a PCB can cool so well, then why are heatsinks still made of copper and aluminum? What does the surface area of a motherboard have to do with cooling?

Originally posted by: Binky
If you honestly think that everybody NEEDS a full ATX system you really need to think about whether you're considering your needs or what other people might need from a computer.

Haha, reminds me of all the times that people ask for hardware recommendations for some cheap web browsing/email box for some relative, and the replies with recommendations for 500W power supplies and mid-range gaming video cards.

Originally posted by: Binky
Personally, I live in both camps. I have a mid-tower overclocked desktop for games and general use, a media center computer that is micro atx, and a laptop for travel and work. The micro atx system runs very hot, is extremely cramped, but does exactly what I need it to do. They all work perfectly for what I need from them.

Me too! My main rig is an ATX mid tower in an Antec Solo case. My HTPC is a mATX "desktop" in a Cooler Master 620 case. My gaming rig that I transport to weekly LAN parties is in a mATX SFF case that measures 13.5" tall, by 5.75" wide, by 14.5" deep. A notebook computer rounds out the lineup.

BTW, my mATX SFF gaming system has a 7900GTO video card and an Athlon 64 4000 (2.4GHz San Diego core with 1MB cache) overclocked to 3.12GHz. So much for small computers not being powerful or overclockable. My next one will be a Core 2 Duo (overclocked) and 8800GTS.

Originally posted by: tcsenter
ATX connectors located in the general area seen on the ASRock board do result in the power cable being routed directly over the CPU fan, which obviously could affect air flow or even result in the cable making contact with the HSF. However, that is a cable management issue, not an access issue. Its actually one of the best locations strictly for ease of access and installation. A plastic tie, rubber band, or other cable management solution can easily solve the problem by routing the power cable away from the CPU to one side or the other.

Spoken like someone who has quite a few system builds under their belt.

Anyone remember what computers were like before the ATX form factor? IIRC the most popular cases were desktop or mini tower, using baby-AT motherboards. Those were the "norm" and pretty close to the current mATX in size.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: Binky
SerpentRoyal - Your use of terms like "we" is laughable (e.g. "We like to tinker"). You don't represent the entire computer-using community. Matx boards have a very useful place, primarily with people who want smaller, integrated, and (mostly) unoverclocked systems.

These boards are targeted at certain buyers and they may have less of certain features like overclocking that are unimportant to some people. You may care about open space and cooling efficiency, but not everybody does. There are many people out there that don't care at all how hot the computer is running - as long as it keeps running. You may not care about the larger size of your computer, but I think that many laptops are purchased only because they are small and integrated, and not because they are portable. Size is very important to some buyers.

If you honestly think that everybody NEEDS a full ATX system you really need to think about whether you're considering your needs or what other people might need from a computer.

Personally, I live in both camps. I have a mid-tower overclocked desktop for games and general use, a media center computer that is micro atx, and a laptop for travel and work. The micro atx system runs very hot, is extremely cramped, but does exactly what I need it to do. They all work perfectly for what I need from them.

You're in the minority camp. MB manufacturers follow the $ trail...and currently, it's leading to ATX.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Yes, $55 is too expensive for an ancient 945 chipset and only two DIMM slots. The horizontal positioning of the 20-pin power plug is a pain to install.

Actually, its EASIER to install the ATX power cable in this configuration compared to 'vertical' positioning like this and this (Epox boards were almost always this way). Many times I've had to contort the ATX power cable to insert it in the latter position, because the wires are an unequal distance from the cabling's origin at the PSU.

Its more difficult to access or install than ATX connectors placed along the edge of the board below the memory slots, not only because the board edge flexes more during insertion, but because this quadrant or corner of the board is usually the most densely crammed with cabling after everything is installed in a case. This is more problematic in cases that are not as deep from front to back as others. In those mid-towers, a full ATX motherboard has very little space between the board and 5.25" drive rack/cage. e.g. imagine two 5.25" optical drives installed in this mid-tower using Bays 1 & 3 to ensure adequate ventilation between the two (notice the hard drive has no power cable connected). I never put optical or hard drives back-to-back due to heat issues.

ATX connectors located in the general area seen on the ASRock board do result in the power cable being routed directly over the CPU fan, which obviously could affect air flow or even result in the cable making contact with the HSF. However, that is a cable management issue, not an access issue. Its actually one of the best locations strictly for ease of access and installation. A plastic tie, rubber band, or other cable management solution can easily solve the problem by routing the power cable away from the CPU to one side or the other.

Finally, due to the smaller form-factor, there is little spacing between the two RAM slots for good air flow.

Are you looking at the right board? The RAM slots are certainly better spaced than this board. Given that you consider two RAM slots instead of four RAM slots to be a short-coming, I assume you might want to populated all four RAM slots on the ABIT board, which would have worse air flow than the ASRock due to ZERO spacing between adjacent RAM slots.

Feel free to set up a poll between the $55 AsRock and the $70 Abit IP35-E. I'd wager that 95% of the users would go with the Abit board.

Hmm...pitting a regular priced motherboard against one that currently has a killer rebate offer (expires tomorrow). See any problem with that comparison? How about the ABIT at its regular price of approx. $120. I'm sure that would influence the results a bit. Besides, the forum is disproportionately overclocking/gaming/performance enthusiasts, precisely the audience that doesn't buy mATX boards for reasons having nothing to do with heat or thermal management issues.

BTW, I would have preferred this board over the ASRock.

Vendors are putting the 20/24 pin plug at the edge due to customer's inputs! What works for you doesn't work for the majority of PC builders. Wires crossing the middle of the board create lousy front to back air flow.

AsRock has two RAM slots. Abit has four, in a staggered pattern. Abit has better air flow around RAM modules when two slots are populated.

Normal selling price for IP35-E $90 at MWAVE. It's also available at NewEgg for $75 AR. It's not my problem to find a good deal on a MicroATX board for YOU! Funny how you want to promote the $120 regular price to make your case.

So why do people build custom PCs? If you don't care about overclocking/gaming/performance, then buy a DELL. No need to waste time on a Micro board.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
You're in the minority camp. MB manufacturers follow the $ trail...and currently, it's leading to ATX.

Enthusiasts buy ATX boards because they are "better." Manufacturers build ATX boards because enthusiasts are buying them. A self perpetuating cycle...

I see changes happening though. Back in 2002 I made the observation that there was not a great selection of "decent" mATX boards. Three years later there were a number of overclockable mATX boards for the Athlon 64 platform made by Biostar, Jetway, EPoX and DFI.

Now, five years later, we have fairly nice mATX boards that are quite overclockable and almost as many bells 'n whistles as ATX boards. Onboard video is "good enough" for light gaming and HTPC usage with DVI and HDMI outputs, SPDIF in/out, HD audio, Firewire, GBe, RAID, PCI-E, all solid capacitors, as many garish colors as normal ATX boards.

That... is progress.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the next few years brings us in the micro ATX form factor.

 

[Trevante]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
So why do people build custom PCs? If you don't care about overclocking/gaming/performance, then buy a DELL. No need to waste time on a Micro board.

I'd have to disagree with this statement.

There are many reasons to build your own PC, even if you don't care about overclocking/gaming/performance.

1. Upgradability - my brothers HP Media Center computer has a non-standard design and as such, we can't add another HDD to it unless it's external. Also, you can't easily overclock most pre-built computers, so when they start to lag behind, you either buy a new comp or keep your slow computer.

2. Price/performance ratio - when I look at my friend's $700 HP desktop (bought earlier this year, maybe around March or so) that only came with 1GB of RAM, integrated video, a 250GB IDE (ugh) HDD and 1 IDE (blech) DVD burner, I can't help but laugh at him for not consulting me before he bought it. I could have easily built the same system, in a more upgradable platform for at least $200 less.

3. Customizability/aesthetics - you know damn well Dell doesn't make any cool looking desktops. I have a Thermaltake Lanbox and I get all kinds of wows and oohs and aahs when people see me carrying it. One old guy thought it was a microwave...as if they make microwaves with handles on them :thumbsdown: But yea, custom built computers usually look better than pre-built computers.

4. You know what's in the system - if something goes wrong with my computer, I can usually pinpoint the problem in a matter of minutes because I put it together myself and I know where everything is. When I have to crack open someone's non-standard Dell/HP/Gateway PC, it's a bit more difficult to fully understand what might be wrong since I'm not completely sure how they put this thing together.

5. Quality of components. - being businesses, most computer companies like to cut corners by using cheaper components where they can. This in turn can lead to less performance or shorter component life for your computer.

I don't overclock. I've never been a serious PC gamer. I don't do intense number crunching activities like encoding and rendering, but I feel like I get a much better value out of my computer than I could have gotten from any pre-built computer.

As far as mATX vs. ATX, I think the only real issue that separates them is space/cooling. Simply put, mATX cases (not mobos) are smaller and thus leave less room for better cooling options. Otherwise, an equally built mATX mobo could be exactly like (sans the 3 expansion slots) and perform just like an ATX mobo on any given day. An ATX case has more room which means better cooling options and more airflow, both of which are necessary for overclocking. That's why most enthusiasts go with ATX rather than mATX. It's not that mATX mobos are inherently limited in terms of performance, but rather that mATX cases have less cooling options which can lead to thermal problems.

To the OP, get a Gigabyte GA-G33M-DS2R. I believe this is the best mATX mobo available right now. Be sure and get a 1066 or 1333mhz processor (e6750 ftw) also, 800mhz processors are harder to overclock on that board. If you want an 800mhz processor and want to overclock it, you'll need DDR2-1066 RAM, or you could get the Asus P5K-VM.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The small-form factor board is narrower and shorter than a standard ATX MB.

This page January 05, 2006 - The Impossibly Small PC: Nano-ITX has this image which shows the sizing of the various form factors. Please note that micro ATX as a form factor can be exactly as wide as standard ATX, and the actual size difference is at the bottom where the last three ATX slots are located.

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Surface area is very important for an air-cooled PC.

Huh? If a PCB can cool so well, then why are heatsinks still made of copper and aluminum? What does the surface area of a motherboard have to do with cooling?

Originally posted by: Binky
If you honestly think that everybody NEEDS a full ATX system you really need to think about whether you're considering your needs or what other people might need from a computer.

Haha, reminds me of all the times that people ask for hardware recommendations for some cheap web browsing/email box for some relative, and the replies with recommendations for 500W power supplies and mid-range gaming video cards.

Originally posted by: Binky
Personally, I live in both camps. I have a mid-tower overclocked desktop for games and general use, a media center computer that is micro atx, and a laptop for travel and work. The micro atx system runs very hot, is extremely cramped, but does exactly what I need it to do. They all work perfectly for what I need from them.

Me too! My main rig is an ATX mid tower in an Antec Solo case. My HTPC is a mATX "desktop" in a Cooler Master 620 case. My gaming rig that I transport to weekly LAN parties is in a mATX SFF case that measures 13.5" tall, by 5.75" wide, by 14.5" deep. A notebook computer rounds out the lineup.

BTW, my mATX SFF gaming system has a 7900GTO video card and an Athlon 64 4000 (2.4GHz San Diego core with 1MB cache) overclocked to 3.12GHz. So much for small computers not being powerful or overclockable. My next one will be a Core 2 Duo (overclocked) and 8800GTS.

Originally posted by: tcsenter
ATX connectors located in the general area seen on the ASRock board do result in the power cable being routed directly over the CPU fan, which obviously could affect air flow or even result in the cable making contact with the HSF. However, that is a cable management issue, not an access issue. Its actually one of the best locations strictly for ease of access and installation. A plastic tie, rubber band, or other cable management solution can easily solve the problem by routing the power cable away from the CPU to one side or the other.

Spoken like someone who has quite a few system builds under their belt.

Anyone remember what computers were like before the ATX form factor? IIRC the most popular cases were desktop or mini tower, using baby-AT motherboards. Those were the "norm" and pretty close to the current mATX in size.

Do you understand about heat transfer? Have you attempted to de-solder a capacitor from the MB? Care to guess how many watts it would take to do this job? Please don't lecture me about heat sink until you have measured the amount of heat that is absorbed by the MB!

You can pump MicroATX till the cows come home. Go to Frys and count the numbers of ATX vs MicroATX boards. $ talks, BS walks.

Hmmm...comparing sub 300MHz mATX PCs with 3.0GHz ATX PCs. Smart, very smart. I look to the future for innovation.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
You're in the minority camp. MB manufacturers follow the $ trail...and currently, it's leading to ATX.

Enthusiasts buy ATX boards because they are "better." Manufacturers build ATX boards because enthusiasts are buying them. A self perpetuating cycle...

I see changes happening though. Back in 2002 I made the observation that there was not a great selection of "decent" mATX boards. Three years later there were a number of overclockable mATX boards for the Athlon 64 platform made by Biostar, Jetway, EPoX and DFI.

Now, five years later, we have fairly nice mATX boards that are quite overclockable and almost as many bells 'n whistles as ATX boards. Onboard video is "good enough" for light gaming and HTPC usage with DVI and HDMI outputs, SPDIF in/out, HD audio, Firewire, GBe, RAID, PCI-E, all solid capacitors, as many garish colors as normal ATX boards.

That... is progress.

I'm looking forward to seeing what the next few years brings us in the micro ATX form factor.

You give the noobs too much credit. If MicroATX is better and cheaper, then sale volume will also ramp up. This is a free market economy.