Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/ 2008-10-15T18:57:27-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/ http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/halogo.gif text/html 2008-04-30T08:38:59-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534857 Gerritt said: <div class="quote">Dublin,<br /> Using your minimalized approach we should be able to feed 12v and GND only as all other voltages can be regulated and or extrapolated from those two. Unfortunately this does not take into concideration the current draw nor the fluxuations in current and voltage as the needs of different sections of the MB power draw changes. If you put all the power through a single substraight you'd probably melt the runs right off of the board, not to mention the stability issues associated with a monolythic approach.<br /> Now having said that, laptops work off of a single 9 or 12V feed at around 90Ws, and you're driving the screen to boot, but there are usually greater trade offs there.<br /> <br /> Gerritt</div><br /> <br /> With good quality PSU's designed for this type of set up, and quality regulation on the board, I dont think it will be an issue.<br /> <br /> Chipsets are constantly requiring less &amp; less power, and you'll obviously be still sending power directly to your drives and cards(that require extra power).<br /> <br /> I think probably the main reason it hasnt been redesigned is compatibility. text/html 2008-04-29T04:08:28-05:00 Gerritt http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534772 Dublin,<br /> Using your minimalized approach we should be able to feed 12v and GND only as all other voltages can be regulated and or extrapolated from those two. Unfortunately this does not take into concideration the current draw nor the fluxuations in current and voltage as the needs of different sections of the MB power draw changes. If you put all the power through a single substraight you'd probably melt the runs right off of the board, not to mention the stability issues associated with a monolythic approach.<br /> Now having said that, laptops work off of a single 9 or 12V feed at around 90Ws, and you're driving the screen to boot, but there are usually greater trade offs there.<br /> <br /> Gerritt text/html 2008-04-28T16:00:00-05:00 MrBungle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534726 DublinGunner said: <div class="quote">IMO the only power that should be needed going into a mobo is: 1 x 5V, 1 x 12v, GND, 1x -5V.<br /> <br /> There you go, 4 pins. Motherboards regulate most of the power down themselves anyway, so most of those pins on current boards could be easily made redundant.<br /> <br /> </div><br /> <br /> can we add a single standardized plug for all the front panel switches and plugs to that as well? text/html 2008-04-28T09:04:20-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534702 IMO the only power that should be needed going into a mobo is: 1 x 5V, 1 x 12v, GND, 1x -5V.<br /> <br /> There you go, 4 pins. Motherboards regulate most of the power down themselves anyway, so most of those pins on current boards could be easily made redundant.<br /> <br /> text/html 2008-04-26T09:17:12-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534564 I think they will not go longer than the AT specification. You have to look at the situation from their perspective: How many refund requests will be issued for cards if they get too long? I believe the answer is the expansion supported size (might be same as AT).<br /> <br /> Then again, I think it's time for a new format altogether. ATX is old (how many power cords does a motherboard need?????) and BTX is stupid. We need a new format that provides more slots that consider mammoth card cooling. We also need a new type of main plug that places all incoming power in one place and has the future in mind. We need a tool-less design standardized. The list goes on and on. It's time for ATX to die in favor of something more in tune with the times. text/html 2008-04-26T02:23:23-05:00 Gerritt http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534547 I remember, way back when, when AT cards extended even further than the ATX MB actually extends now. Is it possible that this card is SO long that it will not fit in a standard ATX &quot;full-size&quot; chassis now?<br /> <br /> Gerritt text/html 2008-04-26T01:12:38-05:00 Bitmap http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534544 Happily, my Antec 900 came with a support block for full-length cards. Still got it in a box with all the other spare parts too, so I'm set for a good long time. <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile3.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":D" title=":D"> text/html 2008-04-25T22:56:43-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534537 ATX specifies a maximum length for cards. I don't recall it but, because it has been years since a card of the maximum length has been common place, most case manufacturers decided to infringe on that designated space in favor of keeping case length down.<br /> <br /> I believe both my Thermaltake Xaser III and Silverstone case are both capable of full length boards with the necessary supports to keep them stable. If you're looking at a new case, look for the telltale expansion slot supports to never have to be concerned about it. XD text/html 2008-04-25T22:14:23-05:00 MrBungle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534530 Im concerned about the length, I don't wan't to have to buy a new case with my next video card. text/html 2008-04-25T21:30:11-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534527 Why would it be very important anyway? The most important attribute of the PCB is how many layers there are. The more layers, the more expensive the card will be to manufacturer and therefore, how much it will cost consumers. The only reason why it would be noteworthy is if it is something revolutionary like made of artificial diamonds or something. text/html 2008-04-25T20:33:25-05:00 MrBungle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534517 Gerritt said: <div class="quote">Folks,<br /> I think the PCB specification was a typo or bogus. That's what I was trying to say.<br /> No corabitive support for the P651 standard ANYWHERE!<br /> <br /> Gerritt</div><br /> <br /> That or its some sort of internal nVidia PCB classification that isn't on the web somewhere. text/html 2008-04-24T03:21:33-05:00 Gerritt http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534360 Folks,<br /> I think the PCB specification was a typo or bogus. That's what I was trying to say.<br /> No corabitive support for the P651 standard ANYWHERE!<br /> <br /> Gerritt text/html 2008-04-23T14:48:31-05:00 MrBungle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534303 I figured that much, I was more wondering what the physical size of PCB P651 was. text/html 2008-04-23T08:30:13-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534300 P651 would certainly appear to be a PCB designation. Nvidia's designs usually follow the Pxxx designation for PCB's. text/html 2008-04-22T14:50:00-05:00 MrBungle http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71303/?l=1#534205 Gerritt said: <div class="quote"><br /> The only reference that I can see for P651 as relates to GPUs or PCBs was through an article out on Toms HW, that was attempting to reference post 9 series nvidia offerings.<br /> Gerritt</div><br /> <br /> were they saying 9 series in general or did they give a specific 9 series model?<br />