Motherboard layout

Hello all, I would just like to see what opinions are on the following
suggestion. I think that it is about time that IDE, floppy, and PCI
connectors are done away with on new motherboards. OK, I am having a gripe
about an issue that is specific to my PC, which is, I have a Maximus Formula
board, 2 PCIe HD3870's. A PCIx1 soundcard, and the choice of either a PCIx1
tv or satellite cards. That's all i want to have in my PC, 2 graphics cards,
one sound, and one TV. I have no regular PCI components anymore, and I think
that it would be great if motherboards allowed for 2 dual slot graphics
cards, without having a PCIx1 slot under each one that will be lost with a
dual slot cooler. While I am at it, I'd like to see the RAM slots completely
clear of the topmost PCIx1 connector, on the Maximus Formula, when I remove
the onboard sound, the Xonar will not fit as the RAM prevents it from
inserting. If it wasn't for the Sapphire Toxic graphics cards (single slot
design you see), there'd be no way I could have those four cards in my
system, which I think is not too many addon cards to have in a system.
Anyway, there you go.

On 08/07/2008 03:07, Carl wrote:

> Hello all, I would just like to see what opinions are on the following
> suggestion.

Variety is the spice of life, I wouldn't have bought my P5E-WS-PRO if it
*didn't* have 2xGigabit LAN, 1xPCI-X and 2xPCI2.2 slots, a serial
port, IDE and floppy connectors.

Equally on my P5E-VM-HDMI, all I cared about was the HDMI and onboard
sound + LAN, no PCI/PCIe slots will be used.

Yes, I see what you mean, but the point I am making is that the motherboard
makers will put two PCIx1 slots, or PCI under each of the PCIx16 slots. Why
do this when they know that most graphics cards these days are dual slot? I
will be looking for 2x PCIx16 and 2x PCIx1 slots that can all be populated
on my next motherboard.

"Carl" <me@theworld.universe> wrote in message
news:9tGdnWbM8ZcKrO7VnZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d@bt.com...
> Yes, I see what you mean, but the point I am making is that the
> motherboard makers will put two PCIx1 slots, or PCI under each of the
> PCIx16 slots. Why do this when they know that most graphics cards these
> days are dual slot?

Well, well, not everybody is seriously involved in gaming. i have a PCIe
passivly cooled single slotted card. I was forced to by it only because the
mobo supporting c2d CPU had no AGP port. Otherwise i was totally happy with
a Matrox P650 AGP x8.

I
> will be looking for 2x PCIx16 and 2x PCIx1 slots that can all be populated
> on my next motherboard.

The same story. No reason to have a new soundcard, when the old one is still
a lot better than all onboard controllers up to-date. It feels like we all
wil be pressed to it again by the marketers (or marketeers?) aimeing to
satisfy the gamers crowd. Hey, no offence ment, just I am lokkin
realisticaly at al what's happening.

On 08/07/2008 14:38, AS wrote:

> well, not everybody is seriously involved in gaming. i have a PCIe
> passivly cooled single slotted card.

ditto

what I don't understand is why someone doesn't manufacture a video card
where the "hot bits" are on the opposite side of the card, and so are
uppermost when fitted in a tower case?

This would help with heat distribution, and most machines have free
space above the top PCIe slot, whereas a double slot card, usually
blocks the card below it as Carl pointed out.

"Andy Burns" <usenet.april2008@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aMGdnWYyyLX4X-7VnZ2dnUVZ8t_inZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> On 08/07/2008 14:38, AS wrote:
>
>> well, not everybody is seriously involved in gaming. i have a PCIe
>> passivly cooled single slotted card.
>
> ditto
>
> what I don't understand is why someone doesn't manufacture a video card
> where the "hot bits" are on the opposite side of the card, and so are
> uppermost when fitted in a tower case?

Also 100% right.

Or why aren't the graphics cards slots down at the bottom of the board, to
take advantage of cooler air coming into the case? I was thinking that if
the IDE and Floppy connectors were not present, you could move the USB/ 1394
headers away from the bottom of the motherboard, and have a graphics card /
PCIx slot down as low as possible? OK I know that that flies in the face of
the ATX standard, and who the hell am I to be prognosticating and
pontificating about the way I'd like a motherboard to be set out!

In article <aMGdnWYyyLX4X-7VnZ2dnUVZ8t_inZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Andy Burns <usenet.april2008@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:
>On 08/07/2008 14:38, AS wrote:
>
>> well, not everybody is seriously involved in gaming. i have a PCIe
>> passivly cooled single slotted card.
>
>ditto
>
>what I don't understand is why someone doesn't manufacture a video card
>where the "hot bits" are on the opposite side of the card, and so are
>uppermost when fitted in a tower case?

It would hit into the chipset heatsink and would also pump tons of heat right
up onto the CPU area.


>
>This would help with heat distribution, and most machines have free
>space above the top PCIe slot, whereas a double slot card, usually
>blocks the card below it as Carl pointed out.
>

Carl wrote:
> Or why aren't the graphics cards slots down at the bottom of the board,
> to take advantage of cooler air coming into the case? I was thinking
> that if the IDE and Floppy connectors were not present, you could move
> the USB/ 1394 headers away from the bottom of the motherboard, and have
> a graphics card / PCIx slot down as low as possible? OK I know that that
> flies in the face of the ATX standard, and who the hell am I to be
> prognosticating and pontificating about the way I'd like a motherboard
> to be set out!

Part of the problem is that as computers get faster the speed of light
becomes a problem. To get the fastest transfers between the video card,
memory, and the CPU the distance between them has to be as short as
possible. This of course means that "slower" components end up where
ever they fit.
One way around this problem would be creating a duct to move the air
directly to the hot components and then out of the computer. Something
like this would allow the use of two single slot video cards and still
keep them cool enough to run at full speed.
Or you could use one of the X2 video cards to get the processing power
in a single double slot card.

"GMAN" <glenzabr@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:g51f40$2is$2@news.xmission.com...

>>
>>what I don't understand is why someone doesn't manufacture a video card
>>where the "hot bits" are on the opposite side of the card, and so are
>>uppermost when fitted in a tower case?
>
> It would hit into the chipset heatsink and would also pump tons of heat
> right
> up onto the CPU area.
>
>
>>
>>This would help with heat distribution, and most machines have free
>>space above the top PCIe slot, whereas a double slot card, usually
>>blocks the card below it as Carl pointed out.


I am certainit would be a problem only in a crazy case. If it's well thought
out, the cooling would be fine.