Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

[profJim]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Why did they remove one inch from the motherboard? Cost savings in material along with lower costs with smaller motherboard boxes plus lower shipping costs. The savings add up quickly when they are producing and shipping thousands of motherboards.

Check out Computer form factor - Wikipedia

A web search using: motherboard sizes form factor will provide additional information and quite a few pictures and images.

Here is a direct link for diagrams and images.

File:Formfactors.gif - Wikipedia

[ChaosTheorist]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Thanks; we know about the standard sizes, and 305x218mm/12x8.6in doesn't match any of them.

But I think your cost-savings idea is exactly on target. Since standard board blanks are 24x18 inches, each blank can only produce 2 ATX boards. By dropping the length to 9 inches or less, you now get 4 boards per blank. Or you could get 2 standard ATX boards plus 2 305x213mm boards; wonder if anyone uses that size?

In that spirit, since the 8.6in/218mm length doesn't seem to have a name, I christen it "Cheapo-ATX"

[parsec]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Thanks; we know about the standard sizes, and 305x218mm/12x8.6in doesn't match any of them.

But I think your cost-savings idea is exactly on target. Since standard board blanks are 24x18 inches, each blank can only produce 2 ATX boards. By dropping the length to 9 inches or less, you now get 4 boards per blank. Or you could get 2 standard ATX boards plus 2 305x213mm boards; wonder if anyone uses that size?

In that spirit, since the 8.6in/218mm length doesn't seem to have a name, I christen it "Cheapo-ATX"

Oh sure, name one of my boards Cheapo-ATX, Mr. X99 8 core CPU, must be nice...

There is zero doubt in my mind that the Chea... er, psuedo ATX sized boards are that size due to the ability to make four from a blank PC board.

OTOH, if everything fits fine on the board, and nothing is really compromised by using the smaller size, then it's Ok IMO. The lack of support on the edge of the board is another issue, not necessarily related to the size of the board.

Actually, I've read that the biggest expense on an Intel based board is the chipset, like a Z97 or X99. I imagine that blank printed circuit boards for PC mother boards are not an exotic item and shouldn't be very expensive. That of course varies with the quality of the board, eight layers and two ounce copper being more pricey.

I've dreamed about what a PC mother board would be like if it were made by a high end audio company like McIntosh, Krell, Mark Levinson, etc.

[ChaosTheorist]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Sorry, didn't mean to slag on your cute little board...how about "EconoATX". Being economical is a virtue, right?

The board is definitely not the most expensive piece of the puzzle but, even if getting four products instead of two from each one only saves you a dollar or two per board , if you're doing a million or two of them, it adds up.

Especially if you're using ML boards:

"Triple-thickness copper traces for near-zero impedance, separated by fiberglass layers made from woven glass matting hand-spun and hand-woven by virgins working in a Level 5 clean room, then epoxied via a vacuum-deposition process and polished to a surface irregularity of 300nm or less as verified by blue-light conofocal microscopy. In keeping with our long tradition of being environment-friendly, acid etching is forbidden; circuit traces are cut from 5-micron copper leaf on a precision NC laser cutter, then transferred to the board with a proprietary permanent adhesive derived from African sable wood, ambergris from ethically-culled Sperm Whales, and other ingredients known to only 3 members of the Levinson team. Continuing with our commitment to protect the environment, exposed copper connection points are tinned with SN100CL, a 100%-lead-free alloy.

Yours for the astonishingly low price of $500/square foot."

[parsec]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Sorry, didn't mean to slag on your cute little board...how about "EconoATX". Being economical is a virtue, right?

The board is definitely not the most expensive piece of the puzzle but, even if getting four products instead of two from each one only saves you a dollar or two per board , if you're doing a million or two of them, it adds up.

Especially if you're using ML boards:

"Triple-thickness copper traces for near-zero impedance, separated by fiberglass layers made from woven glass matting hand-spun and hand-woven by virgins working in a Level 5 clean room, then epoxied via a vacuum-deposition process and polished to a surface irregularity of 300nm or less as verified by blue-light conofocal microscopy. In keeping with our long tradition of being environment-friendly, acid etching is forbidden; circuit traces are cut from 5-micron copper leaf on a precision NC laser cutter, then transferred to the board with a proprietary permanent adhesive derived from African sable wood, ambergris from ethically-culled Sperm Whales, and other ingredients known to only 3 members of the Levinson team. Continuing with our commitment to protect the environment, exposed copper connection points are tinned with SN100CL, a 100%-lead-free alloy.

Yours for the astonishingly low price of $500/square foot."

Now now, I did not take offense, nor did I comment on you beta testing... I mean as an early adopter of the X99 platform, you get to discover the many hidden features. Being a developer I imagine you know what I mean.

For others reading the post above, the description of the circuit board build up used by Mark Levinson is a factually accurate description of ultra high end audio extremes. The only things left out was cryogenic treating of the entire board, and the use of PC-OCC copper.

... ethically-culled Sperm Whales

Over clocking processors is just scratching the surface, I want my CPU's transistors biased into Class A.

[ChaosTheorist]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Yeah, I'm not usually the bleeding-edge type. In fact, this build was originally going to be a Z97/4790K/DDR3 setup. But I took a closer look at upgrade potential, and Z97/DDR3 seems much closer to the end of the line. Then I stumbled onto an Egghead deal that put the final price of the X99 OC Formula at less than the price of GigaByte's X99-UD3 and within $10 of the price of the Z97 OC Formula, and it was Game Over for Z97. Since it looks like Skylake may not happen until 2016, X99/5820K/DDR4 gives me a solution to the immediate problem (old machine is dying) with the best potential upgrade paths.

[ChaosTheorist]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

To close the loop on this: as expected (based on parsec's measurements), the X99 OC Formula fits into the Fractal Design Arc Midi R2 just fine. The SATA cables are a little tight to the drive cages, but that's OK, since they're only there temporarily. Thanks to the offset mounting setup in the top panel, the Swiftech H220-X easily clears everything on the MB. Pictures: New Computer - Imgur

[parsec]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Glad that case worked with the board, which is really not rated for use with eATX boards... of various dimensions.

Yes, that case is not very deep, even my Define R4 is a tighter fit than other cases I have. Things look a bit tight in that case, but unless you are constantly changing things inside the case, that is not a problem.

[ChaosTheorist]

Re: Anyone have correct dimensions of X99 WS and X99 OC Formula?

Once I have a box the way I want it, I typically don't touch it for months, sometimes years. Which is why I don't get the removable-motherboard-tray thing; yes, reviewers change hardware frequently, but real users don't--why should the majority have to pay for a feature useful only to a small minority?

My goals were to find
1) The smallest (particularly, the shortest) case that
2) Can be built to be quiet, and
3) Will hold everything I want to put into it, and
4) Will provide adequate (but quiet) airflow for the hot components it will eventually have (8 7200RPM drives, an Adaptec 7805 that specs "200LFM" of cooling, and a Samsung XP941 that literally gets hot enough to boil water), and
5) Does NOT have windows, LED fans, flashing lights, glow-in-the-dark panels, a plastic facade pretending to be a Transformer/nuclear weapon/spaceship, or other related distractions

The ARC Midi R2 (Solid Side Panel) was the one that checked all the boxes. I looked at dozens of cases, and I'm really impressed with what Fractal Design puts out.

As nearly as I can tell, the ARC Midi R2 and Define R4 are the same box--the difference is what goes on up front and on top. The side panels are interchangeable. If I didn't have a thing about doors, I might have gone with the Define. Or not--the R4 still has the top cooling running right down the middle, so it has clearance problems. The R5 looks like it fixes that issue; in fact, the R5 has a number of changes to make it more water-friendly. OK, so if I didn't have a thing about doors, I might go with the Define R5....