Pics of Gigabyte X79 boards seen on VR Zone

[frontier204]

Well it looks like the next generation of RAM will be all low profile to allow for this...

What's with these manufacturers not being able to get SATA right? This is the second time in the tick/tock that Intel has had to disable SATA ports. AMD also had a bumpy start with inconsistent performance / lack of TRIM. Don't forget nVidia as well with their corrupt-o-matic SATA support they had when they used to make chipsets.

[JD]

Originally Posted by GT7R

Thus as much as I try, I can't seem to find any reason why to even think of buying it over a much cheaper 1155 or maybe Bulldozer (With it's never ending delays) platform... especially after seeing the benches at toms. (yes I know those are pre-production chips, but still..)

I agree entirely. Intel basically removed the enthusiast components of the X79, and now it's really no different than the P67 unless you require additional PCIe lanes.

I think it's more just because X58 has grown so old, so they felt they needed something new in the X-series of chipsets/platforms. The way I see it, I'll just hold out for Ivy Bridge instead since there isn't much benefit to upgrading my i7 920 D0.

[Sagath]

Originally Posted by JD

I agree entirely. Intel basically removed the enthusiast components of the X79, and now it's really no different than the P67 unless you require additional PCIe lanes.

I think it's more just because X58 has grown so old, so they felt they needed something new in the X-series of chipsets/platforms. The way I see it, I'll just hold out for Ivy Bridge instead since there isn't much benefit to upgrading my i7 920 D0.

Ah-hem. (Without saying +1)...Bingo.

Just like the pre-released i7 3xxx reviews; This platform is totally uninteresting, and an upgrade to a 2500/2600 would be better money spent.

gross, two 8pin connectors

[chrisk]

Hate the ram layout too. Not Gigabyte's fault.

Unless these new SB-E chips OC like a fiend, my 4.0GHZ 970 will be more than capable against what has been shown so far.

[Eldonko]

Sucks about cutting back the SATA ports but LGA2011 still looks pretty sweet to me

[MpG]

Aside from CPU cooler clearance issues, the position of the power circuits also places them (and their heatsinks) out of the main airflow path for most cases. Even if the case has a top fan to help out, you're still forcing the airflow to make a 90 degree turn upwards.

[lowfat]

The UD5 gets me slightly hot and heavy. 14 SATA + 8 DIMM's = naughty.

[EmptyMellon]

Originally Posted by Arinoth

Be thankful there is no IDE or Floppy connector on there taking up unnecessary space.

I am.

[Dzzope]

on the positioning of the ram slots, many many cases these days (at least non budget basement ones) have top mounted exhaust fans that are generally larger than the fans at the rear anyway. So why not make the flow go the way heat tends to want to?

That is.. up.
Forcing against airflow is bad.. sure
But having a front air feed to top exhaust isn't exactly a bad thing..
Indeed many cases have the ability to feed air from the bottom. Making a straight airflow which makes more sense than a front to back?

Perhaps there is an article in this somewhere? best airflow / heat-sink orientation? :P
i know this can be highly variable from case to case and hardware to hardware but a cross section of common cases from the more budget friendly to the more expensive, test with sli etc and see which provides best cooling on gpu, cpu and hdd's ?
airflow from front - back.. bottom - top.. front - top.. bottom - back and any other combination you can think of ( Like mine which is front/bottom/side - back/top)
if volume of air more important than flow? is fresh (cooler) air feeding the coolers more important than dumping the hot air?

And possibly a neat cable - messy cable - rats nest comparison too :P
Just to see how important tidiness is would be interesting