bit-tech.net

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

Intel Nehalem workstation and server boards were also on show

Despite the fact that we had the corporate "we can neither confirm nor deny Tylersberg will be called X58" speech from Intel itself, it seems pretty obvious from the plenty of manufacturers on show at its own stand that it will be the intended name.

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

First off, the Abit IX58-MAX - don't take the cooling (on any board) too seriously yet, we're sure it'll get heatpiped eventually. Abit looks to have gone for a standard eight phase power regulation rather than digital PWMs this time although the rest of the board looks typically Abit in style - blue PCB and black slots.

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

Both Foxconn and Asus had their mainstream boards on show - no doubt wanting to keep their respective gaming series under wraps until nearer the time of launch. Many boards are now featuring four x16 lanes because the X58 chipset has 36 PCI-Express 2.0 to play with, so four x8 slots and an x4 is certainly viable now.

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

Gigabyte again makes a familiar looking board, however there are a couple of odd SATA placements at the bottom. The Intel reference design has a quite strange northbridge placement but otherwise looks as unremarkable as usual. We're seeing less and less PCI slots on these motherboards in favour of PCI-Express x1 instead - how soon until they are phased out entirely like EISA was back in 2001 with Socket A Athlons and later Socket 370 Intel Coppermines?

Plenty of Nehalem boards on show Plenty of Nehalem boards on show

There are also many server boards on display - X58 will feature on the very high end so the performance also overlaps here. Because of the direct connect nature of the CPU to memory there is more PCB space and these boards look similar to AMD Opteron now.

Do you really want one? Do they look how you'd expected? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

22 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
wuyanxu 6th June 2008, 21:22 Quote
interesting core orientation on the Intel board.
hope we'll still have as much freedom in heatsink mounting direction as the current square ones.
Redbeaver 6th June 2008, 21:38 Quote
where's the DFI ones??????
500mph 6th June 2008, 21:39 Quote
I wish more boards were like the intel board. It goes with airflow very well.
pistol_pete 6th June 2008, 23:09 Quote
What's the point in new motherboards if they aren't pretty? More copper!

Uh, otherwise the heatsink mount holes look to be square... good, any orientation.
Icy EyeG 6th June 2008, 23:54 Quote
Do the Dual Processor Nehalem boards use FB-DIMMS?
DXR_13KE 7th June 2008, 00:02 Quote
i think it is time for pci to die....
RotoSequence 7th June 2008, 00:15 Quote
DFI has always been slow to the new chipset party. Expect them to be fashionably late, to the point of X68 being on the verge of release :p
Hamish 7th June 2008, 00:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DXR_13KE
i think it is time for pci to die....
perhaps you should tell the expansion card manufacturers that :p
Goty 7th June 2008, 02:22 Quote
It's nice to see some high-end Intel chipsets that don't require massive northbridge heatsinks and a ton of heatpipes to cool it, again.
1st time modder 7th June 2008, 05:24 Quote
is it just me or are the heatsink mounting holes excessively far away from the socket wall? ... and PCI still isn't used to its fullest bandwidth. I agree with you Goty, nice to see it aswell, silence and functionality are key. Am curious to hear the full detailed specs of X58 and its partnering components.
Bindibadgi 7th June 2008, 09:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goty
It's nice to see some high-end Intel chipsets that don't require massive northbridge heatsinks and a ton of heatpipes to cool it, again.

Don't be too sure - these are very very early boards.

RE: FB-DIMMs, you know, I completely forgot to ask but I would say no - they are simply Registered ECC DDR3 because they've no need to be fully buffered anymore as there's no central MCH and no need to reduce the trace count.
Djayness 7th June 2008, 10:38 Quote
Has asus ever made a board, more bland, more ugly than that....looks like someone chose a terrible pcb colour.
Bindibadgi 7th June 2008, 12:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djayness
Has asus ever made a board, more bland, more ugly than that....looks like someone chose a terrible pcb colour.

Think about it this way - if Intel asks your for support, you will want to be there. However, by being there all the competition knows what you are doing, so this is the only way Asus gets to win at both keeping its cards close to its chest and providing support.
naokaji 7th June 2008, 14:20 Quote
I'm not sure just how many heatpipes and how many tons of copper color painted aluminum they will slap on those boards, afterall x58 should use far less power due to Nehalem having IMC.
That they neither deny nor confirm that x58 will be called x58 is rather stupid though, especially considering they have boards with x58 in the name at their own stand.
Cupboard 7th June 2008, 19:12 Quote
Very odd Intel board... everything is the wrong way round and the memory slots have three of one colour and one of a different colour. Is this catering for some processors have 3 channel memory (the 3 blue slots) and some having 2 (some other combination)?

And I suppose x58 will be cooler running now it doesn't have to do memory controlling.
edit: the post doesn't seem to link here, though I may be being stupid.
Goty 7th June 2008, 19:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
I'm not sure just how many heatpipes and how many tons of copper color painted aluminum they will slap on those boards, afterall x58 should use far less power due to Nehalem having IMC.

That was my line of thought, too. If Intel still can't get the power consumption of their chipsets down after removing the vast majority of the logic from their northbridge, that's pretty sad.
ssj12 8th June 2008, 00:14 Quote
nVidia needs to definitely license intel SLi tech so they can get SLi into these boards
Icy EyeG 8th June 2008, 00:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi

RE: FB-DIMMs, you know, I completely forgot to ask but I would say no - they are simply Registered ECC DDR3 because they've no need to be fully buffered anymore as there's no central MCH and no need to reduce the trace count.

Cool! :) As they wasted a lot of energy IMAO...
Bindibadgi 8th June 2008, 10:10 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
I'm not sure just how many heatpipes and how many tons of copper color painted aluminum they will slap on those boards, afterall x58 should use far less power due to Nehalem having IMC.
That they neither deny nor confirm that x58 will be called x58 is rather stupid though, especially considering they have boards with x58 in the name at their own stand.

That's not true - X58 uses MORE power because of the super fast high frequency QPI links. At least, in its current revision it does - this could change.

ssj12 - it's not about Intel Licensing SLI, it's about Nvidia letting Intel license it.
kenco_uk 19th June 2008, 14:51 Quote
They did for the 975X - I'm a little surprised that recent Intel mobo's are able to carry Crossfire, but not SLi.
naokaji 19th June 2008, 14:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenco_uk
They did for the 975X - I'm a little surprised that recent Intel mobo's are able to carry Crossfire, but not SLi.

It's not a limitation due to Intel, its nvidia not allowing it.
kenco_uk 19th June 2008, 15:03 Quote
Aye, I know. bindi said the same a couple of posts above. I'll word my post better for you:

I'm a little surprised that recent Intel mobo's are able to carry Crossfire, but there's no agreement in place for SLi.

Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums