ASRock X299E-ITX/ac A Very Tiny Mini ITX LGA2066 Motherboard

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Oct 17, 2017.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,391
    Likes Received:
    379
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
  2. MorganX

    MorganX Active Member

    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 1070 / 8GB
    If ASRock manages this with Threadripper (doubtful) I'm in.
     
  3. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,751
    Likes Received:
    215
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    I am legitimately impressed with this. They managed to keep quad channel this time (they didn't with the x99 m-ITX).

    wonder how it would handle a 7820x?
     
  4. rl66

    rl66 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,514
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    quadro K6000+Tesla M2090
    no the CPU is bigger than itx form factor ((maybe i am trolling lol :) ))

    not sure of that as the mATX have the 4 of them... anyway about the 7820X i guess it would be nice on WC as those too become smaller with time and more effective.
     
    MorganX likes this.

  5. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,751
    Likes Received:
    215
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    m-ITX x99 was dual channel. http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99E-ITXac/index.asp
     
  6. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,180
    Likes Received:
    64
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    This is some seriously impressive engineering, but I see this as being a very niche product, even moreso than the other X299 boards. Unless you're using one of the i7s or worse, a lot of the PCIe lanes will go to waste. Available PSUs and cooling methods to accommodate the CPU are also going to be pretty bulky. This platform would make for the best ITX build you can make, but for X299 (or X399) I'd rather have micro ATX. You'd get a slightly larger chassis but a whole lot more options, and likely a cheaper motherboard (in the event one is ever made).
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2017
  7. tunejunky

    tunejunky Member Guru

    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    16
    GPU:
    gtx 1070 / gtx 1080ti
    Asrock...rocks.

    i have been a bit more than underwhelmed with x299 since the launch. there has been nothing on the mobo front to pique my interest until now.
    now there's a usage scenario with Kaby LakeX that make sense. expensive sense, but sense.
     
  8. MorganX

    MorganX Active Member

    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 1070 / 8GB
    Unfortunately, I think you are correct.
     
  9. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,180
    Likes Received:
    64
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Socket TR4 can fit in ITX, in theory. Take a look at the full size ATX boards: some of them have the first PCIe slot directly below the I/O panel. The real challenge with an ITX TR build would actually be finding a place to put the chipset. If a manufacturer did the same sorts of things ASRock did with this X299 board, everything could fit, except the chipset. That would also likely need to be mounted on a separate card, unless you start removing things like SATA or other headers.


    What kind of surprises me is why nobody has bothered to create a daughterboard for ITX. So basically the bottom (and larger) layer has the I/O ports, the PCIe x16 slot, the M.2 slots, the chipset, and if there's room, the 24-pin power connector. The bottom layer would also have most/all of the header pins and SATA ports, but angled at 90 degrees. Then, the top layer would contain the CPU socket, RAM slots, VRM, 8-pin power connectors, and maybe the M.2 slot for wifi. Since you're probably going to water-cool this system anyway, I don't think another few cm of elevation is a big deal. You might be thinking that the 4000+ pin CPU would complicate communication to the bottom layer, but I don't think it would:
    * Roughly half of the pins in socket TR4 are useless; about half of them are meant for the additional 2 dies supplied by Epyc. AMD made the sockets similar because it was cheaper to just recycle the same socket.
    * Though I don't know how many of them there are, a good chunk of the pins of the CPU are used for ground and power delivery, making the remaining ~2000 pins not seem so high. Remember, the VRM and 8-pin power connectors are supplied on the daughterboard too.
    * The CPU supplies up to 64 PCIe lanes, but the motherboard will be using less than half that. I have no idea how many pins are dedicated for PCIe but I imagine ignoring at least 32 of them would substantially reduce the complexity.
    * There may be quad-channel memory, but that too is on the top-layer board.
    So all that being said, I can't imagine it'd be too complex or expensive to connect the two boards.

    Probably never going to happen, but I at least think it's cool to think about.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2017
    tunejunky likes this.
  10. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    10,230
    Likes Received:
    224
    GPU:
    1080Ti H20
    Will never happen, socket just takes way too much space.

    They would have to omit a PCIe slot or vrm above cpu. But then there's not room else where to put things.
     

  11. igorfiuza

    igorfiuza Member

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire HD7950 Boost 3gb
    Did anyone notice that the RAM slots are notebook memory type?
     
  12. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,751
    Likes Received:
    215
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Yes. Only way you are getting quad channel on a mITX.
     

Share This Page