I was under the impression mSTX was going to have a fixed I/o at the back (something like an HDMI/DP, couple USB and a LAN) that would remove the neat for that sort of thing. Guess manufacturers didn't like being limited like that.Oh this is interesting! I thought mSTX didn't have a specification for I/O shields, but either that was added or the manufacturers chose to take it into their own hands. And every one of them is doing it that way, not like the cases we saw a few months ago.
Where do they disregard the standard?What I also find interesting is that Gigabyte presented a somwhat thin mITX Q170 board, that looks quite swell:
They disregard the standard here and there but it seems like that can only help. Looks very server-y with all the jumpers at the top.
Yeah that's one of the problems with Thin mITX, they designed it for a low profile blower connected to the CPU through heatpies off either the front or side of the board, and the latter restricts the length of the PCIe slot to 4x. Not that the chassis (primarilly AIOs) it was designed for tend to be designed for the high heat and power desktop GPUs put out (especially when it was designed, before Nvidia and AMD started chasing lower wattages and better thermals). I have seen a couple boards with an MXM slot on the front and a couple cases that support such a configuration, but they seem to be strictly OEM (not that any Thin mITX stuff is easy to obtain)Too bad they could not squeeze an x8 on the bottom instead of the x4. Close but no cigar.
The two first things I noticed were the internal power connector, which has four pins instead of two and the non-standard LVDS connector. I think the Front-Panel connector at the front of the board isn't allowed either, it should be at the top edge. Not sure about that one, though.Where do they disregard the standard?
You gave a link to [email protected]'s article entitled "ECS Shows off the No-frills H110S-2P" and he doesn't bother to mention H110H4-S that's shown in the single photo that he decided to post in the article, or clarify the reason he's calling it by its previously revealed name. And it seems no one reading the article gave a damn.It's probably a misunderstanding on their part. I've noticed their news posts are sometimes inaccurate with details like that.