Motherboard SFF Threadripper motherboard petition thread

[Boil]

@VegetableStu
I made an mATX mockup of an AMD x399 board. I would love to see something like this.

Couldn't help but notice, there are no securing points for the upper Ultra M.2 slot...

 

[cmvrgr]

I think the major problem is coolling. I am researching to create a portable workstation that is based in mATX form factor with threadripper.

I hope that they will make a motherboard at mATX form factor. The problem is that the chassic facing the same problems with all ssf chassis just 105mm height for the cpu cooler. When I was researching for building a ryzen portable workstation I found some corsair cooling watercooling systems that if I drilled a 120mm fan hole I could stick it inside. Radiator with fan thickness is 52mm and I think the pump was 45mm so difficult to install and to that cramped space.

We have to wait a see if water cooling with single 120mm fan will be developed and how large would be the pump.


Any ideas are welcomed !

 

[IntoxicatedPuma]

I would prefer to see more SFF ATX cases than an mATX threadripper. Even if we get an mATX Threadripper board, we are still stuck with mATX cases around 35L in size

 

[GuilleAcoustic]

I would prefer to see more SFF ATX cases than an mATX threadripper. Even if we get an mATX Threadripper board, we are still stuck with mATX cases around 35L in size

I highly second the idea. We need smaller ATX / mATX chassis

 

[T_Tank]

The enermax steelwing least in the sff review is.. about 16L though I think this kind of case is a rare breed. Now.. if only someone made a custom back section for this case for all the pci slots to be avail..

Now back on threadripper it be insane just to have that much processor in even a matx chassis if they can somehow cram it on a itx board thats gonna be jaw dropping.

 

[jeshikat]

Some mockups /u/lenonymes posted in /r/sffpc after I mentioned that the TR4 socket is only about 20% bigger than LGA 2011:


Since the TR4 socket is narrower, the SODIMM slots could be moved closer together and the M.2 daughterboard could be moved to the top edge of the board.

I've yet to see a pic of the bare chip but the X399 chipset shouldn't be that big since all the major stuff could just connect directly to the CPU since it has PCIe lanes in spades.

And the X399 ATX boards shown so far have 6-10 power phases, while the X299E-ITX/ac has 7 so we're already about there for the VRM section.

So it looks like a X399E-ITX/ac isn't all that far-fetched. Though I think a X399E-MDTX/ac would cause this forum to implode from traffic

 

[CC Ricers]

I would prefer to see more SFF ATX cases than an mATX threadripper. Even if we get an mATX Threadripper board, we are still stuck with mATX cases around 35L in size

Do what some people do and take an old OEM case for mATX and cram modern hardware in it. Many of those cases are small for mATX.

 

[VegetableStu]

Since the TR4 socket is narrower, the SODIMM slots could be moved closer together

Can that be done? there's like those little beads between them...

 

[jeshikat]

I was talking about with the socket in the other orientation.

 

[VegetableStu]

Oh, duh, sorry >_<

 

[jeshikat]

Haha, no worries

 

[3lfk1ng]

 

[grumpyrobin]

I think from a business stand point, before AsRock even considers spending the RnD on that ( although I am certain they are already fiddling with the idea), they would need to see their full atx x399 selling like crazy (likey will happen), and their brand new x299 itx to be selling decently as well (in relation to x299 overall sales).

 

[cmyk78]

Please Asrock Please

 

[|||]

I was thinking it could be very difficult to route the traces for all four memory channels to one side, but then I remembered that Epyc has 8 channels, 4 to each side. But it may require a lot of PCB layers in order to do that. I'm also curious if the tiny X300 chipset could be made to work with Threadripper or not...there are plenty of native PCI-e lanes to run to controller chips (granted you do need the space of the board for those, but it's distributed and not a large, singular chipset) that I/O would still be very robust.

 

[grumpyrobin]

could you have the memory slots on a daughter board?

 

[|||]

Memory signal integrity is one of the hardest to manage. Putting the signal through a second interface would be extremely difficult and probably limit the memory speed considerably.

 

[3lfk1ng]

The real advantage here is that the keep out area of TR4 is effectively the size of the actual socket so provided the traces are routed through a thick PCB, I could also see the possibility of also having all m.2's on the back like their STX board.

The diminutive x300 chipset's only issue that I can see is that it doesn't support USB 3.1 Gen2 or quad channel memory.

 

[VegetableStu]

I was thinking it could be very difficult to route the traces for all four memory channels to one side, but then I remembered that Epyc has 8 channels, 4 to each side.

Isn't X399 quad channel only? o_o

 

[|||]

The diminutive x300 chipset's only issue that I can see is that it doesn't support USB 3.1 Gen2 or quad channel memory.

Isn't X399 quad channel only? o_o

Memory connections are directly from the processor. You may be confused with either the old northbridge chips, whose functionality has been integrated into all modern CPU's, or Intel limiting overclocking of memory to the Z- and X- chipsets. The chipset does not touch the memory interface in any way.

For USB 3.1 Gen2, there is the ASMedia ASM3142 chip, which I believe is faster than even the USB 3.1 Gen2 integrated into the AMD chipset and Intel's Alpine Ridge. It can connect to some of the 64 PCI-e lanes coming off of Threadripper, no problem.

And yes, Threadripper only has 4 memory channels coming off of it, versus the Epyc's 8 memory channels. But, I'm pretty sure it is the same physical packaging and socket between the two (although AMD has said they are electrically different, with different pin-out mappings).