Talk:ATX

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

microatx listed twice with differing sizes[edit]

My hunch is there is a max and a min - but not at all clear in the Computer form factors box.

If a standard has a max and a min it should be listed as 123 x 234 - 111 x 199 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.243.106.82 (talk) 22:45, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AUX connector[edit]

4pin[edit]

According to the ATX12V 1.1 power supply design guide this is only required for power supplies with +3.3V output greater than 18A or +5V output greater than 24A. Does anyone have a copy of the ATX12V 1.0 spec to confirm if this is the case there too? Plugwash (talk) 11:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

8pin[edit]

A 8 pin aux connector is required by Intel Core processors, that is often meantioned as being ATX on recent power supplies. If this is gona be ATX standard it has to be watched ,right now the ATX standard doesnt meantion this or? Is a meantion in the article worthwhile, that the ATX standard is extended like that? 79.238.253.112 (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some modern systems use the 8 pin "EPS connector" (from the EPS12V standard) instead of the 4-pin "P4 connector" to provide more power headroom for over-clocking. This isn't a requirement of "intel core processors" in general though. Plugwash (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My latest AMD system physically needed a 8 pin connector to get to POST, and did not work with a 4 pin connector.--Unifoe (talk) 21:48, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

HPTX[edit]

This section seems to be slightly outdated. EVGA has already released its HPTX motherboard (it's called EVGA SR-2 I guess). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.200.20.83 (talk) 19:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ATX-2-AT adapter cable specification[edit]

I created this ATX-2-AT adapter assignement table. Maybe it could be useful? It's not fully completed. I tested it anyway, and it works. I did notice however that the "not connected" on the ATX connector is used for -12V in some cases (FSP Group Inc). Something to watch out for perhaps. Electron9 (talk) 01:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

I doubt that this will have a tremendous impact on the article even if it goes ahead, but for form's sake I have proposed that HPTX (Form Factor) is merged into the existing coverage of the form factor here. I you want to comment on this proposal please do so on that talk page rather than fragmenting the discussion. Crispmuncher (talk) 21:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Power switch false and misleading statements[edit]

The power switch section says "While this switch functions as if were a physical switch and disconnects AC power from the power supply (as required by UL),", but this cannot be true: the entire 5V-standby circuitry remains powered on and thus the AC must be present. Apart from the wasted energy this also poses a significantly higher risk of damage by voltage spikes on the line. Considering that most home users will neither use WoL or power on by keyboard, but also will not go through the trouble of using the back-side switch (if present), this means higher risk (and cost) for negligible gain.

The reference to an UL requirement has no citation, and I don't see how such a requirement could be accommodated while maintaining standby power. I have not yet modified the article in case someone does find a proper citation. --93.201.252.230 (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ATX plug/socket part numbers are a good idea[edit]

I know Wtyshymanski is gonna chew my ass out over this, but I really think part numbers for the connectors belong in this article. Mainly because the connector manufacturers do not make any attempt to declare "this part is what the ATX standard uses" in their product descriptions.

To them it's just another part in a series of theirs, which someone ELSE declared part of some global interconnect standard. Yawn, is that their concern? Apparently not.

Just try searching for the ATX socket part number and see how far you get. Apparently only Molex makes it? Does AMP make a compatible connector? Who knows. That's the sort of detail this article could use.

Also, just try finding the 20+4 motherboard adapter plug assembly with the 4 breakaway pins, or the 24 pin socket intended to mate with the 20-pin plug or 24-pin plug. Finding the part numbers for these ATX components is a nightmare. DMahalko (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Just try searching for the ATX socket part number and see how far you get. Apparently only Molex makes it?
The ATX specification says or equivilent. When you are as big as a PC PSU or motherboard vendor you can go to a connector manufacturer and say "I want an equivilent to this connector from your competitor molex" and they will likely oblige.
"Does AMP make a compatible connector? "
I think one of the AMP "MATE-N-LOK" ranges is compatible with the molex mini-fit range used for ATX connectors but i'm not positive.
"Also, just try finding the 20+4 motherboard adapter plug assembly with the 4 breakaway pins, or the 24 pin socket intended to mate with the 20-pin plug or 24-pin plug."
Yeah :(, I think the problem with the wide tabs and breakaway connectors is that they have never been part of either a standard range of connectors OR a PSU standard. They were things invented by PSU and motherboard vendors to improve compatibility (the standard connectors are sorta compatible between 20 pin and 24 pin but there can be problems with things blocking the overhang and the tabs may not line up).
"Finding the part numbers for these ATX components is a nightmare."
Finding connector part numbers in general is a nightmare because afaict there are no real standards. Connector vendors often make clones of each others connectors but (presumablly for legal reasons) they don't like to advertise the compatibility on their websites.
-- Plugwash (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Volt/amp[edit]

I see a lot of documentation on what wire carries how much volt. How much amps do they usually carry?

I know it depends on the PSU wattage, but an average would be nice (eg: For a 500W PSU). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.166.176.82 (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I originally marked the 13 amp rating for the MinifitJR connector as dubious. It is only 8 amps per conductor with 18 Gauge wire, 24 pin connector. I have now corrected it based on this document: [1] I found a (broken by JavaScript) link to it on the cited page (cite note 11). They may not like hot-linking. 70.74.233.146 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mini-ATX[edit]

Mini ATX could mean either 284*204 or 150*150mm. The ATX comparison picture uses 284*204mm, the table uses 170*170mm.2001:980:A381:1:754F:42C2:1603:EA96 (talk) 15:42, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible error[edit]

See File talk:ATX PS signals.svg#Possible error. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ATX 2.4[edit]

Has anyone information on the ATX 2.4 specifications? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.247.147.103 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Error on connector pinout[edit]

Some versions of the Intel ATX Specification (i.e. Version 2.2) contained a small, but important, typo on the Main Power Connector drawing (figure 8) from which the Wiki drawing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ATX_PS_signals.svg) was sourced. This has been corrected in the current Intel spec. (i.e. http://cache-www.intel.com/cd/00/00/52/37/523796_523796.pdf Section 4.2.2 figure 5), however the Wiki drawing has not. The error is that "PWR_OK" is shown as "PWR_ON". Since there is already a "PS_ON" signal, this is confusing.

Note that the official specification calls this signal "PWR_OK". "Power good" was IBM's term for the signal as used by the IBM PC, and the ATX spec references it (in quotes) as a class of signal. It's proper name is "PWR_OK" (section 3.3.1, http://cache-www.intel.com/cd/00/00/52/37/523796_523796.pdf) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.213.76.24 (talk) 17:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the original author of the drawing, but tonight I created an update that fixed the TEXT to match the official documents. I just now noticed these other problems, so I'll investiage, then come back and fix them on the next update. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 09:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done • Sbmeirow • Talk • 16:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on ATX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on ATX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:41, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sections[edit]

This layout current lacks, maybe "internal rhythm" - some sections have no more than 1 line of text, others have a pile. This makes it hard to put all the minor variations into a table. Maybe a table to absorb the minor variations and make it easier to compare features like dimensions and number of slots, and then a following narrative section that would explain more of the "why" and "wherefor" reasons for the major changes? --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on ATX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

minimum load[edit]

There is one section suggesting that there is a minimum load, but nothing says what it might be. Any ideas? Gah4 (talk) 06:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It varies by the internal design of each power supply. There is some mention of minimum loads in the spec, but the wording is fuzzy. If you do some searching on the internet, there are reports of various crappy-designed power supplies that don't regulate properly without a minimum load on a specific output voltage, and that one voltage may need a higher load than loads on other voltages. I remember way back in the early days of IBM PC/XT/AT (don't remember which model) that IBM use to ship a load resistor plugged into a drive connector to ensure the power supply would regulate properly and not destroy itself. The minimum load for a voltage might be from zero to 100mA on the low-end, or hundreds of mA on the high end. If you want to repurpose an ATX power supply, you should plan for a load on every output voltage, then remove one or more loads as you determine what works or doesn't work. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 07:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I added a couple of references to the article. The RepRap link is great. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 08:10, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was the PC/AT that came with the load resistor if you didn't have a hard disk. Gah4 (talk) 12:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
After I knew about that, I had a resistor that I used for power supply testing, and otherwise. And I did once run a clone power supply without enough load, and the magic smoke leaked out. The actual reason for the question now, is that I have an ATX tester, which you plug the power supply into and it gives the voltages for each output. I don't know what load it uses, though, but it can't be very big as the tester isn't big and would get very hot with a few 20W resistors inside. So, both, what is the safe load, and what is the load to accurately test a power supply? Gah4 (talk) 12:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We are up to ATX 2.52 now[edit]

Original sources seem to be published by intel with a quick search. JeneralBen (talk) 03:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

E-ATX is not a form factor[edit]

According to Gamer's Nexus, E-ATX is not a standard, it is free-for-all marketing thing that generally agrees largest size is 12" x 13". Wikipedia article has inaccuracy referring E-ATX and SSI EEB are not hole compatible which is untrue. SSI-EEB only introduces additional POSSIBLE hole choices to make component placement easier on the motherboard. [1]

(Different user here:) I have some information to add (I wish I had more time to contribute in amore meaningful manner, but - take it for what it's worth). One of the first and most-prominent motherboards to support the AMD Socket sWRX8 for AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO Series Processors, the ASUS Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI, claimed to have "EATX(EEB) Form Factor", yet its dimensions were listed to be "12.2 inch x 13 inch ( 30.98 cm x 33.02 cm )". I have confirmed that it is oversized since I had to modify a Chenbro SR107+ chassis before it would fit - an excess of 0.2" was enough to require some fabrication. Generally, it's been a chore finding motherboards and chassis that comply with specifications, making me think that yes, indeed, and unfortunately, E-ATX does not seem to be a standard. [2]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54VJwwLRJBk
  2. ^ https://www.asus.com/us/motherboards-components/motherboards/workstation/pro-ws-wrx80e-sage-se-wifi/techspec/

"SFX (PSU)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect SFX (PSU) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#SFX (PSU) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jalen Folf (talk) 04:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sole inventor claim[edit]

NOTE - I moved the following comment from my user talk. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 09:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie here. I am the sole inventor of the ATX architecture (see patent reference). Everybody gets lucky from time to time and here "hit one out of the ballpark". I decided to edit the Wikipedia page after seeing the Chat GPT answer below...

>Who is the sole inventor of ATX

>The ATX (Advanced Technology Extended) form factor for computer motherboards was not invented by a single individual, but rather was developed by a team at Intel Corporation led by Robert O. "Bob" Simons in the mid-1990s. The team included engineers such as Steve Smith, Alain Le Guennec, and Jack Thornton, among others.

Frankly none of these people named were involved the ATX around the time that I patented the design. My search of Robert O. Simons shows that he worked at Microsoft, but I see no evidence the he every worked at Intel.

Just looking to factually correct the record. Suggestions welcome.

David E Dent Dave D Here (talk) 08:16, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I added "David Dent" because it appears in the patent. None of those other names are currently in this wikipedia article, and this isn't "Chat GPT" customer support, thus it is off topic. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 09:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Dave D Here (talk) 10:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ATX&oldid=1217458670"