- Joined
- Apr 23, 2001
Captain Slug said:
The Mini-ITX whitepaper itself lists ITX (not mini) on page 7 as being 215mm x 191mm.
The FV25 It's the first production model Mini-ITX Socket 370 board. It's their most popular seller in their barebones line. he Jetway board is a direct competitor to this one which regularly sells in JUST the barebones machine. But outside the US in a number of places the board can be purchase seperately.
Their other models are Flex ATX. I had Flex-ATX confused with Mini-ATX (as most retailer do as well). The only difference between Flex ATX and ITX seems to be a matter of power consumption expectations and a mere 15mm difference in depth. They even have the same mounting holes.
Here's a whitepaper on Flex ATX that I'd never seen before.
So I was wrong about a couple of them. But there's no huge difference between the two. (Then I guess were were both right )
The Sudhian Media forum has report that the ECS U-Buddie line is ITX form factor.
There are a large number of products being released in the ITX, Flex-ATX, and mini-ITX form factors at current, but they're slow to migrate into the states and of number of products don't even fit those standards.
I must happily agree with you on one thing that indeed that the Mini-ITX whitepaper itself lists ITX (not mini) on page 7 as being 215mm x 191mm and this to be honest was quite a shock for me.
I still however dispute that the FV25 however is based around a Mini ITX motherboard of any kind as the case dimensions have not changed greatly and the manual for FV25 V2.2 (latest model) which can be downloaded here refers to the motherboard on page 5 as being a "Flex ATX" which generally indicates that it is based on the small form factor.
The ECS U-Buddie line specification indicates that it could perhaps be ITX form factor but the only dimension listed in the specifications are for the complete 'case' which is large enough to fit a Flex ATX mobo, and I fail to see why when producing a compact system the maker would 'decide' to use a case larger than is required, which defeats the object... Therefore I would suggest the following.
You do not select to use a Via C3 processor because it is either powerfull or cheap as Duron or Celeron can beat it in bang for the buck, so why did this manufacturer select it ?, perhaps it is because it is embeded to the motherboard.
The two different models have vastly different power requirements which suggest totally different system bases.. The Via C3 version is actually Mini-ITX based while I have not found anyone selling a Duron 1200 mhz or P4 ITX based system made by ECS which makes me believe that these are actually Flex ATX based.
I am still yet to see a Mini ITX based system running other than a Via Eden or C3.. show me