Gigabyte Unveils 100-Series Motherboard Feature List, Teases Z170 G1 Gaming

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Gigabyte's upcoming 100-series Intel-based motherboards will come with heaps of features, and they've already let us have a sneak-peak at some of them.

Gigabyte Unveils 100-Series Motherboard Feature List, Teases Z170 G1 Gaming : Read more

 

[josejones]

USB 3.1 only comes with DisplayPort 1.2?

WTF? Why the old 2009 DisplayPort 1.2 instead of the newer DisplayPort 1.3? I feel gypped already - what's up with that? These boards already have HDMI 2.0 so, why on earth would Gigabyte only support the already old DisplayPort 1.2? Very disappointing. Gigabyte has some essssplaining to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#1.2

 

[expunged]

yes please!

 

[Larry Litmanen]

G-Connector, love the idea.

 

[dwatterworth]

I dream of a day when automated assembly such as the newly revealed Asus GPU line will allow you to order a custom motherboard. There is rarely one that has everything you want and nothing you will never use.

 

[BulkZerker]

Josejones. That's a question you should ask Intel. Not Gigabyte. But then again Intel has a vested interest in not supporting display port so they can hawk their whateverbolt connector.

 

[RazberyBandit]

The computer industry should have created a standardized version of this so-called G-Connector a very long time ago. It's incredibly long overdue, and should come pre-installed in cases as a single cable with a connector at the end (akin to front Audio and USB cables), not as a motherboard accessory.

Three PCIe 3.0 x4 M.2 slots with RAID support creates some seriously fast RAID-5 potential, but I feel many (if not most) potential RAID users would actually prefer four slots for RAID-1+0/0+1 configuration support over RAID-5 support.

 

[josejones]

I've been looking forward to these new Z170 boards and Skylake for a very long time. It's odd they chose to go with the old 2009 DisplayPort 1.2 instead of the newer DisplayPort 1.3.

Also, another issue right now is that there are no computer cases that provide Front Panel Support For USB 3.1 Type-C and probably won't be until at least 2016 - what's up with that?:

"Intel will soon be launching Skylake processors and new Z170 chipsets, but they do not support USB 3.1."

http://www.legitreviews.com/front-panel-support-for-usb-3-1-on-cases-still-months-away_163145

 

[dwatterworth]

I've been looking forward to these new Z170 boards and Skylake for a very long time. It's odd they chose to go with the old 2009 DisplayPort 1.2 instead of the newer DisplayPort 1.3.

Also, another issue right now is that there are no computer cases that provide Front Panel Support For USB 3.1 Type-C and probably won't be until at least 2016 - what's up with that?:

"Intel will soon be launching Skylake processors and new Z170 chipsets, but they do not support USB 3.1."

http://www.legitreviews.com/front-panel-support-for-usb-3-1-on-cases-still-months-away_163145

I bet you'll see some of the higher end case manufacturers start to offer replacement modules for the front panel USB connectors.

It would be great from a building aspect to have a unified front panel connector for power, hdd etc. Silly Asus making that impossible with their one off FP connections.

 

[expunged]

I've been looking forward to these new Z170 boards and Skylake for a very long time. It's odd they chose to go with the old 2009 DisplayPort 1.2 instead of the newer DisplayPort 1.3.

I will be using the display port off a video card anyways so this does not bother me at all.

 

[josejones]

dwatterworth, even though the article I posted about Front Panel Support For USB 3.1 Type-C in cases by legitreviews was just published in May, it may already be outdated, so you are likely correct:

Computex's best trend: USB 3.1 Type-C motherboard ports
http://www.pcgamer.com/computexs-best-trend-usb-31-type-c-motherboard-ports/

I think expunged is correct in one sense too - doesn't matter that much about DisplayPort 1.2 vs 1.3 since we will use the DisplayPort from the GPU, however, it will matter to some that cases do not provide Front Panel Support For USB 3.1 Type-C for things other than GPU.

So, I would like to hear more about the quote above on why Intel's Skylake does not support USB 3.1 or, is that an error? I notice that there is no mention of USB 3.1 at Wiki on Skylake:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylake_%28microarchitecture%29

So, again, maybe it doesn't matter but, I'd like to know for sure.

 

[expunged]

whether skylake supports it or not you can always add a type c add in card. I doubt it will be too long before someone starts making type c hubs as well.

 

[ammaross]

Three PCIe 3.0 x4 M.2 slots with RAID support creates some seriously fast RAID-5 potential, but I feel many (if not most) potential RAID users would actually prefer four slots for RAID-1+0/0+1 configuration support over RAID-5 support.

Unless those 3 M.2 slots are powered by 4 lanes to a chip that provides the virtual 12 lanes. Remember, Skylake only has 20 lanes and 16 of those go to the GPU...

 

[expunged]

Thats a deal breaker for me. My plans are for dual 980 ti, and an intel 750 pcie-ssd.

 

[RazberyBandit]

Three PCIe 3.0 x4 M.2 slots with RAID support creates some seriously fast RAID-5 potential, but I feel many (if not most) potential RAID users would actually prefer four slots for RAID-1+0/0+1 configuration support over RAID-5 support.

Unless those 3 M.2 slots are powered by 4 lanes to a chip that provides the virtual 12 lanes. Remember, Skylake only has 20 lanes and 16 of those go to the GPU...

If there's a discrete GPU.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if Intel implemented a switch that opened access to those 16 lanes to the M.2 devices should no discrete GPU be detected? Or perhaps allowed for a manual lock of the x16 slot to x4 or x8? Wishful thinking? No. Forward thinking? Yes.

My point was that three slots is not sufficient for true power-user RAID applications because such users typically prefer the increased performance and reliability of a four-drive Hybrid RAID-1+0 array over a two-drive RAID-0 or RAID-1 array, as well as a three-drive RAID-5 array and its redundancy-related write latency.

 

[dudmont]

Now if they would fix their bios fan control.........
Looks great, have a gigabyte board and like it, save for the terrible manual fan control in the bios.

 

[txgs]

Three PCIe 3.0 x4 M.2 slots with RAID support creates some seriously fast RAID-5 potential, but I feel many (if not most) potential RAID users would actually prefer four slots for RAID-1+0/0+1 configuration support over RAID-5 support.

Unless those 3 M.2 slots are powered by 4 lanes to a chip that provides the virtual 12 lanes. Remember, Skylake only has 20 lanes and 16 of those go to the GPU...

If there's a discrete GPU.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if Intel implemented a switch that opened access to those 16 lanes to the M.2 devices should no discrete GPU be detected? Or perhaps allowed for a manual lock of the x16 slot to x4 or x8? Wishful thinking? No. Forward thinking? Yes.

My point was that three slots is not sufficient for true power-user RAID applications because such users typically prefer the increased performance and reliability of a four-drive Hybrid RAID-1+0 array over a two-drive RAID-0 or RAID-1 array, as well as a three-drive RAID-5 array and its redundancy-related write latency.

Dynamic pcie lanes allocation is something I always wanted. Ever since PCIe was introduced. There is no reason for a GPU to suck up 16 or 8 lanes in windows when they could be spread across across the other slots with maybe raid or usb cards. The only thing that comes close to doing this are PLX chips, but even then they usually have a floor cap on lane distribution. I currently own a z97 ws for that very reason, gpu is in first slot, the other three are two HBAs and one raid card. x32 multiplexed through x16. x8 each when all slots are filled and at most two x8 slots can run at full saturating speed.

 

[expunged]

I was thinking of buying a x99 setup, what chipset will this motherboard have? I'm interested to see how many pci lanes the southbridge has.