Talk:Motherboard/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

SHOWS DISK ERROR BOOTING TIME

SHOWS DISK ERROR BOOTING TIME

Merging PC Motherboard

The above article is nothing different to this one it has a little extra information i suggest the information be merged here and redirect the other to this one as there no need for two articles about the same thing.--Andrewcrawford (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

i have merged pc motherboard into this article as they where the same thing and no point in two articles. i have also tagged the article as it needs a lot of work to make it a good article so people can use it for information. i will try do it but i am busying doign my degree just now.

If you are not ready to do the necessary work required then I strongly recommend to unmerge them until you are. A generic motherboard and a PC motherboard are emphatically not the same thing! Computers other than PCs also have motherboards. Devices other than computers have motherboards, including some PABXes and, potentially, anything else with a CPU. I don't object to us having both subjects covered in one article, although this is not what I would regard as optimal, but what we can't allow for more than a day or two is the current mess where there is no clear distinction between the generic characteristics of a motherboard and the specifics of a PC motherboard. The article is so confusing and misleading that it has to be given top priority to get it fixed before it makes us a laughing stock.

My recommendation remains as it always has been. This article should be a short article about motherboards in general with nothing specific to PCs and PC Motherboard should be the larger article with the PC specific stuff in it. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The two articles where the same this one hada little more information tha tthe other, as for the work it not that the article is not good just needs improvements which si different to being not revelent. There is no different betweena motherboard anda pc motherboard there teh same thing, even apple motherboard is teh same--Andrewcrawford (talk) 15:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry to have to be blunt, but this is simply not true. There is a fundamental difference in subject between a PC motherboard and a generic one. I know that this article has always been contaminated by people who misunderstood this distinction putting PC specific stuff in it. Please go and do a little background reading on the subject and you will see that I am right. There were motherboards before there were PCs and there continue to be motherboards which are not related to PCs! What was the main board of an old CPM box if it wasn't a non-PC motherboard? --DanielRigal (talk) 15:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree totally that mainboard is not a motherboard, but motherboard is the term used for pcs, mainboard should have it own article, i have at least 12-15 years experiance behind me so i am some dafty i want to improve the aritcle and make it better and i want people to understand what a motherboard is and whata mainboard is, i am not sure if there isa mainboard article yet if not how about i transfer some of the revelent infromation to it and make a stub to be expanded upon?>--Andrewcrawford (talk) 15:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC) Ok the mainboard redirect here so i will remove the redirect and make it aaritcle again

The only confusing part is the integrated peripheral but that was confusing before the merging--Andrewcrawford (talk) 15:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC) The article is quite clear otherwise defining what a motherboard is, i have tagged it for improvements

It does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve it by citing reliable sources. Tagged since September 2008. It contains a plot summary that is too long compared to the rest of the article. Tagged since September 2008. It needs to be updated. Tagged since September 2008. It may contain original research or unverifiable claims. Tagged since September 2008. It is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. may be able to help recruit one. It needs to be expanded. Tagged since September 2008. It may need copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling. Tagged since September 2008. It may require general cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Tagged since September 2008. Its introduction may need to be rewritten to comply with Wikipedia's lead section guidelines. Tagged since September 2008.

all of them are just saying the article is in need of improvements nothing says it confusing

I will add a confusing tag, if that helps. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough :) but the article is better than you made out otherwise it would not be c classed :) but i agree it needs work i have cleaned it up a little i will put some time aside tomorrow and this weekend to clean it up some more and make it less confusing and reference it a bit more. but the major clean up i do not have time for just now i can only do it bit by bit over the next 3-6 months--Andrewcrawford (talk) 15:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

this sentence should be changed

As of the late 1990s, many personal computer motherboards support a full range of audio, video, storage, and networking functions without the need for any expansion cards at all; higher-end systems for 3D gaming and computer graphics typically retain only the graphics card as a separate component.

A lot of people still need expansion cards for components, which are not installed on Motherboards today. i.E. TV tuner cards, PPUs and SCSI are normally not included on Motherboards. Also some people prefer discrete soundcars like the Creative X-Fí series because of better performance and sound quality. --MrBurns (talk) 04:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I have a little different opinion. I would claim that 95% of all home users would not have any use for any peripheral except a TV card for HTPC use. SCSI for instance, is rapidly losing ground with IEEE1394 connections and USB 2.0 that can handle just as much data or more with less headache in setting up together with fast SATA drives that is going beyond the performance of SCSI of just a couple of years ago. The integrated sound with 7.1 channels and the onboard graphics is of such quality that they can handle most typical work loads for a home pc except the latest games. Games a couple of years old can run fine on a AMD 780G chipset motherboard with integrated HD3400 graphics chip in the north bridge. Scaling HD material can actually be better on some built in graphics solutions than some low end discrete graphics cards. It would only be neccessary with a better soundcard if you are sampling and recording sound for commercial release and that can't be more than a small fraction of the pc users. Henrik Robeck (talk) 21:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I found a second confusing sentence in the history section:

The early pioneers of motherboard manufacturing were Micronics, Mylex, AMI, DTK, Hauppauge, Orchid Technology, Elitegroup, DFI, and a number of Taiwan-based manufacturers.

At least one of the mentioned companies (Elitegroup) is also Taiwan-based, so the sentence should be changed to be lesse confusing. --MrBurns (talk) 04:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

TV tuner and scsi cards are standard for normal user!!! and as for PPU come on....., as for the sound cards the sentance isnt saying you cant use external card jsut what comes natural again if you want to tidy this up go ahead but be careful how you word it as i have point out what you are talking about aint normal need stuff for a comptuer to run--Andrewcrawford (talk) 14:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC) The second point is a valid one but if you read the tags the article need major clean up full stop there nothing stopping oyu amending it

95% market share?

While doing a little copy-editing, I replaced the claim that IBM-compatible PCs currently have more than 95% market share with "around 90%". The article did cite a recent reference that supported the 95% claim, but I think the claim itself was out of date - results of Google searches suggest that Apple currently has around 10% market share. But it's a contentious issue and I haven't found a reliable and independent reference, so I've tagged it for now. I'll cite a reference if I can find one, unless someone else finds one first. (Alternatively, maybe market share isn't really relevant to a technical article, and isn't needed at all?) Oscroft (talk) 12:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

correct eth market share is not revelent for a tehcincal article remove it if you cnanot find a refernece for it otherwise i am sure it coudl be included some where as long as there arefernce--Andrewcrawford (talk) 14:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

flickers

Can somebody clarify this sentence:

1. power connectors flickers, which receive electrical power from the computer power supply and distribute it to the CPU, chipset, main memory, and expansion cards.[4]

I can't find definition of flickers that seems to fit this context. It is it being used as an alternative name for power connectors? If so it should read: Power connectors (known as flickers), which receive... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.98.199.152 (talk) 19:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

what is decompiler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.72.96.100 (talk) 13:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Question

What difference between Chip set mother board and Intel original mother board. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.177.116 (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

the difference between

what is the difference between with ATX , BTX , AT on your motherboard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.63.24.217 (talk) 13:02, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Reword Section: Peripheral card slots

The paragraph(s) pertaining to the number of the various slots and peripherals on a motherboard really shouldn't be there. There is no standard (and the article even mentions it) on the number of different slots or peripherals on the board so why is there that big section describing them?

Perhaps it shouldn't say "A standard ATX motherboard will typically..." or "A standard EATX motherboard will have" but instead provide examples of the various peripherals and slots while at the same time mentioning that the number peripherals and slots depend on the manufacturer and application. Also, the article should never say "Always" (i.e "A sound chip is always included on the motherboard..." because that is especially not true) because there is no standard on things like that.

Again, it should only provide examples of peripherals and slots, because there is no 'typical' setup. I've seen server boards with shorter PCI-E x8 Slots and PCI-X Slots, lacking in sound. There have also been desktop boards with numerous IO slots lacking video and sound or a board omitting PCI Slots entirely. --67.184.44.54 (talk) 07:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

is a mother board is suitable for all processors? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.17.3 (talk) 14:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Integrated peripherals

I would just like to go on record as saying that something which is integrated into the motherboard is not a peripheral, by definition. Or am I missing something? ~ PonyToast...§ 14:09, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Alt name "parentboard"

I read in Andrew Tanenbaum's text that the term parentboard is the preferred PC term for motherboard. Obviously this is not widely adopted, but is parentboard at least an alternative term? I don't see it in the first sentennce. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozhu (talk • contribs) 17:57, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

History section

Last paragraph has been truncated (dodgy edit?). Sentence reads as follows "A motherboard specifically refers to a printed circuit with the capability to add/extend its performance and capabilities with the".

the difference between

what is the difference between with ATX , BTX , AT on your motherboard

this article

should explain what a motherboard does and is. as it exists, it does neither. an encyclopedia should give understanding to all, not just industry experts.

Suggestion: how computer performance depends on motherboard

Hello, I'd like to find some info how computer performance depends on motherboard, for CPU , GPU, RAM, disk its quite clear, but motherboard is for me just thing which must be in computer, but I dont't understand why are there motherboards for servers, for office desktops etc. I would be pleased (and may be some other users) if there will be such an info, it would be helpful and informative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ProkopHapala (talk • contribs) 17:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing is a better place to ask. Rilak (talk) 17:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

There isn't really motherboard for server as such, but motherboard that are designed for a specific type of processor, server usual use a xeon processor as it more reliable, but that is not a rule of thumb. if you are looking for a home use motherboard your best going for intel 775 or amd 2+ sockets as there the best for home use--Andrewcrawford (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there are such things as server motherboards. They differ from the average motherboard by the features they support such as registered ECC memory and etc. There are also gaming/enthusiast motherboards and motherboards that fit into all sorts of different categories. Its also important to note that the big iron servers, like the high-end models of the System p range from IBM or the M9000 from Fujitsu/Sun don't use motherboards - if the definition of a motherboard is a PCB that holds the CPU, RAM and expansion slots, drive interfaces, integrated peripherals, etc. Rilak (talk) 11:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I said isn't really i did not say there is not, the motherboards that you see on sale saying server are technical just normal motherboard but high end ones, the true server motherboard are in blade servers--Andrewcrawford (talk) 11:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

To expand and explain all different variants for home users and professional users would perhaps expand the text too much in my mind. If we are looking at the PC (personal computer) there are different variant of motherboard intended or marketed for different use, but there is no real distinction between them. There are naturally a whole world of servers and work station computers beyond blade servers. In our datacenter we haven't yet come up to 50% in blade servers, most are still rack mounted and some stand alone servers, although we have moved off the massive SPARC and Alpha powered systems running VMS or Unix, but that was as recent as two years ago. A stand alone Sun server could easily be four times as big as a standard refrigerator and hit you with a price tag of over $1.000.000 US (at the time of our purchase), and we had a few of those... Simplifying and saying they are all blade servers isn't true. And the motherboard of those are not quite like a standard pc although it is not near the really big main frames. claiming that Xeon processors are more stable than others isn't either correct, however used with ECC (error checking and correcting) memory they are less prone to produce erata as a result, but all servers usually have ECC memory, regardless of the system is running on AMD Opteron, SUN UltraSPARC, DEC Alpha, IBM Power, HP PA-RISC, Intel Itanium etc. And dont forget that other architectures than the x86 that was Intel's architecture for the 8086, 80286, 386, 486, Pentium etc and the more recent AMD EM64T 64 bit extension(named x64 by Microsoft) that is used for the Intel Xeon is more prone to stall than some of the other processors, even though more modern processors like the 486 and later can handle and mask interrupts better. If we try to generalize about PC computers as used for home for surfing or gaming, or simpler workstations or small stand alone servers or rack mounted servers they are not so very different and can be categorized after use, ports (I/O communication) and chipsets. I could claim that 95% of all home users would not have any use for any peripheral except a TV card for HTPC use. SCSI is rapidly losing ground with IEEE1394 connections and fast SATA drives. The integrated sound with 7.1 channels and the onboard graphics is of such quality that they can handle most typical work loads for a home pc except the latest games. Scaling HD material can actually be better on some built in graphics solutions from certain vendors than some low end peripheral graphics cards. The question remains; should we describe and cover all uses, from small laptops over pc and work stations up to main frames as that is a big scope and somewhat fluid in definite terms or should we generalize to keep the text short and concise? Henrik Robeck (talk) 21:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I do not think that there is a need to discuss non-PC platforms in this article. Most non-PC platforms do not refer to their primary logic board(s) as motherboards and it would be inappropriate for us to refer to them as such. Doing so because we say it fits the definition of motherboard would be synthesis, which is strictly forbidden. Rilak (talk) 03:24, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

There was an article written about 10 years ago which you could refer to. It basically said that the motherboard is the most important component for determining the use of the computer, including its performance, peripherals, and its capabilities or limitations. But it also narrowed this down to the chipset which makes the thing what it is. See this ancient article about motherboards and chipsets. If you want to add that sort of info into the article, you now at least have a basis to do so. I like to saw logs! (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 December 2015

The 4th edition of Modern Operating Systems, Prentice-Hall, a reliable source on operating systems and computer systems, by Andy Tanenbaum and Herbert Bos has on page 34 of chapter 1:

"Every PC contains a parentboard (formerly called a motherboard before political correctness hit the computer industry)."

This request is to include the "parentboard" in the first sentence of the article, as:

"A motherboard (sometimes alternatively known as the mainboard, parentboard, system board, planar board or logic board,[1] or colloquially, a mobo)" 84.245.31.67 (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: This appears to have been the only book to have done this, and it is quite outdated now. There is no evidence of even minimal usage, so I do not see a reason to include it in the lead. -- ferret (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)