That diagram isn't necessarily correct for non-ESA compliance. In the red chart, my system with the 780i motherboard works the same way and is fully ESA compliant (mobo included). :smileywink:
This isn't really a matter of compliance per se it's about Dell's lack of disclosure. There is no indication anywhere on the XPS 630 sales site that would suggest the use of an MIO board to achieve a "system" certification. Even on the "how ESA works" site there is no mention of a component like the MIO board. If Dell wants to use a "loophole" to get certification from what the norm is then it needs to be disclosed. It begs the question why didn't Dell disclose this information clearly on the website? If there is nothing wrong with how the MIO board implements ESA then it shouldn't be a problem disclosing it. Dell was all too happy to claim ESA Certification knowing the XPS 630's form of achieving it was different from what is generally portrayed but chose not to disclose that information. Again, something the "enthusiast" market would be keenly interested in.
Rambler358- You could always swap your motherboard with mine if you like.:smileytongue:
This isn't really a matter of compliance per se it's about Dell's lack of disclosure. There is no indication anywhere on the XPS 630 sales site that would suggest the use of an MIO board to achieve a "system" certification. Even on the "how ESA works" site there is no mention of a component like the MIO board. Dell was all too happy to claim ESA Certification knowing the XPS 630's form of achieving it was different from what is generally portrayed but chose not to disclose that information.
I'll give you Dell's lack of disclosure about the 8x PCIe lanes, and my issue was with the lack of LightFX 2.0 that was advertised with the XPS 630. However, everything else worked (for me anyway). The MIO board is a component of the system chassis, and is not required for ESA though it can be ESA certified. All ESA does is provide an interface between the OS and the hardware via software, and in the case of the XPS 630 it's used for controlling the chassis lights, chassis fans and BIOS controls (previously nTune on older XPS models) from nVidia's Control Panel. And it's widely reported that nTune is not very reliable, and that's not Dell's fault - even when it was the only way to OC the older XPS PCs. But I prefer to OC through the BIOS anyway. But there is no issue in Dell's advertising the XPS 630 as ESA certified - unless those users are having fan problems or the like, but that's a support issue and not an ESA issue.
I myself never had an issue with the 630's lights or fans, though I'm not making light of those who are. I upgraded the mobo because I wanted to take overclocking further. But with the stock 630 mobo, I was easily able to OC the CPU to 3.0GHz.
There were 4 main selling points to why I bought the XPS 630:
1. Standard ATX architecture for future upgradability.
2. BIOS level OC capability.
3. No interest for 12 months through DPA.
4. Cool programmable chassis lighting.
Now #4 was a disappointment to me, but still being able to change the colors was acceptable enough to me to keep the XPS 630. And you have to realize - the people having problems with thier 630s are in the minority of all the 630s sold. And people who are having problems are going to speak the loudest. For those having no issues, it's likely you won't hear a peep from them.
But *if* Dell is secretly replacing the 630's chipset from the 650i to the 750i, then Dell needs satisfy those owners who would also like the "upgrade".
The MIO board is a component of the system chassis, and is not required for ESA though it can be ESA certified.
If the MIO board is part of the chassis then it should be listed in
Nvidia's certified products under the Chassis category instead of under the system where the other system listed has a motherboard that is ESA Certified compared to the 630's ESA "support", no? In the case of the 630 the MIO board is required for ESA for fan control, light control, etc.
If the MIO board is part of the chassis then it should be listed in Nvidia's certified products under the Chassis category instead of under the system where the other system listed has a motherboard that is ESA Certified compared to the 630's ESA "support", no?
With the hundreds of different PC cases out there and all the different MIO boards associated with them, do you really expect nVidia to list them all? :smileyindifferent:
Rambler358, are you serious? He just told you what should be on the website. In fact, I think he told you more than once. Also, what you are saying about ESA just isn't true. The 650i motherboard has never been ESA certified by anyone, anywhere, at any time. Take the MIO board out and there is no ESA functionality at all with the motherboard. I don't care if Nvidia themselves come into this thread and state that the 650i motherboard is ESA compliant. It would not be the truth. Jury rigging the 650i motherboard may provide an emulation of an ESA compliant motherboard, but unless Nvidia changes the board itself it will never be ESA compliant.
Yes there are systems that are certified ESA compliant, then there are components that are certified ESA compliant. The 650i motherboard is not one of those components. The hack job Dell did with the 630 system allowed them to claim ESA certification for the system as a whole. Nvidia was more than happy to post this fact on their web page (they are selling 650i motherboards to Dell). But unless Nvidia changes the original architecture of the motherboard, it will never be ESA compliant as a component.
Funny how you changed your motherboard, then have the nerve to come on here and tell us that we should be happy with the 650i motherboard as it has been implemented by Dell. Hypocritical FTL.
Also, tell me how exactly you know that the majority of 630 users are not having problems. You state alot of off the wall comments that you have absolutely no data to support. If you do have data, please post it. You do realize that there at many people who would never even know about ESA, nor detect any problems associated with it. We have done alot of research on this topic, and even though sometimes we are wrong, we do know what we are talking about.
Look at your system specs dude. You dont even have a 630i system anymore! Well you do have the case still.
OK, I have waited all day for a response from Dell about whether or not these 630i's with the x2 gpu cards were in fact shipped with 750 chips. Getting a bit perturbed now. Chris_M can you clarify this matter or not?
The only thing I can see Dell posting on their web site, is about the 8x PCIe lanes. Dell has now removed references to LightFX 2.0, so that issue is mute now.
What I stated about ESA is true. And I never stated the Dell 630 motherboard was ESA certified, so don't go putting words in my mouth please. And you are also incorrect about nVidia selling 650 motherboards to Dell. Dell is licensing the ability to use the nVidia chipset - these are Dell branded motherboards. In fact nVidia does not make motherboards, so please get your facts straight first before responding.
And I believe the "hack job" done on the motherboard by Dell was that users could add Crossfire GPU support if they wanted. Other nVidia based boards don't support this. This gives a lot of flexability to many more potential users.
Yes, I changed my motherboard for overclocking purposes, and I previously stated that. I don't need to look at my system's specs to know what I have. And again - I never stated that you should be happy with the motherboard if you're not. Please don't continue to mis-quote me.
And how do I know the majority of 630 users are happy with their system? There have been threads here on that very same question - the majority responded they were happy with it. Just search here, and in the other DCF forums and on the web and you'll find the same.
I'm sorry you're not happy with your system. I understand Dell will reimburse you, should you not want it anymore - just PM Chris_M and good luck!
"The only thing I can see Dell posting on their web site, is about the 8x PCIe lanes. Dell has now removed references to LightFX 2.0, so that issue is mute now. "
I purchased my system while the LightFX 2.0 was being falsely advertised. It is not mute to me.
"What I stated about ESA is true. And I never stated the Dell 630 motherboard was ESA certified, so don't go putting words in my mouth please. And you are also incorrect about nVidia selling 650 motherboards to Dell. Dell is licensing the ability to use the nVidia chipset - these are Dell branded motherboards. In fact nVidia does not make motherboards, so please get your facts straight first before responding."
My point remains regardless. Nvidia is receiving money from Dell and is (i am sure) more than happy to comply with whatever Dell asks of them as far as certification goes. Also, although you are correct that Nvidia doesn't make motherboards, they do make the chips that go on those motherboards. The funtionality of the motherboards come from the chips that Nvidia makes. I said motherboards because I figured most people consider a 650i motherboard as a "Nvidia motherboard". Although, after Dell got done with their hacks, I would agree that it does not resemble your normal Nvidia chip based motherboard.
"What I stated about ESA is true. And I never stated the Dell 630 motherboard was ESA certified, so don't go putting words in my mouth please. And you are also incorrect about nVidia selling 650 motherboards to Dell. Dell is licensing the ability to use the nVidia chipset - these are Dell branded motherboards. In fact nVidia does not make motherboards, so please get your facts straight first before responding."
A big mistake on Dells part. Good for marketing, poor for the systems themselves. Yes this is simply opinion. I would much rather have a normal properly funtioning Nvidia chipset based motherboard that I can actually upgrade with a more advanced video card, than the junk that Dell has put into its motherboard just so they can market Crossfire compatibility. Which, btw, I have read isn't very good (though I am sure that is a minority opinion as well).
"Yes, I changed my motherboard for overclocking purposes, and I previously stated that. I don't need to look at my system's specs to know what I have. And again - I never stated that you should be happy with the motherboard if you're not. Please don't continue to mis-quote me."
Ok I will quote my own thoughts then. You have changed much more than just the motherboard. I do not see any mention of that. I agree with myself that you basically do not even have a 630i any longer.
"And how do I know the majority of 630 users are happy with their system? There have been threads here on that very same question - the majority responded they were happy with it. Just search here, and in the other DCF forums and on the web and you'll find the same."
I asked for data that you have. I am not searching anything to prove my point, because I am not stating that the majority of people are dissatified with the 630i. I am mearly stating that the majority of owners do not post here. So you have no way to know what you are claiming.
I have asked to get a refund already. But that is good advice. Unfortunately, I have not heard from Dell regarding my request that Chris forwarded for me. Would it surprise you if I never heard from Dell regarding my refund? It would not surprise me at all. In fact, it is what I expect. Chris can only do so much.
BTW...you have done much more than changed your MB to OC better. You have changed/upgraded your system to the point that it is unrecognizable as a 630i. If you didn't mention that it was once a 630i, no one could tell what system brand you have. I would have guessed custom.
@Durrthock wrote:
Dell told my that this board had 2 pcie x16 slots and 1 pcie x8 slot. lol
That's part of the problem - up until a day or two ago, the sales information - both on the web and in the hands of the Dell sales folks, had the same erroneous information. It's only until you escalate to a manager or someone on the tech side that they (and you) learn that the x16s are running at x8. But then again, pretty hard to ask the question if you don't already know there's a problem...
Drange
155 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 18:00
This isn't really a matter of compliance per se it's about Dell's lack of disclosure. There is no indication anywhere on the XPS 630 sales site that would suggest the use of an MIO board to achieve a "system" certification. Even on the "how ESA works" site there is no mention of a component like the MIO board. If Dell wants to use a "loophole" to get certification from what the norm is then it needs to be disclosed. It begs the question why didn't Dell disclose this information clearly on the website? If there is nothing wrong with how the MIO board implements ESA then it shouldn't be a problem disclosing it. Dell was all too happy to claim ESA Certification knowing the XPS 630's form of achieving it was different from what is generally portrayed but chose not to disclose that information. Again, something the "enthusiast" market would be keenly interested in.
Rambler358- You could always swap your motherboard with mine if you like.:smileytongue:
Rambler358
526 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 18:00
I'll give you Dell's lack of disclosure about the 8x PCIe lanes, and my issue was with the lack of LightFX 2.0 that was advertised with the XPS 630. However, everything else worked (for me anyway). The MIO board is a component of the system chassis, and is not required for ESA though it can be ESA certified. All ESA does is provide an interface between the OS and the hardware via software, and in the case of the XPS 630 it's used for controlling the chassis lights, chassis fans and BIOS controls (previously nTune on older XPS models) from nVidia's Control Panel. And it's widely reported that nTune is not very reliable, and that's not Dell's fault - even when it was the only way to OC the older XPS PCs. But I prefer to OC through the BIOS anyway. But there is no issue in Dell's advertising the XPS 630 as ESA certified - unless those users are having fan problems or the like, but that's a support issue and not an ESA issue.
I myself never had an issue with the 630's lights or fans, though I'm not making light of those who are. I upgraded the mobo because I wanted to take overclocking further. But with the stock 630 mobo, I was easily able to OC the CPU to 3.0GHz.
There were 4 main selling points to why I bought the XPS 630:
1. Standard ATX architecture for future upgradability.
2. BIOS level OC capability.
3. No interest for 12 months through DPA.
4. Cool programmable chassis lighting.
Now #4 was a disappointment to me, but still being able to change the colors was acceptable enough to me to keep the XPS 630. And you have to realize - the people having problems with thier 630s are in the minority of all the 630s sold. And people who are having problems are going to speak the loudest. For those having no issues, it's likely you won't hear a peep from them.
But *if* Dell is secretly replacing the 630's chipset from the 650i to the 750i, then Dell needs satisfy those owners who would also like the "upgrade".
Drange
155 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 19:00
Rambler358
526 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 19:00
With the hundreds of different PC cases out there and all the different MIO boards associated with them, do you really expect nVidia to list them all? :smileyindifferent:
Drange
155 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 20:00
Rambler358
526 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 20:00
KryttosArcadia
129 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 20:00
Rambler358
526 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 21:00
foehammer25
201 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 22:00
"For not saying what? "
Rambler358, are you serious? He just told you what should be on the website. In fact, I think he told you more than once. Also, what you are saying about ESA just isn't true. The 650i motherboard has never been ESA certified by anyone, anywhere, at any time. Take the MIO board out and there is no ESA functionality at all with the motherboard. I don't care if Nvidia themselves come into this thread and state that the 650i motherboard is ESA compliant. It would not be the truth. Jury rigging the 650i motherboard may provide an emulation of an ESA compliant motherboard, but unless Nvidia changes the board itself it will never be ESA compliant.
Yes there are systems that are certified ESA compliant, then there are components that are certified ESA compliant. The 650i motherboard is not one of those components. The hack job Dell did with the 630 system allowed them to claim ESA certification for the system as a whole. Nvidia was more than happy to post this fact on their web page (they are selling 650i motherboards to Dell). But unless Nvidia changes the original architecture of the motherboard, it will never be ESA compliant as a component.
Funny how you changed your motherboard, then have the nerve to come on here and tell us that we should be happy with the 650i motherboard as it has been implemented by Dell. Hypocritical FTL.
Also, tell me how exactly you know that the majority of 630 users are not having problems. You state alot of off the wall comments that you have absolutely no data to support. If you do have data, please post it. You do realize that there at many people who would never even know about ESA, nor detect any problems associated with it. We have done alot of research on this topic, and even though sometimes we are wrong, we do know what we are talking about.
Look at your system specs dude. You dont even have a 630i system anymore! Well you do have the case still.
chembane
32 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 22:00
OK, I have waited all day for a response from Dell about whether or not these 630i's with the x2 gpu cards were in fact shipped with 750 chips. Getting a bit perturbed now. Chris_M can you clarify this matter or not?
Rambler358
526 Posts
0
August 1st, 2008 23:00
KryttosArcadia
129 Posts
0
August 2nd, 2008 00:00
foehammer25
201 Posts
0
August 2nd, 2008 00:00
I purchased my system while the LightFX 2.0 was being falsely advertised. It is not mute to me.
"What I stated about ESA is true. And I never stated the Dell 630 motherboard was ESA certified, so don't go putting words in my mouth please. And you are also incorrect about nVidia selling 650 motherboards to Dell. Dell is licensing the ability to use the nVidia chipset - these are Dell branded motherboards. In fact nVidia does not make motherboards, so please get your facts straight first before responding."
My point remains regardless. Nvidia is receiving money from Dell and is (i am sure) more than happy to comply with whatever Dell asks of them as far as certification goes. Also, although you are correct that Nvidia doesn't make motherboards, they do make the chips that go on those motherboards. The funtionality of the motherboards come from the chips that Nvidia makes. I said motherboards because I figured most people consider a 650i motherboard as a "Nvidia motherboard". Although, after Dell got done with their hacks, I would agree that it does not resemble your normal Nvidia chip based motherboard.
"What I stated about ESA is true. And I never stated the Dell 630 motherboard was ESA certified, so don't go putting words in my mouth please. And you are also incorrect about nVidia selling 650 motherboards to Dell. Dell is licensing the ability to use the nVidia chipset - these are Dell branded motherboards. In fact nVidia does not make motherboards, so please get your facts straight first before responding."
A big mistake on Dells part. Good for marketing, poor for the systems themselves. Yes this is simply opinion. I would much rather have a normal properly funtioning Nvidia chipset based motherboard that I can actually upgrade with a more advanced video card, than the junk that Dell has put into its motherboard just so they can market Crossfire compatibility. Which, btw, I have read isn't very good (though I am sure that is a minority opinion as well).
"Yes, I changed my motherboard for overclocking purposes, and I previously stated that. I don't need to look at my system's specs to know what I have. And again - I never stated that you should be happy with the motherboard if you're not. Please don't continue to mis-quote me."
Ok I will quote my own thoughts then. You have changed much more than just the motherboard. I do not see any mention of that. I agree with myself that you basically do not even have a 630i any longer.
"And how do I know the majority of 630 users are happy with their system? There have been threads here on that very same question - the majority responded they were happy with it. Just search here, and in the other DCF forums and on the web and you'll find the same."
I asked for data that you have. I am not searching anything to prove my point, because I am not stating that the majority of people are dissatified with the 630i. I am mearly stating that the majority of owners do not post here. So you have no way to know what you are claiming.
I have asked to get a refund already. But that is good advice. Unfortunately, I have not heard from Dell regarding my request that Chris forwarded for me. Would it surprise you if I never heard from Dell regarding my refund? It would not surprise me at all. In fact, it is what I expect. Chris can only do so much.
BTW...you have done much more than changed your MB to OC better. You have changed/upgraded your system to the point that it is unrecognizable as a 630i. If you didn't mention that it was once a 630i, no one could tell what system brand you have. I would have guessed custom.
Durrthock
27 Posts
0
August 2nd, 2008 01:00
acs9000
30 Posts
0
August 2nd, 2008 01:00
That's part of the problem - up until a day or two ago, the sales information - both on the web and in the hands of the Dell sales folks, had the same erroneous information. It's only until you escalate to a manager or someone on the tech side that they (and you) learn that the x16s are running at x8. But then again, pretty hard to ask the question if you don't already know there's a problem...