POST A COMMENT

27 Comments

Back to Article

  • dishayu - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    One has to ask : Why? I can MAY BE understand the utlity on a Xeon board but 22 SATA ports for a desktop motherboard? I can't see a plausible utlility. Reply
  • arthur449 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Only one reason comes to mind:

    because shut up
    Reply
  • Arnulf - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Because you're st00pid ? It is a valid question, besides finding room for 22 drives is yet another obstacle. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Get a big tower with some backplanes for the 5.25" slots and you are set. If you use 2.5" drives/SSDs, even easier. Reply
  • KamikaZeeFu - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    On desktop? One reason : pron Reply
  • Vepsa - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Because it would make a great home storage server board. Reply
  • nathanddrews - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    4-way SLI/CF
    22 SATA ports

    What immediately comes to mind to me is a massive home media/gaming server. As we enter the age of personal cloud gaming, I could see placing a monster gaming PC on my basement rack connected via HDMI/DP over CAT6a to all my displays or using Piston or Shield to play games anywhere in the house. Load FlexRAID on there and fill it with 22 hard drives to store 80TB of Blu-ray backups and Steam games.

    This is likely a niche within a niche within a niche, but who cares? It's awesome. :)
    Reply
  • Guspaz - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    4-way SLI implies you'll get at least four mechanically x16 PCI-E slots. In fact, the previous version of this board (the X79 chipset) had seven x16 slots (it used some bridge chips). Fill those slots with LSI 9201-16i cards and the Extreme 11 ends up with 134 SATA ports.

    I'm not sure why you'd want that many ports in a single consumer machine (I wouldn't trust a 134 drive RAID setup without ECC RAM), but you *could*, and that's pointlessly awesome.
    Reply
  • piroroadkill - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Overkill. For the lulz. Who cares. It's available. You don't have to buy it. I'm glad they make stuff like this. Reply
  • TomWomack - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Because maybe you want to attach lots of disc to a machine without paying the Xeon tax. There's no requirement to buy stuff with an expensive ENTERPRISE label on the front to do large-scale work. Reply
  • Guspaz - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Unfortunately, there are a few "enterprise" features that you really really want before you put that many drives in a single machine. ECC being one of them. You can handle a lot at the software layer with something like ZFS, but even ZFS won't help against memory corruption. Reply
  • b3nzint - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    damn right.
    anand u should do a review on this mobo, with say a 20 SSD in raid 0. coz people may actually build it.
    Reply
  • Etern205 - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    Because you can never have enough SATA ports. The article did say it's SATA/SAS, I believe SAS can be daisy chain, but it only possible through a SAS expander port. The SAS on this board is only 1 device per port. SAS expander can connect up to 4 devices. Reply
  • Nitrobass24 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    You can use reverse breakout cables and take SAS ports 0-3 to a single SFF-8087 connector and plug it into an expander or route to an external HBA for a DAS hookup.
    I used to do this with my ASUS Z8NA-D6 and an HP Expander.
    Reply
  • jabber - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    It's done for a very specific reason.

    It's called "Wouldn't it be interesting/fun if we......"

    It's also called having an inquiring imagination. Something a lot of people lack these days.
    Reply
  • arthur449 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Thank you. Some people just don't understand "because we can."

    This would be an entertaining platform for a case building hobby.
    Reply
  • watersb - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Maximum RAM? (guess: 32GB)
    ECC support? (guess: no)

    I can wish for a Haswell workstation-class board, but I may have to wait for new Xeons. Sigh.
    Reply
  • watersb - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    (also: are guys sleeping much? (guess: no)
    thanks for the info on these new boards! this new Haswell surge is exciting.)
    Reply
  • ssj3gohan - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    If it's haswel, max RAM would be 64GB. No ECC without C-series chipset. Reply
  • Kevin G - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    This would require 16 GB unbuffered memory which have yet to be released in any sort of volume. Haswell supports it if they ever do appear on store shelves. Right now it is best you can get on this board is 32 GB. Reply
  • Duraz0rz - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    If only I could afford 22 SSDs to populate all the SATA ports :D Reply
  • PCTC2 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    It's probably an LSI2116 chip, or an as-of-yet-unreleased SAS3 (12Gbps) controller. The LSI2116 is an HBA chip (non-RAID) that is found in their LSI 9201-16(i|e) cards. Reply
  • Travis Jackson - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    What I really want to know is this:
    The Z77 chipset supports SSD-Trim in RAID-0, but only on 2 ports. Will the Z87 chipset support SSD-Trim in RAID-0 on all six SATA 6Gbps ports?
    Reply
  • clille - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Nope, it is not 2116, but it is LSI ... I have a picture of the specs ... let me get the picture out of the camera and I'll sent it Reply
  • clille - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Sorry ... got sidetracked a little with the photo ... there was an earthquake right now in Taiwan, and I felt it -

    Anyway: back to the motherboard, it is the LSI 3008 controller, I will sent the pictures to Ian, and then he can add them to this article
    Reply
  • Nitrobass24 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    "But the peak speeds showcased by ASRock were half this value at 5.5 gigabytes per second, suggesting that these LSI ports may be SATA 3 Gbps limited." I dont think this is accurate..if you go back and look at the IOMeter Screenshot it is showing IOPS, not Throughput. Reply
  • IanCutress - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    That was the first thing we noted, and ASRock said the screen shot was showing the wrong text. 5500 IOPS would be low. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now