Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Bombastus, post: 91897, member: 2178"] Thermaltake lists rear-connector motherboard support for ATX and microATX boards in the View 590 TG ARGB, while standard support also includes SSI-CEB and Mini-ITX. Those two compatibility lists look similar at a glance, but they answer different questions when you are buying a board for a cable-hidden build. A normal motherboard only needs the case to accept its dimensions, mounting points, expansion slots, and rear I/O position. A back-connect board also needs openings behind the PCB in the right places so power, USB, fan, SATA, and front-panel connections can pass into the rear chamber. The distinction makes [B][URL='https://goldmidi.com/community/threads/thermaltake-detailed-view-590-tg-argb-rollout-in-japan.77311/']the View 590 TG ARGB rear-connector support[/URL][/B] more specific than the broad motherboard list suggests. SSI-CEB and Mini-ITX belong on the ordinary compatibility list, while Thermaltake names only ATX and microATX for rear-facing connector layouts. [HEADING=2]Rear-connector support is narrower than board support[/HEADING] Back-connect boards move many internal headers from the visible face of the PCB to its rear. MSI Project Zero, Gigabyte Stealth, and ASUS BTF use their own implementations, but the case still has to expose the connector zones instead of placing solid motherboard tray metal behind them. Physical board size alone cannot settle the issue. An ATX board measuring the familiar 305 by 244 mm can bolt into an ATX-ready case, yet rear-facing power or USB headers become useless if the tray does not provide matching access around those positions. The basic idea behind [B][URL='https://patents.google.com/patent/US8687350B2/en']moving internal cable connectors behind the motherboard[/URL][/B] predates the current crop of branded back-connect ecosystems. The practical problem remains unchanged because cables need usable space behind the board and a route away from each connector without being crushed against the chassis. Thermaltake has already done the important part by explicitly listing MSI, Gigabyte, and ASUS rear-connector designs for the View 590. Even so, the brand names should not be read as a blanket promise that every unusual board carrying one of those logos will work. Form factor remains the hard boundary in the published specification. A rear-connect board should be ATX or microATX, and checking the exact motherboard against the case documentation is still smarter than assuming a matching brand badge guarantees every cutout will line up. [HEADING=2]Current ATX and microATX boards fit the intended pattern[/HEADING] MSI's Project Zero design specifications cover both ATX and microATX layouts. Its Z790 Project Zero is a back-connect ATX board at 304.8 by 243.84 mm, while the B650M Project Zero uses a square 243.84 mm microATX PCB. Gigabyte follows the same broad size pattern with its Stealth range. The B850 AORUS Stealth is a 30.5 by 24.4 cm ATX board, while the B850M AORUS Stealth moves the concept into microATX without asking the case to support a different rear-connector form factor. Those examples sit directly inside Thermaltake's published ATX and microATX back-connect allowance. They also show why searching only for "hidden connector motherboard support" can be misleading, since the useful answer depends on the exact board format as well as where its rear-facing sockets sit. ASUS BTF belongs to the same compatibility conversation, but BTF is an ecosystem name rather than a universal chassis standard. Some ASUS hardware also extends the hidden-cable idea to graphics-card power, so motherboard fit and support for every optional BTF feature should be treated as separate checks. Cable access deserves attention before the motherboard is screwed down. Connecting the 24-pin lead, CPU power, front I/O, USB headers, and fan leads from the rear can be easier before drives, hubs, or bundled cables occupy the same chamber. [HEADING=2]SSI-CEB support does not extend to rear connectors[/HEADING] The View 590's SSI-CEB support is useful for builders considering larger workstation-style boards, but Thermaltake does not list SSI-CEB under its rear-connector compatibility line. A conventional SSI-CEB motherboard can therefore be within specification without creating a back-connect build. Mini-ITX has the same split. The case accepts Mini-ITX as a standard motherboard format, yet the published rear-connector list stops at ATX and microATX, so a hypothetical rear-facing Mini-ITX design should not be assumed compatible from size alone. This matters because connector relocation changes the chassis requirement, not merely the appearance of the finished PC. Rear-facing sockets need tray openings, cable depth, and sensible bend room in places a conventional motherboard never uses for plugging in cables. Buying the motherboard first and checking the case later is the risky order here. Start with the exact board model, confirm it is an ATX or microATX rear-connect design covered by the View 590 layout, then inspect connector placement before adding controllers, drives, or thick cable bundles behind the tray. A regular SSI-CEB, ATX, microATX, or Mini-ITX board has a much simpler compatibility test. Back-connect hardware needs the second test as well, and the View 590's published specification makes the dividing line unusually clear. [/QUOTE]

Name