Intel DG45FC

We looked forward to the arrival of this motherboard with great anticipation. It is not every day we have the latest IG chipset available in a mini-ITX form factor. We heard rumors of this board at CES last January and were actually surprised to see it on the roadmap in April and even more surprised that Intel built this board. As such, we will take an in-depth look at it and supporting components such as cases and power supplies shortly.

For the time being Intel has done a remarkable job shoe horning the G45 into this particular form factor. The DG45FC offers an excellent feature set that includes Intel’s 82567LF PCIe Gigabit Ethernet controller, RAID 0,1,5,10 support from the ICH10R, IR capabilities, and HD audio from the IDT 92HD73E featuring Dolby Home Theater certification. Considering the cost of most mini-ITX boards, the street price of $129.99 is astounding.

We like the layout of the board. It features a three-phase power delivery system that worked well with our selection of dual core processors. Quad Core processors are not supported but considering the processing power available in an E8600 for instance, it should not matter for most users considering this form factor. Like the DG45ID, this board is legacy free. There are four SATA ports located on the board and an eSATA port on the IO panel that also contains six USB 2.0, LAN port, and the HDMI/DVI output ports. There are two headers on the board for an additional four USB 2.0 ports, one PCIe x1 slot, and two DIMM slots that support up to 4GB of memory at DDR2-667/800 speeds.

Actual operation of the board was similar to the DG45ID. The BIOS (version 079) is the same one offered on that board and as such all of the comments we discussed in the DG45ID overview holds true for this board. We are still searching for the perfect case to install this board in to be honest.

We utilized an Apex M-100 for initial testing. This case does not offer the best ventilation so our current thermal numbers are skewed to some degree. It also requires the use of a low profile CPU fan/heatsink like the ones shipping with the E7200/E5200 processors. Installing the retail fan/heatsink is a bit tricky but it works. The lack of a heatsink on the ICH10R resulted in temperatures hitting the 65C~70C range in this case. Airflow was partially blocked by the hard drive so the MCH ran upwards of 80C with the E7200 at 42C. We did not encounter any stability problems but would like to see reduced temperatures for 24/7 operation. We will be looking at other case and thermal solutions shortly.

Pros/Cons

We really want to like this board; in fact, we do to a certain extent and it excites us from an HTPC viewpoint. It carries all of the baggage of the DG45ID board with it due to the BIOS design and hardware compatibility problems. Like all of the G45 boards, it is also saddled with drivers and ISV support that is still lacking although improving with each release. We think Intel should have included a small heatsink on the ICH10R although proper case airflow is still a requirement for keeping the MCH and ICH at tolerable levels.

Changes we would make would include the ability to manipulate processor voltages, a more robust fan control system since this becomes extremely important in a mini-ITX design, a thermal solution for the ICH10R, and figuring out a way to include IEEE 1394a support would have put icing on the cake. Overall, the price and performance for a mini-ITX platform is just incredible. If Intel can straighten out some of the BIOS, driver, hardware, and BD playback compatibility problems, this board would be our choice for a HTPC or SOHO solution in the current market space.

Gallery: Intel G45 ITX

The Boards: Intel DG45ID The Test & General Performance
Comments Locked

53 Comments

View All Comments

  • sprockkets - Wednesday, September 24, 2008 - link

    Except the fact that you needed a firmware update on the home theater receiver is just bulls****.

    Thanks DRM!

    I can't wait till VLC gets native blue ray support! At least we have Sly-Soft!
  • DoucheVader - Friday, September 26, 2008 - link

    Hey if it wasn't for a vast majority of people copying stuff, we wouldn't have DRM. I am sick of the complaints. We as consumers created this problem.

    Most things that have DRM are to protect someone's bread and butter. How would you like it if every time you got paid there was some money missing?


  • - Saturday, September 27, 2008 - link

    Your point might be valid if DRM worked, but can you point out a single mainstream home theater medium on which the DRM means anything to the pirates?

    DRMed CDs? Ha. Those just pissed off consumers when they inevitable didn't play in some players and/or contained bad software. Often defeated with the frickin shift key.

    DVD? People have tattoos of the DeCSS source code it's that damn short. Amusingly the longest lasting DRM scheme, with 2.5 years between the first DVD movie release and the release of DeCSS.

    HD-DVD? 253 days, not even a full year after the format first shipped its AACS protection system was cracked. Under three weeks later the first copies start showing up on private trackers.

    Blu-Ray (AACS)? The same AACS crack applied to it, and about two weeks after the first HD-DVD copies showed up Blu-Ray was right behind it. Launch to first pirated movie: 225 days.

    Blu-Ray (BD+)? Slightly harder than AACS apparently, but titles did not ship with it until October 2007 so the cracking community got off to a late start. AnyDVD HD supported decrypting all BD+ titles roughly 5 months after the first titles shipped and copies again showed up soon after.

    I'm less familiar with DVD-Audio and SACD, but my understanding is that there hasn't been a direct "crack" of their respective encryption but instead PC-based players and/or sound drivers are modified to just write the decoded bitstream to the hard drive. This works quite well for audio, as in most cases the compression (if any) applied on the disc is not wanted and the uncompressed PCM stream is exactly what the user desires. For obvious reasons that is not feasible with video.

    Once these protections are broken, they do nothing to reduce piracy and only remain to prevent fair-use backups by technologically illiterate users and/or to annoy consumers with crap like these HDCP issues.

    It doesn't even matter to the pirate crowd whether the cracks are public or private, as long as someone can do it that means the files will get out, and once they're out they're out.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now