I have read all the back and forth between you and oneseraph. I decided to do a little research of my own. I thought you both might be full of it. here is what I found out.
Standard ATX allows 7 expasion slots.
http://www.formfactors.org/FFDetail.asp?FFID=1&CatID=1 look at 3.3.1 Expansion Slots
oneseraph 1 Rastalovich 0
PCIE power limit 375 watts
oneseraph 2 Rastalovich 0
Both Nvidia and AMD have both stated that they are staying within the pcie 375 watt limit.
oneserph 3 Rastalovich 0
Basically everything I look up points to oneseraph being right. No offense but the more you comment the less you appear to know. I suggest letting it go mate, you are on the wrong side of the debate.
Excellent research, and best of luck with your ATX standard mobo with the agp for advanced graphics and isa lanes for the 7 expansion slots. Let us know how you get on with that, I assume your current mobo fits these standards.
There is no debate as to whether PCI-SIG mention 375w as the operational limit, but as I'm try to explain to you all about how the system works, this is/was dependant what is available at the time of testing and writing of the said document. i.e. 2x 8pin atx pcie power connectors - it would not be envisaged that anyone would go beyond that at the time.
Back with the base 2.0 specification they would have stated 75w, for the slot, plus *whatever additional power could feasibly and realisticly be supplied*. They added molex, upped the power, 6x pin, upped the power, 8x pin, upped the power .. til the documents now read 375 .. another change comes along and so the documents will/may change.
As a statement of intent, for sure both parties stated they were sticking within this, and they have. They're all nice and friendly behind the scenes, even tho tho poke tounges out at each other when the other's not looking.
This isn't a political battleground or anything buddy, I'm merely trying to explain to you how the system works.
At the current moment in time, the PCIe 2.0 (latest 2.1) 'should' (I can't confirm this) be being used within modern up to date mobos being release. 2.1 is (should be) the final stepping stone to 3.0, it is *practically*, for all intensive purposes, the same in everything except data usage (for arguments sake). Whether this itself carries the same electrical properties of 3.0 I can't tell you, as the documents within PCI-SIG, which you'll need membership for to look at maybe, do-not give specific numbers on what the power req for base-3.0 will be. I did speculate the other week, knowing that both nvidia and amd have release these cards that so fragrantly play the "I'm not touching you" game with 375w, amd especially as they have a bigger hand in mobos these days, that they are infact in-house using "3.0" and are gearing up for it for future releases.
The reasoning behind many of the failures of going beyond 375 in testing gfxcards is down to how these 8x pin sockets are supplied. If you go down the standard route of conventionally hooking up your psu and using 8x pin designated cables, your system can and usually will, shutdown as the psu trips out. BUT if you supply the 8x pin socket with a combination of power sources, using adapters in the main, much more than 375 can be there if the card requires it - i.e. what overclockers will tend to do if they're intent on breaking the boundries.
For sure, there will be disclaimers all over the websites of these manufacturers explaining to you how awful it will be for your system if you go beyond 375, they'll probably even use it as a means to refuse warranty. But hey - it's a disclaimer - Intel have disclaimers about how many volts they want you to put over their cpus, and how much notice of that do enthusiasts take notice of ? In today's climate we need disclaimers on bridges that dangling your baby off the edge of it could result in harm and the bridge people won't be held responsible.
