ubersonic wrote:
This shouldn't even need a poll ... providing this update is the type of thing that's expected to be standard from a MB manufacturer on the level of ASUS :mad:.

I strongly agree with this.

ASUS shouldn't require arbitrary feedback of this sort to decide whether it's "worth" investing time and labour into implementing maximal hardware compatibility into their boards. They already know how many ASUS-branded Z97s they've sold (and are still selling) so they already know if over 1000 users are receptive to an NVMe compatibility upgrade. If they think people will want to buy NVMe motherboards then they shouldn't even need to ask. It's a fiercely competitive market where (whether they need it or not, whether they even understand it or not) customers will vote with their money and end up buying the motherboards which do it all. ASUS is renowned for maximizing capabilities and features on every motherboard they make, but I suspect a lot of customers loyal to the ASUS brand would shift their allegiance quickly enough if the day comes they feel ASUS failed to deliver on this implicit expectation. I half-jokingly suggest that a single vague "maybe we'll look into it" promise about NVMe development from Gigabyte or MSI would be worth more than a million votes on this ASUS poll page.

The entire notion of this poll seems a bit inane, anyhow. UEFI code modules are somewhat modular and interchangeable, once the core code works it shouldn't be too difficult to port it across multiple hardware platforms (ie, all ASUS-branded motherboards with latent NVMe capabilities) with necessary minor tweaking to address unique hardware quirks. Certainly, new features always require some "beta testing" in the wild because users will always have a wider array of (bizarre and troublesome) hardware configurations than ASUS could possibly access for in-house testing, and new features might require a firmware revision or three to get things just right.

Unless, due to UEFI capacity limits or somesuch, adding new functionality would come at the cost of losing old functionality. Even then, it would make sense to fork firmware versions or enable some sort of modular installation option so that users can select and prioritize which capabilities they consider most important.

Myk SilentShadow wrote:
Just because the RIVBE is a year old, that doesn't mean jack.

I think you misunderstood my point, I wasn't trying to say that the R4B should have official NVME support out of the box because it's not that old, that would be stupid. I was saying the R4B should be given NVME official support as a matter of course because it's still quite new.

Myk SilentShadow wrote:
They don't have to nor are they obligated to update BIOSes on older boards for NVMe compatibility.

Let's put this in perspective, the R4B was significantly newer/younger when consumer NVME hit than the R4E was when IB-E CPU's hit, could you imagine any MB manufacturer announcing that they wouldn't be adding IB-E support because the boards were a year old?

Adding official support for NVME to the BIOS on a £300+ motherboard should not be something that needs a poll, it should be something that is simply done.

There many of us who can't afford to always upgrade Torelli. i'm on a Rampage IV Formula, had a 3820 and just recently upgraded to a 3930K. I have 8GB of Corsair's XMS3 RAM, i'd love to get 32GB, but cash is very tight right now and I will be moving house, again, in a couple months...so no new purchases for me lol.

Nate: You should pay attention to the Front Page more often mate 😛