Talk:Dell OptiPlex

Corrected btx link
Updated link for BTX since the page has been moved. --  RND   T  C   17:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

GX280
Citation needed for: "Many suffer onboard CPU fan controller problems requiring a total motherboard replacement?" I have a dead GX280 that won't post, with an out of control CPU fan that sounds like a jumbo jet taking off sitting right here, next to me at work while my coworker wastes her time messing with it and I type on a backup computer...personally I don't require any additional info... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.27.111.132 (talk • contribs)
 * That you have a problem with a single machine doesn't allow anyone to conclude that any larger group is flawed, or prone to failure. -- Mikeblas 16:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've had 5 GX280 machines fail on me from the same problem. They have the symptoms described above but the problem is the capacitors on the board, they overheat and swell (and sometimes burst).  Dell knows about the problem and has been replacing motherboards for all systems with this problem, even those out of warranty.  --  Atama  sama  00:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm adding memory variations in GX270 and GX280 they have 2 memory sockets in SFF, but the rest have 4 sockets.

Notability
I'm taking the notability tag off... Dell ships millions of these. I have two at my offices and I don't even like 'em. Potatoswatter 03:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Shipping millions of them does not make them notable. For a product to be notable, it has to be innovative and trend-setting. These products don't fall into those categories; they're manufactured on razor-thin margins using parts available from half a dozen vendors and with features that are very comparable to other products. If this product was truly notable, you'd see lots of articles and books about the "making of", the design of, the designers and team members themselves, and so on. Think of the Corvette or the Volkswagen Beetle, for example; there's piles of books on them. There's hundreds of books on all aspects of Microsoft Windows or Linux or Apple's OS. Are there any books, at all, specifically about any aspect of the OptiPlex machines? No -- because they're not notable. -- Mikeblas 04:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

"For a product to be notable, it has to be innovative and trend-setting." No, for a product to be notable it merely needs to have been noted in the media. That is why it is called notable. Mathmo Talk 22:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

They are extremely vanilla. Maybe the only notable thing is that they are unusually simple to set up, deploy and maintain. Device drivers tend to be very stable, bad drivers being the bane of Windows. Perhaps you could call Optis the Apples of the IBM world. --LADave (talk) 18:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

My first reaction to the article was "Why are we allowing Dell ads on Wikipedia", and I still feel the "strengths" section was written by Dell's marketing people, and not really relevant to the goals of Wikipedia, but as I read on, I decided that Dell (or whoever) really has written this in a manner consistent with the goals of Wikipedia, and my feeling that it wasn't worthy of disk space diminished. Perhaps some of the links to things like "goverment" and "business" should go... they are merely SEO-cheating ploys, not valid links... "in my humble opinon", as they say. Tkbwik (talk) 07:51, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

GXi Memory
The GXi does not take SDRAM. The Intel 440HX does not support it. It takes DIMMS but they are EDO DIMMS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonent (talk • contribs) 18:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Dates and CPU speeds needed
The main table in this article is Very Useful. But it would be even more useful if it listed the dates when each model was made, and the range of CPU speeds for each model.-69.87.203.119 (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * yeah, approximate date range would be nice. 70.91.159.1 (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that adding a timeframe would be nice. 65.71.155.66 (talk) 16:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC) Here is what I have based on when we ordered them: Dell Model/Year ordered 260 = 2003 270 = 2004 280 = 2004 745 = 2006 520 = 2007 320 = 2007 330 = 2008 755 = 2009 360 = 2010 760 = 2010 380 = 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.71.155.66 (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I'd be happy to see a column for end of life or end of support also, but I can't find that info anywhere on Dell's website.Tericee (talk) 21:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

About PS/2 ports
The affected column on this page of which Soham has complained on my talk page is a features description, not a parts catalog. Actually finding anything on Dell's site a second time can be terribly difficult. I've seen them there some time in the distant past. I am using them. I actually got them via eBay, where they are much easier to find. http://www.ascendtech.us/dell-optiplexgx520-i-o-panel-board-y9003_i_iovgadelly9003.aspx has the model fitting both GX520 and GX620 in SFF. http://www.ascendtech.us/dell-f3636-dual-ps2-expansion-i-o-panel_i_ltpps2dellf3636.aspx has the model fitting the GX280 tower. Each of those two URLs have photographs. These things come in an assortment of accessory models fitting various PC models. http://www.ebay.com/itm/DELL-OPTIPLEX-GX620-SFF-LOW-PROFILE-PS-2-SERIAL-PORT-ADD-IN-CARD-W-CABLE-Y9001-/121241111513?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c3a888bd9 is a current eBay ad for one that fits GX620. Likely the reason they are hard or impossible to find on Dell's site is they are for long since discontinued models, and likely accessories specifically for those models have been discontinued as well.

What I did was correct misleading content. It was claimed no PS/2 connectors, which while technically true, is misleading, because the motherboard has ports available to those who want or need them via the accessory component originally from a Dell catalog new, and now used from alternate suppliers, under an assortment of part numbers. The motherboard connector for the cards has 23 pins in 2 rows, on GX280, GX520 and GX620 models at least. Should one need to attach photos of the part installed to the page? On both GX280 and GX620? Loads of photos are available via Google image search for the commonly offered y9001 part number if anyone actually needs one, just not on among Wikipedia image inventory or on Dell.com. Photos for a feature details context in a huge table like this do not seem appropriate anyway. If what I've provided is inappropriate, then all references to PS/2 ports should be omitted for the GX280 and GX620 models, not a simple reversion. Mrmazda (talk) 07:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Dates for each item
Should add dates to each of the models when they started selling in stores or for online purchase.

Odd PCI slots
What is the extended section of PCI Slot 2 (the middle slot) on an Optiplex 760 in the small desktop case? It's not a PCI-X slot. Bizzybody (talk) 07:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Form factors?
A few models in the list have a notation they are BTX. It would be nice to have a form factor column for BTX, ATX, Mini ITX and Dell proprietary. Bizzybody (talk) 04:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Form factors
From what I can see, at least the Optiplex X90-X020 (X-3/7/9) SFF, are actually roughly DTX, at least in their dimensions. This is something I found while preparing to mod a dead 3020 SFF by putting in an Acer/ECS Q77H2-AD (generally found inside the Veriton X6620G) and a Dell 240W PSU (hopefully what I ordered will be 80+ Bronze) meant for the 3010 SFF, as well measuring a 790 SFF that just came in. 147.236.159.2 (talk) 17:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Update:I just found the 3020 SFF motherboard, and I promptly measured it. It is precisely 244mmx203mm, which disqualifies it as being a proprietary or microATX form factors, since that is what is mandated by DTX. 147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Update 2: I'm guessing that someone can see this and approve editing the page (I am confident in the results, however this comment is more to reflect that I am discussing the article itself, and not just it's contents, and I'd rather that these comments not be deleted. 147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Power Supplies in the SFF models
The SFF models also use TFX PSUs, not just the DT models. 147.236.159.2 (talk) 04:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Update: It turns out I was slightly mistaken, but not completely. TFX was used in earlier Optiplex DT and SFF machines, however Dell switched to LFX (with a nonstandard depth of 240mm instead of 210mm) starting from at least the x90 DT/SFF (I verified this by looking at my mother's previous work machine (790 SFF) when it was brought to me for data backups), and starting from the x020, they moved to LFX12V (with the same depth change) (verified by measuring my (possibly dead, I never threw it out or sent it to recycling) 3020 SFF's power supply).147.236.159.2 (talk) 21:16, 9 February 2022 (UTC)147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 2: For some odd reason, there are quite a few online listings for Dell TFX power supplies that are advertised as compatible with the Optiplex 790 and 990, despite it actually using LFX PSUs. There are 5 holes that could theoretically be used to screw in the power supply, 3 of which are used by default with LFX PSUs (the top left, top close right and bottom middle holes), theoretically it may be possible to fit a TFX power supply by turning it over 180 degrees, however this is not certain, and even if is doable, it will only be held by two screws (the top far right and bottom far right holes), unless the chassis is modded to add a third hole on the far left (and then this is irrelevant, since by modding the possibilities are almost endless).147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 3: I found the source of the confusion, SFF and DT use different power supply standards. SFF from x90 (it looks as though x80 and below use a different standard) to x010 uses LFX, from x020 it is LFX12V (no idea until when). DT from x90 to x010 uses TFX, from x020 it is TFX12V (no idea until when). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.236.159.2 (talk) 21:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC) 147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 4: Just to make things clear, while Dell relies upon TFX12V and LFX12V starting from the x020, the pinout is proprietary and not according to these standards.147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 5: I have just managed to compile a list of LFX power supply models meant for the Optiplex x90-x010 SFF models, though without Dell part numbers, since I don't have the resources to match the model number with the part number.

No 80+ Certification (Potentially Inaccurate) AC240AS-00 AC240ES-00 D240AS-00 D240ES-00 H240AS-00 H240ES-00 L240AS-00 L240ES-00

80+ Bronze (Potentially Inaccurate) AC240AS-01 AC240ES-01 D240AS-01 D240ES-01 H240AS-01 H240ES-01 L240AS-01 L240ES-01

80+ Gold (Potentially Inaccurate) DPS-240WB

147.236.159.2 (talk) 22:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 6: While the models I have posted in this talk section are all Dell PSUs (with at least three different manufacturers, Delta, Lite-On and Hipro), the categorization may be wrong. Upon further research, I can see (looking at pictures) multiple power supplies with the same model number, but with either the same or different Dell part numbers, different manufacturer base model numbers and different specs (such as the H240ES-01 under both 80+ Gold and 80+ Bronze, as well as the H240AS-01 under both 80+ Bronze and no 80+ certification, and even the L240AS-00 having two different models, both without 80+ certification (to be fair, both units are made by Lite-On, so it could be that they had to change one or more of the components with equivalent components from other suppliers). 147.236.159.2 (talk) 23:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Update 7: I have finally uploaded my list to the web, although some details are still missing. The compilation can be found over at:

https://github.com/moriel5/Dell-LFX-PSUs147.236.152.125 (talk) 20:35, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Content deletion
It seems that someone thinks this page is more an advertisement from Dell than it is a list of information compiled together on all Optiplex devices. I have been using this article for years because even Dell does not list all of this information for their models in an easy to read place. Instead now all of the hard work that was put in place by everyone has just been erased because one person disagrees. Can we put the page back the way it was? I work in IT and this page is a huge help to refer to when working with Dell Optiplex models. Evogamer05 (talk) 22:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Drmies came to my talk page to explain about the policies regarding to the edits contributed to the Wikipedia page that's about the Dell OptiPlex desktop series, I replied to him explaining about the edits contributed to the Wikipedia Dell OptiPlex page and he didn't respond to my response messages regarding the OptiPlex Wikipedia page.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dweiwin#c-Drmies-20221031005900-Welcome%21
 * Dweiwin (talk) 23:37, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Drmies was the one who removed the list of Dell OptiPlex models from the Dell OptiPlex Wikipedia page.
 * 23:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC) Dweiwin (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I also regularly referred to the page and was surprised to see it stripped down. However, I do see Drmies's point. The list might be better suited to a new article, List of Dell OptiPlex models. I'll be happy to create it and start adapting the old info tomorrow. K-nw (talk) 00:26, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , you were arguing that there was sourcing, and you added that the sourcing was to Dell links. In other words, it was primary, not secondary sources. Whether content can be sourced to primary sources is a matter of judgment and context. A list of products sourced only to the company is basically worthless--it makes the Wikipedia article into nothing but a differently formatted version of the company website. You can say "IBM has it too", but that's not all that impressive: maybe those pages need to be cleaned up as well. Personally I don't see anything encyclopedic about such lists of models and processor speeds and whatnot--that's not what encyclopedias are for. If there was a ton of secondary sourcing, it would be different. What's happened here is that the editing population of Wikipedia, mostly white computer-literate men, have started writing up those articles which are little more than product listings, thereby establishing a status quo in which that kind of material somehow is acceptable. We're not the Dell website., I hope you understand that I don't think "List of" is any better, but that list has the advantage that there's a possibility that Dell OptiPlex becomes an actual encyclopedic article, with secondary sources on the model and its history--without turning into a table full of models. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand. For anyone interested in why the page probably isn't the best fit for WP, Why can't I advertise my company or product on Wikipedia? goes into further detail.
 * I'll still be working on the list page, but will also continue searching for a similar directory that we could perhaps add to instead. As for the main article, ThinkPad could be a good example on which to model this one. K-nw (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think adding a section on reception can help balance the article. Bindydad123 (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2022 (UTC)