Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: wpeters on August 26, 2013, 10:18:05 AM
-
It is time for a new computer and i would like suggestions. I have been looking at gettin a AMD 10. What do you think :banana:
-
You can get a lot of information and current opinions by reading the last couple of pages of this Hardware section.
A quick look at what has been said about the AMD 10 looks like an effort to reach Intel. Until someone has tested it, no-one can tell whether AH could use two cores or only one of the 10.
For other purposes than playing AH it looks like a good bang for a buck.
-
don't even consider an apu series of amd processor for gaming...all you would be getting is a souped up laptop processor. great for watching movies, surfing the web, some business apps but, no heavy games.
-
Alright what would you recommend for the same money :x
-
PRODUCT SPECS:
Hard Drive Size
2 TB
Processor Series
AMD Quad-Core A10
Operating System
Windows 8
Processor Brand
AMD
Installed Memory
8 GB
Audio
High Definition Audio with up to 7.1 surround sound capabilities
Chipset
AMD A75 FCH Chipset
Weight
15.77 lb approx.
Card Reader
Yes
Wireless Compatibility
Wireless LAN 802.11b/g/n featuring single-band 1x1
TV Tuner
No
Webcam
No
Hard Drive Detail
2TB 7200RPM Serial ATA hard drive
Graphics Type
Integrated
Graphics Memory
Up to 4196MB Total Available Graphics Memory as allocated by Windows 8
Graphics Brand/Model
AMD Radeon HD 7660D
Screen Size
not applicable
External Ports
11
Screen Type and Resolution
not applicable
Energy Compliance
n/a
Dimensions
15.35 in(L) x 6.91 in(W) x 14.48 in(H) approx.
Classification
Everyday
Processor Speed (GHz)
3.40GHz
Networking Detail
10/100/1000 Base-T Network
Optical Drive Detail
SuperMulti DVD Burner
Optical Drive Write Speed
40x max
Processor Cache Size
4MB L2 Cache
Processor Model
AMD Quad-Core A10
Installed Memory DIMMs
2
Memory Type
DDR3-1600 SDRAM
I think this looks like more than a laptop. Could you Explain?
-
When you google for A10, the first results are about laptop APU's.
Anyway, there's a review of the A10-6800K in PCMag.com (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2420043,00.asp), concluding
If you care about peak CPU performance, a fast Intel dual-core or higher-end quad-core will deliver better overall performance than the AMD A10-6800K, even if the total cost is somewhat higher. If, on the other hand, you want a combined CPU+GPU with better graphics capabilities than you can buy from a low-end Intel chip right now, the A10-6800K is a solid deal.
Doesn't that sound like an Intel CPU combined with a powerful GPU would be a better choice for a serious gamer? If you're looking for a low end AH capable rig, the integrated Radeon HD 7660D might do a little better than the Intel graphics chip, though. Either way, integrated GPU's are definitely consumer laptop stuff, capable to run Youtube videos in full HD.
-
What would you recomned then
-
What would you recomned then
What's your budget?
-
I must admit I can't tell what brand, version or anything would be the best, but below is some quite recent reading about the subject. As a general advice 1) think of all things you'd like to do with your computer, 2) decide how much you'd be willing to pay and 3) how long you'd like your investment to fulfil your needs. After that, find the components or computer meeting your qualification and send the specs here. The community will then give you more or less advice.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350810.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350810.0.html)
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350975.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350975.0.html)
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,351076.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,351076.0.html)
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,349738.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,349738.0.html) has both old and new setups
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350721.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,350721.0.html)
-
about $500
-
$500 is not much, although prices in the US seem to be a little lower than in Europe, guess it's because of the VAT. Anyway, for $500 you can't expect a high end rig. Some brand computer beefed with a decent graphics card might be a good choice, look for Brookes comments about Dell in the links I posted. Another choice might be upgrading your existing rig. Chances are, the only reusable parts would be the case and optical drive, maybe not even those. Or, depending on what you've got, you'd "only" need a motherboard, a CPU, RAM and GPU to start with. So, if you're able to reuse your current rig, tell us its specs.
-
well i am using a Hp Pavilion g6 with a Amd A6 processor turning out around 2.80 GHz
-
Here is another one that i am looking at. What do you guys think :P
Custom PC AMD A10-6800K Richland Quad-Core,4.1GHz,8GB,1TB,Win7.DVD Burner
Case MicroATX Mini Tower
Motherboard MSI FM2-A75MA-E35 FM2 AMD A75 (Hudson D3) HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard
Processor AMD A10-6800K Richland 4.1GHz (4.4GHz Turbo) 100W Quad-Core (CPU + GPU)w DirectX 11 Graphic AMD Radeon HD 8670D
Memory Kingston HyperX XMP Blu Red Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 Desktop Memory Model KHX16C9B1RK2/8X
Storage Western Digital WD Blue WD10EZEX 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5"
Network Onboard , Realtek RT8111E 10/100/1000Mbps
Sound Onboard , Realtek ALC889 8-Channel
Power Supply Corsair Builder Series CX430 430 Watt 80 Plus Certified Power Supply
Optical Drives DVD Burner 24X SATA DVDRW DL
Windows 7 Professional
-
A laptop, if I understood it correctly? So, no usable parts for a new build then.
Your second option seems to lack a video card. Add one and you'd also need a more powerful power supply.
Remember, you'd also need a monitor, keyboard and mouse. For $500 you'd only get a consumer laptop or the desktop equivalent. Nothing radically better than what you've got now.
If your budget is tight, one option could be the AH Classifieds forum or other reliable places for second hand items. A high end gaming computer from a couple of years ago might offer you just what you're looking for at a reasonable price.
-
Here is another one that i am looking at. What do you guys think :P
Custom PC AMD A10-6800K Richland Quad-Core,4.1GHz,8GB,1TB,Win7.DVD Burner
Case MicroATX Mini Tower
Motherboard MSI FM2-A75MA-E35 FM2 AMD A75 (Hudson D3) HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX AMD Motherboard
Processor AMD A10-6800K Richland 4.1GHz (4.4GHz Turbo) 100W Quad-Core (CPU + GPU)w DirectX 11 Graphic AMD Radeon HD 8670D
Memory Kingston HyperX XMP Blu Red Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 Desktop Memory Model KHX16C9B1RK2/8X
Storage Western Digital WD Blue WD10EZEX 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5"
Network Onboard , Realtek RT8111E 10/100/1000Mbps
Sound Onboard , Realtek ALC889 8-Channel
Power Supply Corsair Builder Series CX430 430 Watt 80 Plus Certified Power Supply
Optical Drives DVD Burner 24X SATA DVDRW DL
Windows 7 Professional
I like this one it looks like it has a good graphic card.
Right now i am running a laptop. Described around my third post in this thread
-
well i am using a Hp Pavilion g6 with a Amd A6 processor turning out around 2.80 GHz
This is my laptop :banana:
-
It doesn't have a graphics card, it has a graphics circuit integrated inside the CPU. So what's the difference? An integrated GPU uses system memory and processor cycles. System memory is slower than graphics memory: ddr3 vs. gddr5. Radeon HD #670 would be mediocre as a separate card, the "D" meaning it is based to older architecture and is slower than its separate namesake.
-
Ok. what kind of package would u incourage me to get. I have a brand new monitor and keyboard and mouse? :salute
-
I can only give you some rough main lines, but something like this would offer longevity, capability and expandability at a reasonable price. The Finnish vendor says €1000 for their build, but if you build it yourself and do some research before shopping you might get it much cheaper.
- Intel i5-4670K 3.4GHz
- Intel Z87 motherboard of any brand you trust
- AMD Radeon HD7870, 2Gb GDDR5 256bit -graphics card of any brand you trust
- 2x4Gb 1600+ MHz RAM of any brand you trust
- 1Tb, 3.5", SATA3 hdd of any brand you trust
- A SATA DVD burner of any brand you trust
- A well breathing case like Cooler Master HAF912 - The case is the easiest way to save, good ones can be found for below $50 but they can cost even $1000 (http://www.amazon.com/CSX-CX-1000FLNG-01-GP-Fallen-Angel-Cosmos/dp/B001CJ480G/ref=pd_sim_sbs_pc_4). Sturdy, roomy, breathing is what you'd want.
- A quality 500 - 700 W power supply -Seasonic has a good reputation
- Windows 7 Pro 64bit
Also look at http://www.hardware-revolution.com/best-budget-gaming-pc-computer-august-2013/ (http://www.hardware-revolution.com/best-budget-gaming-pc-computer-august-2013/) for hints and tips for what to look for in a budget gaming computer plus direct links from their recommendations to vendors.
Don't fool yourself into reading something between the lines that isn't there! I know, I've done that, it's easy. :salute
-
lol, you keep looking at amd a-series apu processors...you may as well spend the money on a nice weekend at the beach, you will get more out of it. regardless of what amd propaganda and web noobs try to convince you of, those processors are not worth a dam for gaming. if you want amd, look at the fx (bulldozer) processors but, you would be better off looking into an intel i3 or higher end processor.
for $500 all you're going to get is a home pc suitable for web surfing and emails. you're going to need $700+ to get a decent gaming system if you build it yourself.
-
Here is another good place to find ideas about putting together a parts list for your machine:
http://www.maximumpc.com/build_pc_recommended_builds_august_2013 (http://www.maximumpc.com/build_pc_recommended_builds_august_2013)
-
What kinds GPU speed in processors should I look for. Also what is difference in solid drives vs others.
-
What kinds GPU speed in processors should I look for. Also what is difference in solid drives vs others.
You can't tell the speed of a GPU by looking at Mhz, it's far more complicated than that. Check http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107.html
SSD hard disk will make your computer feel extremely fast while loading the OS or applications. In big games like battlefield, maps load in 2-3 seconds instead of 20.
-
Memory wise how do they compare
:rock I guess I am the idiot here
-
Memory wise how do they compare
:rock I guess I am the idiot here
Memory wise they compare like this:
SSD = real fast but expensive per gigabyte
HDD = 'normal' speed but real cheap per gigabyte
which is why many people buy a SSD and a HDD to install the OS and games on SSD and all other data such as videos etc. to the large cheap HDD.
-
The link Bino sent has a quite interesting low budget suggestion. To lower the price and improve gameplay (at least AH), I'd change some things: The case doesn't look like breathing. One with a mesh front and lots of options for big fans wouldn't necessarily cost more. Instead of the i5-3350P I'd choose an i3-3250: AH for example only can make use of two CPU cores, so the number of cores doesn't matter as much as the speed of a single core. i3-3250 is simply faster in many tasks, yet it's a lot cheaper. I'd also leave the SSD out and use the 1Tb hard disk only. Those alterations would shave about $100 off the price, down to about $650.
-
Thanks a lot I appreciate that
-
The link Bino sent has a quite interesting low budget suggestion. To lower the price and improve gameplay (at least AH), I'd change some things: The case doesn't look like breathing. One with a mesh front and lots of options for big fans wouldn't necessarily cost more. Instead of the i5-3350P I'd choose an i3-3250: AH for example only can make use of two CPU cores, so the number of cores doesn't matter as much as the speed of a single core. i3-3250 is simply faster in many tasks, yet it's a lot cheaper. I'd also leave the SSD out and use the 1Tb hard disk only. Those alterations would shave about $100 off the price, down to about $650.
Biz makes good points about the i3-3250, but I'd probably pony up the extra $60 and get one of the latest "Haswell" i5 chips instead, probably an i5-4670. The LGA1150 socket was just introduced by Intel, so it may (hopefully!) have a bit more longevity than the older LGA1155 socket of the i3-3250. That would mean that you could at some point upgrade your CPU without replacing your motherboard.
Also good point about getting a case that moves lots of air. Best to have several big fans (120mm or larger) that turn relatively slowly to keep quiet.
An SSD is certainly faster than a spinning-disk hard drive, but it's not essential, especially if you are on a budget.
Take a look at that link Ripley posted. They pick cards at several price points, and the "hierarchy chart" in there will give you a general idea of how GPUs compare to each other.
-
Longevity is a difficult animal to handle... Six years ago I built my current rig, with a then new socket LGA775 motherboard. My choice for CPU was the Intel Core2Duo E6750, which I thought would serve well enough. As it did. Last year I sold it in an Internet auction where I found an E8500, the high end dual core CPU for LGA775. During the years the price difference between the two processors had dropped down to €30, paid €70 for the E8500.
My point is, any socket will outdate some day. Some do it faster than others and we can't tell their life span beforehand. For LGA1150 we know there's many more expensive processors, like i7-4770K Haswell which today costs $339 at Newegg. I suppose when it's time to get some more oomph something like that can be found at a reasonable price.
-
What kinda case would you get
-
Also were is a good store to shop for this stuff
-
What kinda case would you get
Also were is a good store to shop for this stuff
If you live in the USA, Newegg seems to be a good starting point for Internet shopping. Tigerdirect is another I've heard of as a reputable company. Your local builder shop might be able to be competitive with the big online shops, plus they would give you priceless advice for the same price.
A quick glimpse at Newegg's cheapest cases (http://www.newegg.com/Computer-Cases/SubCategory/ID-7?Order=PRICE&Pagesize=50) tells this:
- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811146061 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811146061) $24.99 is the cheapest with a mesh front for airflow. Note also the wire routing and high end graphics card support designed to fit longer 10." cards
- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811815020 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811815020) $29.99 With less superlatives.
- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811133094 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811133094) $29.99 Sounds better than the above. No mention about long cards.
- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811322068 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811322068) $34.99 Well, another one...
- http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147185 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147185) $34.99 free shipping! Which makes this par with the first one.
Basically you'd want a case that would be sturdy enough for rebuilding, lan partying and whatever you'd put it to tolerate. There should be enough room for the longest video card you can afford now and within a couple of years. There should be good airflow to keep your valuable components from frying to death. Good cable management serves for the same purpose. Look at the measurements of both the case and the components you'll fill it with and make your decision according that.
-
What about this barebones one. http://www.ebay.com/itm/INTEL-I3-2120-3-3GHz-DUAL-CORE-BAREBONES-GAMING-PC-DESKTOP-SYSTEM-CUSTOM-/390650585975?pt=Desktop_PCs&hash=item5af496e377 What else would i need to go with it. :x
-
Well, the price they show doesn't include memory, a hard drive, video card, optical drive, bigger power supply, or an operating system. Once I configured a complete system the price was over $700.00.
-
Well, the price they show doesn't include memory, a hard drive, video card, optical drive, bigger power supply, or an operating system. Once I configured a complete system the price was over $700.00.
That was cheap! I used the calculator within the site and got $878 with basicly a similar system that was described on Bino's link as "Budget" with my alterations to make it even cheaper. It pays to shop around!
"Barebones" is just four components put together. That means, attaching the power supply (cheap and of unknown brand in this case) to the case with four screws, setting the CPU under the latch and clamping the cooler on it, attaching the motherboard to the case with 7-9 screws and plugging two unmistakable cables from the PSU to the motherboard. Calling that a "GAMING PC DESKTOP SYSTEM CUSTOM" should be criminalized. Don't fall for that!
-
Ok thanks for that ingo
-
That was cheap!
Yes it was! :D
To be clear I wouldn't recommend a $700 configuration from that sight for gaming.
-
What do you guys think about this type of Computer :cool:
a Dell Alienware X51 Gaming PC in very good cosmetic (some scratches and scuffs on unit) and excellent functional condition. It has been upgraded with 8GB of RAM and has a fresh installation of Windows 7 Professional 64 bit so it is ready for work and play! Featuring an Intel Core i3-2120 processor at 3.30GHz with 8GB of DDR3 RAM, an NVidia GeForce GT 545 graphics card, and a 1TB (1000GB) hard drive, this computer can handle just about anything you throw at it! You will receive the Alienware X51 computer along with Alienware Keyboard & Mouse, and Genuine SLIM power supply and power cord!
Full specs as follows: Specifications: Color: Black Processor: Intel® Core™ i3-2120 (Dual Core, 3.3 GHz base, 5GT/s, 3MB SmartCache, 64bit). Great for multitasking.
Memory: 8 GB DDR3 SDRAM RAM. Hard Drive: 1TB7200RPMSerialATAhard drive Optical Drive: DVD SuperMulti Drive. Plays and burns both CD's and DVD's Graphics: 1.5 GB GDDR5 Dedicated Nvidia GeForce GT 545 Video Card with two DVI ports, Display Port and HDMI
WirelessN: Integrated Wireless B/G/N Card.
LAN: Integrated 10/100/1000 (Gigabit) Ethernet LAN Audio: Integrated High Definition Audio with Waves Maxx Optimized HD Audio
Keyboard/Pointing Device: Alienware wired gaming Keyboard and Mouse
Multi-in-1 MemoryCard Reader: Integrated
Ports: 6 USB2.0 (2 Front, 4 Rear), 2 USB3.0 (Rear), Audio Ports, Digital S/PDIF port, Card Reader, HDMI, Two DVI, Display Port, RJ-45
ENERGY STAR qualified - Designed to use less energy and meets strict energy efficiency guidelines set by the Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Energy. Windows 7 Professional 64 bit, with Alienware software.
I was wondering what you guys think about i-3 core 2120 are they good or bad. Believe Could upgrade the core in sometime to a I-5 or even up to a i-7
-
The i3-2120 fits an LGA1155 socket, so yes, there are upgrade options. And although the i3-2120 has only two cores, it has a decently high clock.
The GT545 card will hold you back. There are several better options at the same price point, around $100. Again, take a look at the link that MrRipley posted. For example, the AMD 7770 also runs about $100, yet is three steps above the GT545 on that "hierarchy chart".
-
As Bino said, the 2120 is a decently high clocked dual core. For AH and most other games, you won't need more.
Look at this PassMark chart: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=GeForce+GT+545 (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=GeForce+GT+545). It claims that the GT545 would go for as little as $55! Look at its points, 1280, and compare that to known AH capable budget cards such as Radeon HD7770, 2155 points for $95. You'd soon find a good balance between your wallet and performance.
For what I understand from your post, the Alienware would be slightly used? If you get it cheap enough, including an extra $100 in the near future for a better video card, that would be a good budget rig. By cheap I mean something below $300, making $400 with the video upgrade. Compared to your current laptop the gaming experience would be tremendously enhanced.
-
as bino said for a budget AH config I'd get a 2 core I3-I5 with the highest clock possible, with a low end Radeon card like the 7770 wich is cheap but still has some bang.
ram would be 8GB (althougt 4GB would do the work for AH), HDD doesn't matter as long as its new. Motherboard would be a ATX sized for future upgrades, with a Z77 chipset.
I cannot advise any cheap power supply or case, because it's something I refuse to cut corners on in order to protect my investment. That said I'm thinking about getting a Fractal design Black pearl R4 with my current Seasonic PSU. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811352020.
To drive that kind of hardware I guess a low end corsair 300W PSU would do the trick.
Don't forget surge protection, especially if you live outside the city. A 20$ APC surge protector will go a long way to protect your hardware, it took my brother 2 fried computers to realize that :lol
-
Would you say that ailenware computer for $400 is worth the money
-
Would you say that ailenware computer for $400 is worth the money
offer him $350...and make sure you get keep records of the purchase. don't want you to get taken...
-
Thanks
-
SirNuke, I totally agree about the importance of the quality of the power supply, also the surge protector can be of great value where electricity isn't stable.
What I don't agree with you is the question of cheap cases. For example your choice most likely has some extra price for its scandinavian design and extra dampening material. I doubt it would protect the innards twice as good as http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811352008 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811352008) from the same manufacturer for half the price. I did some studying concerning the two above mentioned and the four cheap ones. None of those tell the thickness of the material used, but I suppose most of the weight would come from steel and since they all are about same size, well... The Fractal design ones weigh more than the cheapest ones which leads to think they are sturdier. However the $109 Fractal weighs only a tiny little more than the $49 one, probably because the cheaper one is a little bit smaller. The Rosewill is the most lightweight of the seven, which probably means its side panels will resonate and wobble, and screwing should be done carefully without excess power. So I'm leaning towards you after all but only halfways. It's obvious that a 20+ lbs case should be stronger built than a ~10 lbs one.
I remind, though, that we're dealing with delicate electric devices which shouldn't be kicked, dropped or in any other way exposed to shocks. Although the outside might tolerate abuse, there are parts inside that are only attached by clamps or slots such as the CPU cooler or a big video card.
Would you say that ailenware computer for $400 is worth the money
Offer him $300 which will leave you some negotiating headroom up to $350. The less you pay now the more you can spend for upgrades. And as Gyrene said, keep records of the purchase. Ask if it's been overclocked. Look inside for clogged dust and dirt, especially between the cooler fins beneath the propellers, both CPU and GPU. A little flashlight would be handy to see how much dust there is inside the PSU. If the seller has been smoking while computing, you'd notice that. Don't buy a smoked computer! All cooling elements would be covered with tar, which along with sticking dust will add weight to fans and thermal isolation to coolers.
-
Yummy that micro atx case looks good!
I wonder if a high end videocard fits in there
-
What would you upgrade first when you get this computer. :salute
-
video card...
-
So you would say the power supply is alright on this computer. :cheers:
-
Yummy that micro atx case looks good!
I wonder if a high end videocard fits in there
I looked at a few pictures of the X51 on Dell's website. It looks like the video card is mounted parallel to the mother board at the bottom of the case. I can't imagine there will be very many options available to someone looking to upgrade one of those computers.
-
sorry I was talking about the case bizman linked, I have no idea how the alienware case looks
-
well, supposedly the x51 has/had an option for up to a gtx 670 so it is possible the power supply wouldn't need to be changed...can't find any real specs on the oem power supply.
-
Ok... Thanks. What is wrong with vid card in it. I mean would it be good enough to last me for a little while before upgrading.
-
ya you could use it for a little while...just don't expect any stellar graphics from it. probably have to run 512 textures, no shadows, and some other adjustments...
-
If what I'm reading is true the Dell X51 has an external power supply. That would make a power supply or video card upgrade virtually impossible wouldn't it?
Edit: Everything I've read about the X51 leads me to believe it's nothing more that a glorified laptop. It should be criminal to call that thing a gaming computer.
-
This a computer that I came on for cell. Looks great and in awesome condition. I can get it for 279.99 Dollars. What do you think.
Gateway Intel i3-3240 3.4GHz Desktop PC | DX4870-UB2B
Product Specifications
Processor Type: Intel
Processor Model: i3-3240
Processor Speed: 3.4GHz
Processor Core: Dual-core
Cache: 3MB
System Memory (RAM): 6GB
RAM Expandable To: 16GB
Type of Memory (RAM): DDR3
Number of Memory Slots: 4
Memory Card Reader: Yes
Number of Hard Drives: 1
Hard Drive Capacity: 1TB
Hard Drive Interface: SATA/300
Hard Drive RPM: 7,200
Optical Drive Type: DVD+RW
Graphics: Intel HD
Video Memory: Not Available
Network Card: Integrated 10/100/1000Mbps
Wireless Networking: Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n
Available Expansion Slots: Not Available
USB Ports: 8
Control Devices: Keyboard, Mouse
Operating System: Windows 8 64-bit
System Version: 64-bit
Software Included: Not Available
ENERGY STAR Qualified: No
Dimensions: 15.8" x 7.1" x 14.9"
Product Weight: 23lbs
Product Number: DX4870-UB2B :x
-
That doesn't look all that great. It only has on-board video. You'd need to buy a video card the if you wanted to play games on it. You'd probably have to buy a new power supply to run the new video card. There is an expansion card, probably a USB header, directly below the PCIe x16 slot. That would probably have to be removed for a video card to fit.
Another thing I noticed is it says 6GB of RAM. That's an odd number. I don't think the memory will be running in dual channel mode.
If it were me I'd pass on that one.
-
Two things. One immediately if you want to play, the other in very near future to avoid damages in the rest of the rig:
- Graphics: Intel HD - The gameplay with such is par with a $300 laptop. A slideshow with garbled graphics. Before you buy, check that the motherboard has a pci-e 16x slot for a videocard!
- IF the pci-e slot exists, you'd first need a graphics controller. A Radeon HD 7770 is decently priced for $100, performs well and is relatively easy on the PSU.
- the second thing you'd need would be a reliable power supply to feed your new video card
[edit] edog, you're a fast typist! +1 to all what you said.[/edit]
-
here is another that i could get for 495
s a Gateway DX4870 Desktop PC. Perfect for students, gamers or business users. The RAM has been upgraded to from 8GB to 12GB. Pair that with the Intel Core i5 CPU, the result is a lightning fast PC.
This PC was purchased new by another customer, then immediately returned. The packaging has been opened and the PC has some signs of handling and the box has some distress. But the PC is unused and in mint condition. Thus, I'm listing it as "new in open box".
It comes with Windows 7 restored to the factory original settings. Includes the keyboard, mouse and power cable.
ONLY ONE AVAILABLE! FREE SHIPPING! 60-DAY MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!
General Spec
Brand
Gateway
Series
DX Series
Model
DX4870-UB318 (DT.GDDAA.012)
Type
Student/Home office
Usage
Consumer
Processor
Intel Core i5-3330 3.0GHz
Processor Main Features
64 bit Quad-Core Processor
Cache Per Processor
6MB L3 Cache
Memory
12GB DDR3 1333
Hard Drive
1TB SATA 5400RPM
Optical Drive 1
DVD+/-RW
Graphics
Intel HD Graphics 2500
Ethernet
Gigabit Ethernet
Power Supply
300W
Operating System
Windows 8 64-Bit
Motherboard
Chipset
Intel B75
CPU
CPU Type
Intel Core i5
CPU Speed
3330(3.00GHz)
L3 Cache Per CPU
6MB
CPU Socket Type
LGA 1155
CPU Main Features
64 bit Quad-Core Processor
Max Turbo Frequency 3.2 GHz
Graphics
GPU/VPU Type
Intel HD Graphics 2500
Graphics Interface
Integrated video
Memory
Memory Capacity
12GB DDR3
Memory Speed
DDR3 1333
Memory Slot (Total)
4
Maximum Memory Supported
16GB
Hard Drive
HDD Capacity
1TB
HDD Interface
SATA
HDD RPM
5400rpm
Optical Drive
Optical Drive Type
DVD±RW
Communications
LAN Speed
10/100/1000Mbps
WLAN
802.11a/b/g/n Wireless LAN
Back Panel Ports
Video Ports
1 VGA, 1 HDMI
Rear USB
Total
6 x USB 2.0
2 x USB 3.0
RJ45
1 port
Expansion
PCI Slots (Available/Total)
PCI Express x1 Slots: 3
PCI Express x16 Slots: 1
-
Again, that one has integrated graphics. Need to buy video card and possibly power supply. 12GB of RAM isn't running in dual channel mode. The fact that they added RAM makes me think that it wasn't performing very well and the person thought more RAM would help.
I would save your $495. Save up another couple of hundred dollars and build yourself something halfway decent.
-
Thanks a lot. Guess I kinda sound like Idot in this thread, trueth be told i am when it comes to shopping for a gaming computer
-
It's all good. Better to ask then to buy something that doesn't live up to your expectations.
There was a lot of good advice given earlier in this thread. I would go back click through all of the links and read. Then I'd go back and read them all again.
If your looking for performance on a budget building your own computer is the way to go. You are going to pay a premium for someone to build it for you. If you build it yourself you will have complete control of the components that go into it.
-
On the topic of computers, my friend wants to get a computer in the $500-$600 range. He was looking to get the parts and build it himself (well, get ME to build it for him ;) ). My knowledge of computers can only help him so much, can someone here post parts to build a computer for less than $700?
He'll be using it for gaming, game like Heroes of Stalingrad and DayZ.
-
@Latrobe, look at my post a couple of pages back (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,352968.msg4668959.html#msg4668959) and Bino's answer and the comments to both and you'd surely find an idea about what components you'd get for $700 or less.
@wpeters, I'd rather read posts about people asking before buying if a certain computer would fulfil their needs than answering why their "brand new" ultra low budget "grammy goes banking" laptop doesn't produce a crispy live-like image with full eye candy settings. The idiot is the one who buys before asking. :salute
One hint: If it says "Intel -- Graphics", forget about it or prepare for buying both a video card and a power supply, adding another $200 or more to the price. I see you already have a post in the AH Classifieds forum for multiple mid range gaming rigs. Is this about the same project or do you have another going on for one for yourself? In the latter case, another thread there might help.
-
This is another one for myself. Those are ones that my school kids might :xsell
-
Whatever choice you are doing, put as much money as you can on the graphics card, its pretty much always the bottleneck with modern components.
The 7870 suggested is an excellent choice !
-
Whatever choice you are doing, put as much money as you can on the graphics card, its pretty much always the bottleneck with modern components.
The 7870 suggested is an excellent choice !
Be careful about blanket statements Save!
Think all the celerons and AMD cpus out there. Plus they still sell Intel Pentiums etc. which will bottleneck a 7870 easily. Let's say that as long as the OP will choose Intel i-something then he should shell all remaining money to graphics.
-
I found a nice desktop what do you guys think http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Inspiron-660-Intel-Quad-Core-i5-3330-8GB-DDR3-1TB-Hard-Drive-Windows-8-Wifi/130942294956?_trksid=p2045573.m2102&_trkparms=aid%3D555012%26algo%3DPW.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D298%26meid%3D1213703947385015354%26pid%3D100034%26prg%3D1079%26rk%3D6%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D190891141944%26
-
Or how about this one. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Inspiron-i660-3043-i3-3220-Dual-Core-3-3GHz-6GB-1TB-W7-8-Dell-Warranty-/161103988034?pt=Desktop_PCs&hash=item25828bc542
-
"Integrated/On-Board Graphics" means that Aces High will be a stuttering slideshow at almost any setting.
-
I know i need a graphics card but other wise how is it
-
You'd probably have to get a new PSU sooner and later to feed the video card. From those two I'd prefer the latter because the two cores are faster than on the quad. It also has windows7 which seems to have less problems than win8 at least considering AH. For second hand/refurbished items they both seem overpriced IMO.
A small calculation:
A used Dell or such ~450
a mid class vid card~100
a reputable GPU ~100
Total ~650
Compare that to the "Budget" conversation starting from page 2 of this thread (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,352968.msg4668959.html#msg4668959) to find out a brand new build would cost only about $100 more.
-
What about this here
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1CAEB
-
you're missing ram...and save some cash, go with a 500gb wd caviar black...you can buy a 2tb later for a secondary drive.
-
How does a ssd compare to a regular drive :bolt:
.
-
if you are trying to save some money, you dont need an ssd.
semp
-
How does a ssd compare to a regular drive :bolt:
.
It will make most operations feel like your computer got turbocharged. Harddrives are one of the biggest bottlenecks of modern computers, they're responsible for most of the waiting times.
One example: Load BF3 level on regular hard drive: half a minute. Load same level on SSD: 5 seconds.
-
i love seeing Ripley post "little white lie" generalizations , the one thing he does well. knows just enough to be dangerous....
How does a ssd compare to a regular drive :bolt:
.
an ssd can load software faster than a mechanical drive, but you can also get a slow ssd too. if you buy a cheap low end ssd it won't last as long as a mechanical drive or a good ssd, it can be slow too. the thing with ssd's is the price per gigabyte of storage is very high compared to mechanical drives, and you have to be careful about the components being used. if you're going to buy an ssd, it pays to do some homework, but if you're watching your initial build costs you're better off getting a good mechanical drive to start off.
-
i love seeing Ripley post "little white lie" generalizations , the one thing he does well. knows just enough to be dangerous....
an ssd can load software faster than a mechanical drive, but you can also get a slow ssd too. if you buy a cheap low end ssd it won't last as long as a mechanical drive or a good ssd, it can be slow too. the thing with ssd's is the price per gigabyte of storage is very high compared to mechanical drives, and you have to be careful about the components being used. if you're going to buy an ssd, it pays to do some homework, but if you're watching your initial build costs you're better off getting a good mechanical drive to start off.
I don't love seeing your personal attacks. If you can prove something I said as wrong, prove it or I will report you. Now, as with harddrives there are good and bad products on the market. SSDs are superior in performance as long as you stay away from sub 100 dollar products. Every benchmark proves it and my personal experience too. It seems you don't have experience with SSDs and are acting on your own prejudice.
The one thing I agree with you is that SSDs are still expensive gigabyte by gigabyte. But if the budget can allow it, they're well worth their price. New SSDs such as Samsung 840 Evo's are very affordable already.
-
it was just a typical example of the "little white lie" generalizations you are known for. it's not a personal attack, it's simply the truth. your choice on how you take it.
i would stay away from the samsung evo drives...they use tlc nand and if you do a little research you will find, slc or mlc nand have better long term performance and reliability.
-
What about this here
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1CAEB
You seem to have raised your budget... And yes, no RAM yet. The calculator you've found seems quite nice for telling alternatives for shopping places and their shipping costs. I wonder how much the total price including shipping costs would vary by either finding the cheapest vendor for each part or getting all from the same place.
-
Could u give me a rundown of parts that i would need. I am wanting to get into computer modeling of planes houses and so forth. What do you recommend
-
Could u give me a rundown of parts that i would need. I am wanting to get into computer modeling of planes houses and so forth. What do you recommend
the list you made looks pretty good just to get you started. add some ddr3 1333mhz (you could go faster but, not needed with that hardware), and a good 500gb-750gb hard drive (wd caviar black are some of the best).
you have a monitor? i saw a really good asus 24 inch on sale for under $200 yesterday...can't remember where though.
if you have money to spare...this is what you would be looking at (includes ssd primary drive)
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1CUlL (http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1CUlL)
-
it was just a typical example of the "little white lie" generalizations you are known for. it's not a personal attack, it's simply the truth. your choice on how you take it.
i would stay away from the samsung evo drives...they use tlc nand and if you do a little research you will find, slc or mlc nand have better long term performance and reliability.
If you did a little research you would know that they are stress tested to see if they match the promised write endurance. One of such testers (http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/samsung-ssd-840-evo-review-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/3) is reporting an average of 8 years life span in typical desktop use where 50Gb per day is written for the smallest and weakest of the drives. 8 years is more than most regular HDDs are going to give you.
The 1 terabyte model should last for 64 years in typical desktop use. Yeah read that again: 64 years. So your information about the endurance of the EVO series is completely wrong.
You're completely ridiculous for even mentioning SLC as it's super expensive and only feasible for corporate use.
Now PROVE that I'm wrong or I will report your personal attacks. So far it's been 100% hot air and opinions on your part, I posted links to back up my point.
Keep in mind that all of this is based on 1129 p/e cycles, which is likely less than half of what the practical p/e cycle limit on Samsung's 19nm TLC NAND. To go ahead and double those numbers and then you're probably looking at reality. Endurance isn't a concern for client systems using the 840 EVO.
Geez, this moron at Anandtech should have asked Gyrene first before posting this in public! :rofl
-
If you did a little research you would know that they are stress tested to see if they match the promised write endurance. One of such testers (http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/samsung-ssd-840-evo-review-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/3) is reporting an average of 8 years life span in typical desktop use where 50Gb per day is written for the smallest and weakest of the drives. 8 years is more than most regular HDDs are going to give you.
The 1 terabyte model should last for 64 years in typical desktop use. Yeah read that again: 64 years. So your information about the endurance of the EVO series is completely wrong.
You're completely ridiculous for even mentioning SLC as it's super expensive and only feasible for corporate use.
Now PROVE that I'm wrong or I will report your personal attacks. So far it's been 100% hot air and opinions on your part, I posted links to back up my point.
Geez, this moron at Anandtech should have asked Gyrene first before posting this in public! :rofl
and yet they cant actually prove that they will last 64 years. it's cool to test in a controlled environment like they do, but seriously 64 years? the ssd is designed to last 64 years?
how long did they test it for? 1 day? 2 days? a week? a month? 64 years?
or did they just write a bunch of data until it broke down within a couple of "minutes" <sarcasm font> then decided that based on the amount of data written it should last 64 years, but perhaps within a couple of years some part in the ssd will will fail just due to average humidity in the average home then your 64 years becomes 64 weeks :noid.
semp
-
something that caught my attention in one of the reviews.
I contacted samsung about my IOPS random read and IOPS random write only getting about 35% of the speed they are supposed to and about my drive NOT waking from sleep at all unless I completely cut the power to my computer and turn it back on that way.
Samsung would NOT provide support for me they ONLY said this:
Dear Customer,
Thank you for contacting Samsung SSD Support regarding your concerns and inquiries. You mentioned you have an AMD processor and chipset. The reason I mention this is because Samsung SSDs do not work correctly with machines that contain AMD chipsets. Our SSDs are recommended for use with Intel chipsets and because of this you will see performance issues with your SSD. Now concerning your second issue, the AMD chipset may also be responsible for the sleep mode problem that your having. If your looking for maximum performance from your SSD, the best environment would essentially be a windows based machine with a Intel processor and chipset.
semp
-
something that caught my attention in one of the reviews.
I contacted samsung about my IOPS random read and IOPS random write only getting about 35% of the speed they are supposed to and about my drive NOT waking from sleep at all unless I completely cut the power to my computer and turn it back on that way.
Samsung would NOT provide support for me they ONLY said this:
Dear Customer,
Thank you for contacting Samsung SSD Support regarding your concerns and inquiries. You mentioned you have an AMD processor and chipset. The reason I mention this is because Samsung SSDs do not work correctly with machines that contain AMD chipsets. Our SSDs are recommended for use with Intel chipsets and because of this you will see performance issues with your SSD. Now concerning your second issue, the AMD chipset may also be responsible for the sleep mode problem that your having. If your looking for maximum performance from your SSD, the best environment would essentially be a windows based machine with a Intel processor and chipset.
semp
The SSD requires a very fast SATA6G support and i/o controller in order to reach its maximum potential. The Intel solution is one of the only ones that can provide this. The wakeup problem is most likely unrelated to the Samsung as there aren't widely spread complaints about it. And before Gyrene spouts again something: yes, even at 33% the SSD is still a lot faster than a HDD would be.
-
and yet they cant actually prove that they will last 64 years. it's cool to test in a controlled environment like they do, but seriously 64 years? the ssd is designed to last 64 years?
how long did they test it for? 1 day? 2 days? a week? a month? 64 years?
or did they just write a bunch of data until it broke down within a couple of "minutes" <sarcasm font> then decided that based on the amount of data written it should last 64 years, but perhaps within a couple of years some part in the ssd will will fail just due to average humidity in the average home then your 64 years becomes 64 weeks :noid.
semp
Read the review please, then ask questions with sarcasm fonts. Unlike you the reviewers are doing the stuff for a living. In fact, read a whole load of reviews, especially the ones where they spent brutally writing hundreds of terabytes of data as fast as the device can take it (meaning literally weeks of non-stop writing/erasing 24/7). The drive contains S.M.A.R.T interface through which analyzers can monitor the cell wear - stressing the drive and comparing this to the wear levels quite accurate expectations of life can be made.
Read also the part where they explain that due to the limited amount of data any typical user writes in a day, the larger the drive is the longer it takes for the cell write limit to be even theoretically reached. On a terabyte drive this is, as you correctly read, 64 years. It's most likely that the SSD will fail to an another sort of electrical problem way before the TLC sells become a problem.
SSDs are not vulnerable to any 'humidity' or such that are present in a normal apartment any more than any regular hdd would. In fact they're rated to operating conditions that far exceed any mechanical hard drive (through shock proof operation).
-
Read the review please, then ask questions with sarcasm fonts. Unlike you the reviewers are doing the stuff for a living. In fact, read a whole load of reviews, especially the ones where they spent brutally writing hundreds of terabytes of data as fast as the device can take it (meaning literally weeks of non-stop writing/erasing 24/7). The drive contains S.M.A.R.T interface through which analyzers can monitor the cell wear - stressing the drive and comparing this to the wear levels quite accurate expectations of life can be made.
Read also the part where they explain that due to the limited amount of data any typical user writes in a day, the larger the drive is the longer it takes for the cell write limit to be even theoretically reached. On a terabyte drive this is, as you correctly read, 64 years. It's most likely that the SSD will fail to an another sort of electrical problem way before the TLC sells become a problem.
SSDs are not vulnerable to any 'humidity' or such that are present in a normal apartment any more than any regular hdd would. In fact they're rated to operating conditions that far exceed any mechanical hard drive (through shock proof operation).
then please do explain to me why the reviews have drives that are supposed to last 64 years are already failing for some users after a couple of weeks?
and you know which reviews are important to me? those of regular people who have bought the hardware and installed it on their systems. those reviews really are a real test of any hardware in the real world. this is where you really find those "little problems" that professional reviewers dont tell you it's a problem. for example that those ssd's wont last "64 years" or perhaps be as fast <very sarcastic font> using an amd processor. or you mean to tell me that they only tested it on intel cpu's?
not that I disregard all those reviews by people who get paid to write one but I am skeptical of some who for example claim an ssd drive will last 64 years. when I am pretty sure only the metal case is the only thing designed to last for decades.
then again I do have a regular hd that I dropped when it was new and there's a piece of outer plastic missing. was told it would probably fail in a couple of weeks and it is still going strong.
semp
-
then please do explain to me why the reviews have drives that are supposed to last 64 years are already failing for some users after a couple of weeks?
I have had regular HDDs fail on me in two weeks. Manufacturing faults can hit any electronical device at any time. Also if a user has a bad power supply, that can kill devices surprisingly. There are millions and millions of SSD users and a few reports of early deaths. You do the math.
If you listen to the 'reviews' of the angry 'regular' consumers who have had a bad hardware sample and base your opinions on them you'll never buy any device. Ever. :rock One example: I drove 200 000km with my first MB, a 1996 E-series before I retired it for my wifes use. It already had 105 000km on it when I bought it. She drove another 20 000km with it during the following 4 years. If you read reviews you see that according to consumers the car is horrible. Steaming furious anger from consumers that got 'ripped off' and 'MB quality sucks' and whatnot. The reality is that during the 200 000km I never had a single fault in the car. Not one. The first burned BULB was at 260 000km, a Xenon headlight. And when my wife used it, I had to have the interference suppressors on spark plugs replaced, cost of 60 euros. That's it. I would never have bought that car if I would have seen the reviews lol.
In the reality I seriously doubt if I can buy such quality again - and this is considering that I currently drive a W204 MB.
The article and many others like it show that gyrenes misinformation about the endurance of EVO drives is just that, misinformation. Fear of unknown.
not that I disregard all those reviews by people who get paid to write one but I am skeptical of some who for example claim an ssd drive will last 64 years. when I am pretty sure only the metal case is the only thing designed to last for decades.
I'm sorry but if you can't understand the concept of p/e cycles and drive capacity combined with wear leveling algorithms.. I can't really help you. As I said the drive is going to suffer from some sort of electronical failure BEFORE the TLC is killed through writing. It does _not_ mean the drive will last 64 years but it DOES mean that you have to use the drive that long to 'burn' it.
The anandtech article I posted came to a completely opposite conclusion for the endurance of EVO series compared to the one of Gyrenes. As you see we're still waiting for his proof... silence is screaming.
-
bingo, you nailed , it's possible for the ssd to write 64 years worth of data, not actually be in use for 64 years. like you first mentioned.
see to me that's two different things and goes back to reviews are misleading and don't really tell you all the problems which if you pay attention to user reviews you may find.
remember the headset that had some great reviews as the sound was awesome, but it was found out later that after hours of use the dye in the pads would turn your ears blue? only discovered in user reviews.
semp
-
bingo, you nailed , it's possible for the ssd to write 64 years worth of data, not actually be in use for 64 years. like you first mentioned.
see to me that's two different things and goes back to reviews are misleading and don't really tell you all the problems which if you pay attention to user reviews you may find.
remember the headset that had some great reviews as the sound was awesome, but it was found out later that after hours of use the dye in the pads would turn your ears blue? only discovered in user reviews.
semp
This doesnt change the _fact_ that Gyrenes information was wrong and his approach was downright slanderous.
Having said that, SSDs will not make your ears blue. And there are only a couple of links which report bad experiences while millions of users myself included are using them daily with zero problems. I have several SSDs both at home and work use.
-
This doesnt change the _fact_ that Gyrenes information was wrong and his approach was downright slanderous.
Having said that, SSDs will not make your ears blue. And there are only a couple of links which report bad experiences while millions of users myself included are using them daily with zero problems. I have several SSDs both at home and work use.
dude, gyrene was right on and trust me on this, I dont like gyrene. he said that sub par ssd will actually slow down your computer which you had failed to bring up on your first post regarding ssd's.
only problem gyrene had was that he used the words "white lie" while in reality is more like a misleading statement you made.
like your info on the samsung drives was a bit misleading. you failed to notice that it doesnt work well with amd cpu's which also the tester "failed" <very sarcastic font> to mention. while it does work faster than a regular hd I would still be upset if I paid 600 bucks for something that only works 30% as fast as it should.
you also mention that they last "64 years" which is also misleading. they can do 64 years worth of data but for sure wont last 64 years of continuous use.
as for the hd not making your ears blue, well guess what they wont make my car last longer either as per your example.
anyway back to the original question for the op. for somebody on a budget having a ssd drive is just wasting money that could better be used on better ram/cpu/video card. I have 2 regular hd's and the 7 seconds that it takes for ah to load is not the end of the world.
a lot of us see using ssd's as a waste of money because we dont get a return on our investment. it's not like getting a better joystick or using a better cpu or graphics card that will make your game better. waiting a few seconds longer is not worth 600 bucks. and rippley I am not saying you wasted your money either, we just see things different. kinda like choosing between amd and intel.
semp
-
dude, gyrene was right on and trust me on this, I dont like gyrene. he said that sub par ssd will actually slow down your computer which you had failed to bring up on your first post regarding ssd's.
only problem gyrene had was that he used the words "white lie" while in reality is more like a misleading statement you made.
like your info on the samsung drives was a bit misleading. you failed to notice that it doesnt work well with amd cpu's which also the tester "failed" <very sarcastic font> to mention. while it does work faster than a regular hd I would still be upset if I paid 600 bucks for something that only works 30% as fast as it should.
you also mention that they last "64 years" which is also misleading. they can do 64 years worth of data but for sure wont last 64 years of continuous use.
as for the hd not making your ears blue, well guess what they wont make my car last longer either as per your example.
anyway back to the original question for the op. for somebody on a budget having a ssd drive is just wasting money that could better be used on better ram/cpu/video card. I have 2 regular hd's and the 7 seconds that it takes for ah to load is not the end of the world.
a lot of us see using ssd's as a waste of money because we dont get a return on our investment. it's not like getting a better joystick or using a better cpu or graphics card that will make your game better. waiting a few seconds longer is not worth 600 bucks. and rippley I am not saying you wasted your money either, we just see things different. kinda like choosing between amd and intel.
semp
Gyrene was as wrong as someone can factually be. He bases his stance on a false prenotion (that little amount of 'knowledge enough to make him dangerous') that TLC chips have a lower p/e cycle limit while disregarding that the EVO has an SLC and ram cache (http://www.pcper.com/news/Storage/New-Samsung-840-EVO-employs-TLC-and-pseudo-SLC-TurboWrite-cache) combined with very advanced wear leveling algorithms which were revised for the EVO series. He simply doesn't know what he talks about, end of story. Anandtech then again usually does.
Which one would you encline to believe, Anandtech or Gyrene81? :devil
Please show me the review that wrote about the AMD problems. If the AMD problems would be true, again there would be wide spread complaints. I don't buy it - show the evidence. It's funny that you talk about misleading white lies and continue to talk about the hdd 'not working with AMD CPUs' when in fact it has nothing to do with CPUs. It has to do with the chipsets which are inferior in many AMD motherboards. Only the Intel built in SATA6 ports deliver the maximum i/o potential along with a few add-on cards. This coincidentally means that if you plug in a quality PCI-E Sata controller to an AMD motherboard it fixes the 'problem' like magic.
It's an AMD problem, not related to SSDs or Samsung especially. You should know by now that AMD has dropped the ball years ago on the desktop section. Well, they barely can compete with Nvidia anymore either. On high-end solutions Nvidia has no competition.
The last comment about 64 years shows me that either you REALLY don't understand the scope of the discussion here or you're trolling. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time answering your posts anymore.
It's obvious you have zero experience on using a SSD as a main drive because you wouldn't talk like that once you experienced first hand how much faster it makes your computer feel. Believe it or not.
Edit: TLC/SLC
-
double post
-
Please show me the review that wrote about the AMD problems. If the AMD problems would be true, again there would be wide spread complaints. I don't buy it - show the evidence. It's funny that you talk about misleading white lies and continue to talk about the hdd 'not working with AMD CPUs' when in fact it has nothing to do with CPUs. It has to do with the chipsets which are inferior in many AMD motherboards. Only the Intel built in SATA6 ports deliver the maximum i/o potential along with a few add-on cards. This coincidentally means that if you plug in a quality PCI-E Sata controller to an AMD motherboard it fixes the 'problem' like magic.
It's an AMD problem, not related to SSDs or Samsung especially. You should know by now that AMD has dropped the ball years ago on the desktop section. Well, they barely can compete with Nvidia anymore either. On high-end solutions Nvidia has no competition.
dude you imply that there's no evidence of a problem with amd chipset (meant that instead of cpu's) ask for evidence to back up my statement then you yourself provide the evidence. and provide a solution.
and it doesnt matter who's fault it is, if it is samsung's or amd's. the problem still a problem. but more important that review should have mentioned it, if it was an impartial and complete review.
and also I didnt say an ssd wouldnt make a difference in speed, I said it's not a good return on my investment. just a difference on what a return on investment is. saving a few seconds here and there on what I do wont really save me any time. to you it makes a difference and that's cool, to me it doesnt and that's cool too. I would rather spend the 600 bucks from that ssd in getting a sim pit. and to you that would probably be a waste of money.
semp
-
dude you imply that there's no evidence of a problem with amd chipset (meant that instead of cpu's) ask for evidence to back up my statement then you yourself provide the evidence. and provide a solution.
and it doesnt matter who's fault it is, if it is samsung's or amd's. the problem still a problem. but more important that review should have mentioned it, if it was an impartial and complete review.
and also I didnt say an ssd wouldnt make a difference in speed, I said it's not a good return on my investment. just a difference on what a return on investment is. saving a few seconds here and there on what I do wont really save me any time. to you it makes a difference and that's cool, to me it doesnt and that's cool too. I would rather spend the 600 bucks from that ssd in getting a sim pit. and to you that would probably be a waste of money.
semp
Dude show me the evidence. Show it. I know for a fact that AMD has problems with its SATA6G implementation so logically I assume it must have something to do with that if such a problem even exists. But show me that review, then talk. The cheapest of the EVO line is a little over 100 bucks. Again you fail COMPLETELY to understand the technical aspects. The smallest of the drive can theoretically wear out in 8-16 years due to having the 3-bit MLC it has. It is very likely that _other_ parts in the drive will fail before the 8 years has passed. Just as it's likely that any conventional HDD would fail before that 8 year mark. What exactly there is that you don't get?
You're just biased against SSDs because you have no experience on them.
-
Dude show me the evidence. Show it. I know for a fact that AMD has problems with its SATA6G implementation so logically I assume it must have something to do with that if such a problem even exists. But show me that review, then talk. The cheapest of the EVO line is a little over 100 bucks. Again you fail COMPLETELY to understand the technical aspects. The smallest of the drive can theoretically wear out in 8-16 years due to having the 3-bit MLC it has. It is very likely that _other_ parts in the drive will fail before the 8 years has passed. Just as it's likely that any conventional HDD would fail before that 8 year mark. What exactly there is that you don't get?
You're just biased against SSDs because you have no experience on them.
holly cow. you are hard headed arent ya? I use my computer to play aces high and wot and to pay bills. that's it, sometimes I make aces high movies but rarely. to me spending 100 or 600 bucks so my computer can boot in 5 seconds instead of 30 or to load aces high in 2 seconds instead of the 8 seconds it does now, is a waste of money. I save basically no time. so to me it's not a good return on my investment. to you saving that time maybe worth it and a good return on your investment and that's cool too.
does that make sense to you now?
as for the review, look it up on newegg. on the 1tb ssd.
semp
-
holly cow. you are hard headed arent ya? I use my computer to play aces high and wot and to pay bills. that's it, sometimes I make aces high movies but rarely. to me spending 100 or 600 bucks so my computer can boot in 5 seconds instead of 30 or to load aces high in 2 seconds instead of the 8 seconds it does now, is a waste of money. I save basically no time. so to me it's not a good return on my investment. to you saving that time maybe worth it and a good return on your investment and that's cool too.
does that make sense to you now?
as for the review, look it up on newegg. on the 1tb ssd.
semp
Link to the review. Newegg consumer complaints department is NOT a review it's some single persons rant that can be true or false. I couldn't care less if you can't see the value of an SSD in your personal use. It does not make SSDs bad, unreliable or anything else you and Gyrene have implied. For 100 bucks a SSD is the single biggest speed improvement anyone can have to their pc. Even if you run it through a SATA3G it will still wipe out any regular HDD in performance.
Even on newegg 84% of consumers gave it (128gb) a full 5 stars, only 1 negative review lol.
The Newegg consumer reviews are a good example as to why you should NEVER listen to laymans verdict of a product. There were satisfied customers who reported having installed the drive to usb2 external enclosure because they didn't have a sata cable at hand... Which will make the drive totally useless, slower than a regular internal hdd. People make idiotic mistakes like this, especially the ones who rant later on how bad the products are.
Back to the topic: The original poster can now have one more reason to invest to Intel hardware instead of AMD in his new computer - possible SSD performance problems on AMD motherboards.
-
This doesnt change the _fact_ that Gyrenes information was wrong and his approach was downright slanderous.
Having said that, SSDs will not make your ears blue. And there are only a couple of links which report bad experiences while millions of users myself included are using them daily with zero problems. I have several SSDs both at home and work use.
I would never have something else but SSD as OS drive again.
I store backups for my deskop 3 SSD drives on the mechanical drive I have left.
Once you get used to the speed of a good SSD you never go back.
-
You guys are making me interested in learning more about SSD's.
What are the benefits for having your OS on it? Is there really much that takes any time to load off a normal HD? For me, it seems the longest is waking from hybrid sleep and launching that first browser window, but after that, things seem pretty snappy. For typical usage, what is sped up a lot for the user?
-
For me for the OS, its from 18-20 seconds down to 6 with Samsung SSD,after you typed userid/password with 6GB/S SATA.( I do have some unnecessary programs ,loading though)
AH loads in about 1/3 of time 7200 rpm 3GB/S (mine can not use 6GB SATA).
BF3 normal map take 10 seconds to load instead or whopping 45 seconds
i7 930 O/C to 3.60ghz
7870 graphics card
12gb ram
Win7 Pro 64bit.
If you have 3gb SATA you will double time to load stuff ( tried if it really would have same effectiveness, it did)
-
For me for the OS, its from 18-20 seconds down to 6 with Samsung SSD,after you typed userid/password with 6GB/S SATA.( I do have some unnecessary programs ,loading though)
AH loads in about 1/3 of time 7200 rpm 3GB/S (mine can not use 6GB SATA).
BF3 normal map take 10 seconds to load instead or whopping 45 seconds
i7 930 O/C to 3.60ghz
7870 graphics card
12gb ram
Win7 Pro 64bit.
If you have 3gb SATA you will double time to load stuff ( tried if it really would have same effectiveness, it did)
Even with 3G sata you can get a PCI-E SSD card. 2gb/s throughput is even faster than SATA6G. http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/mushkin-scorpion-pcie-ssd-review-480gb-wicked-performance-great-price/?ModPagespeed=noscript
-
You have to be careful what pci-e version you are using, and on some older motherboards you might end up with bandwidth loss on either the graphics performance, or slower data throughput, again depending on pcie version, and even more so if you are using SLI/Crossfire
-
You have to be careful what pci-e version you are using, and on some older motherboards you might end up with bandwidth loss on either the graphics performance, or slower data throughput, again depending on pcie version, and even more so if you are using SLI/Crossfire
That's true. But then again one should not buy high-end hardware to that old computer in general. Using PCI-E 2.0 a 32-lane PCIe connector can support throughput up to 16 GB/s aggregate. It was introduced in 2007 so your computer needs to be pretty ancient to become a real bottleneck. In the case of AMD chipsets the need for PCI-E based solution still exists (in theory at least) because they have a slow SATA6 implementation.
-
How much data can a ssd store.
Comparing a 120gb ssd vs 1 TB .
How do they compare
-
How much data can a ssd store.
Comparing a 120gb ssd vs 1 TB .
How do they compare
what? a byte is a byte. a 120gb drive, either mechanical or ssd will hold approximately 120 gigabytes of data (windows formats it to about 116gb of useable space). i won't get into file compression as that will just confuse you.
-
You guys are making me interested in learning more about SSD's.
What are the benefits for having your OS on it? Is there really much that takes any time to load off a normal HD? For me, it seems the longest is waking from hybrid sleep and launching that first browser window, but after that, things seem pretty snappy. For typical usage, what is sped up a lot for the user?
on oem retail systems (laptop/desktop) with all the crapware installed, there is a big performance boot up performance difference between the stock mechanical drive and an ssd. even a low end ssd will boot faster.
i had the opportunity to real world test ssd's of various calibers (including refurbs) against mechanical drives in laptops and desktops. just looking at the boot process from power button to internet browser opening using automatic windows login, all of the ssd's were faster than the oem supplied mechanical drives using the factory images (not surprising). using a windows image created from a custom windows install and optimization tweaks, the margins in boot times between mechanical and ssd on desktop systems went down (didn't think it would happen), with the ssd's still being faster. in the case of the custom windows install, if 2-8 seconds of boot time is worth the cost per gigabyte to you, ssd is worth the price.
on the laptops, the boot time margins between ssd's and mechanical drives only marginally improved. over a period of a month of normal office use the mechanical drives slowed down where the ssd's stayed just as fast as the first day. file fragmentation doesn't affect ssd's like it does mechanical drives.
i don't personally know about how ssd's handle sleep/hibernation modes, i turn all windows power management off.
-
on oem retail systems (laptop/desktop) with all the crapware installed, there is a big performance boot up performance difference between the stock mechanical drive and an ssd. even a low end ssd will boot faster.
This is not limited to retail systems. In my case the clean installed Win7 bootup time went from 27 seconds to 7 seconds. Same kind of performance improvement is with overall usage like loading large game maps. On black ops for example using HDD the enemy would vulch you to spawn before you could even move and on SSD you're first on the map.
-
what do think about this computer guys..
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883220329R
-
Buy it for now. And save your pennies to replace 1.) power supply unit, and then 2.) video card. :aok
-
what do think about this computer guys..
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883220329R
The video card is in the very low end of high end cards: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html) second lowest. It costs about $59, for $30 more you'd get a GeForce GTX 460 SE scoring threefold. The power supply is also weak, it should be changed along with the video card.
-
This is not limited to retail systems. In my case the clean installed Win7 bootup time went from 27 seconds to 7 seconds. Same kind of performance improvement is with overall usage like loading large game maps. On black ops for example using HDD the enemy would vulch you to spawn before you could even move and on SSD you're first on the map.
i can believe it. getting the right combo of hardware and windows tweaking on a custom built system can make what would be a nominal difference, turn out to be a huge difference. but that's not always the case for people and the boot time margins can be less than what you experienced.
as far as gaming, i'm still using a mechanical drive on my system and i'm always one of the first 5 people in a multiplayer gaming session during a map change...i'll probably jump on an ssd later this year, prices are still going down and i'm not inclined to go less than 256gb.
-
Hear is another nice one
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883155679
-
Hear is another nice one
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883155679
the asus is the lesser of the 2 evils...if you're going to choose between them, get the asus.
-
WOuld you please explain? :P
-
the asus is the lesser of the 2 evils...if you're going to choose between them, get the asus.
^ this :aok
The video card in the Asus is marginally better. And with the Asus you would not be saddled with one of those dreadful Dell <hock-ptooie!> motherboards.
-
^ this :aok
The video card in the Asus is marginally better. And with the Asus you would not be saddled with one of those dreadful Dell <hock-ptooie!> motherboards.
edzachery...the asus is using an asus mobo, not a modified for dell by <insert oem mfg name> p.o.s. mobo.
-
as far as gaming, i'm still using a mechanical drive on my system and i'm always one of the first 5 people in a multiplayer gaming session during a map change...
Do you play black ops? It's physically impossible for you to be first on map if other players are using SSDs :)
-
Do you play black ops? It's physically impossible for you to be first on map if other players are using SSDs :)
no but i did have bf3 installed for a while...always got in among the first 5.
-
I almost never turn my computers off at home or work. I set them up to go to sleep or hybrid sleep. Sleep or hybrid sleep uses about the same power as them being powered down, and from sleep or hybrid sleep, time from touching a key to getting the log-in screen is a couple of seconds typically, and from the login screen to first browser window another few seconds. Also, with the machine on hybrid sleep, you can have it wake at night to do a full scan of your hard disk or whatever other tasks take a long time that you don't want to do during the day. Once you try using hybrid sleep instead of shutdown, you won't want to go back to doing shutdowns every day. :aok
-
no but i did have bf3 installed for a while...always got in among the first 5.
BF3 doesn't have this problem. It has a wait period for spawn. I remember having to wait always for the other players to get their loading ready while playing on the Revodrive 3 :) Black ops then again lets fast players spawn rape the slow ones.
-
I almost never turn my computers off at home or work. I set them up to go to sleep or hybrid sleep. Sleep or hybrid sleep uses about the same power as them being powered down, and from sleep or hybrid sleep, time from touching a key to getting the log-in screen is a couple of seconds typically, and from the login screen to first browser window another few seconds. Also, with the machine on hybrid sleep, you can have it wake at night to do a full scan of your hard disk or whatever other tasks take a long time that you don't want to do during the day. Once you try using hybrid sleep instead of shutdown, you won't want to go back to doing shutdowns every day. :aok
i'm not concerned with power usage, at full load my system will use $1 a day in electricity, that's nothing compared to my ac unit. my drives do power down after 1 hour of inactivity, but that is as far as i go with powering down or using screen savers or sleep mode. my system is booted and ready to rock in less than 30 seconds as it is, relying on microsh@t's crapware version of power management compatibility with my system hardware won't make it any faster.
aside from that, i'd love to see what all is sitting cached on your system after a few days of not shutting down...did you happen to disable the magic packet readiness on your network adaptor?
-
aside from that, i'd love to see what all is sitting cached on your system after a few days of not shutting down...did you happen to disable the magic packet readiness on your network adaptor?
I haven't disabled the "awake on magic packet" stuff, but I don't use it.
My work computer is typically up for probably a month between reboots.
-
I haven't disabled the "awake on magic packet" stuff, but I don't use it.
My work computer is typically up for probably a month between reboots.
disable it for security purposes...not that it's a common thing to be concerned with on a home pc but, disable it.
a month without reboot? :lol be grateful you don't have to call me for your computer problems at work... :mad: i had one guy that would inevitably put in a support call every month...something not working on his system or it was slow or blah blah blah. i'd get to his desk, ask him what he's been doing, look at task manager then reboot the system...i finally had to tell him if he didn't shut the system down at least once a week, i would have the help desk make sure he reboots his system before they take any action to get his issues addressed.
-
disable it for security purposes...not that it's a common thing to be concerned with on a home pc but, disable it.
Good advice -- I just did. I agree about very little risk (it being behind an router and a firewall), but as I don't use it, why keep it on, eh?
a month without reboot? :lol be grateful you don't have to call me for your computer problems at work...
:aok
It used to be that one had to reboot Windows systems often (even spawned a joke of the MCRE for "Microsoft Certified Reboot Engineer", and jokes at my previous company from the Linux/Debian guys about MS ads saying "I haven't been down to the server room in days!" -- they thought that was hilarious with our Debian machines up for months). But these days, it doesn't seem to cause any problem keeping them up always. I've worked with perhaps 200+ Windows systems over the past 5-7 years that we kept on always (reboots if needed for updates or reboots upon any software trouble as a first step). That way, they can get virus checked and backed up every night when they aren't being used. At home, I only recently started leaving them on always once I realized that that sleep and hybrid sleep don't take appreciably more power than turning them off completely.
We have Windows machines that run our production equipment (custom Java apps that run on Windows XP). We've been using them for over 5 years, and they not only are always on, but a single crash of anything costs $hundreds or $thousands in wasted consumables and sets back production by 3 days. That almost never happens. The last time it happened (and I can't remember a time before that -- not to say it hasn't happened, but not often enough that I even remember the time before last), it was due to hardware failure, not a software or OS crash.
-
oy you gots some expensive stuff going on there :uhoh i can understand why you wouldn't want to reboot unless it's absolutely necessary... :eek:
at one time i wanted to be a windows systern admin...then i got into novell and now unix/linux. :D our windows servers at the app tier keep way too much cruft to run more than a year without problems...especially the vm's (fyi, oracle apps suxxorz on all platforms).
-
oy you gots some expensive stuff going on there :uhoh i can understand why you wouldn't want to reboot unless it's absolutely necessary... :eek:
at one time i wanted to be a windows systern admin...then i got into novell and now unix/linux. :D our windows servers at the app tier keep way too much cruft to run more than a year without problems...especially the vm's (fyi, oracle apps suxxorz on all platforms).
Yep, Windows machines as servers for Internet stuff, database transactions, etc. probably are not a great pick; and even our Windows machines that seem very stable wouldn't, I don't think, stay up for more than a year without a reboot (I've never gotten that far before needing a reboot for updates, installation, or something).
-
We have Windows machines that run our production equipment (custom Java apps that run on Windows XP). We've been using them for over 5 years
One must wonder why Windows XP was selected for anything remotely mission critical. A big fail on someones part there IMO. I'm surprised your systems have been able to run 1 week without crashing lot alone years! So you don't do any security updates I guess and the XPs have no physical connection to Internet.
-
One must wonder why Windows XP was selected for anything remotely mission critical. A big fail on someones part there IMO. I'm surprised your systems have been able to run 1 week without crashing lot alone years! So you don't do any security updates I guess and the XPs have no physical connection to Internet.
I chose it. I did that for a lot of reasons that I can go over if you want me to explain (although please don't ask me to go into it if you're not honestly interested, as it will take me some time to type up). It is clearly not a big fail since these machines and the software on them have just about perfect up time records over the years, not just in our own production facility but in customer facilities in numerous other locations in the US and in other countries (installations in UK, Italy, France, Australia, Switzerland, Canada, China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Russia), including biology labs with little or no IT support. Yes, we do security updates, and they are hooked to the Internet (through routers and firewalls).
These are for device/equipment control, not as a web server, huge database server, etc. The software they run is software we (mostly I) wrote. I would not recommend Windows machines for running a bank, or airline reservations, or a web hosting business, etc. I wouldn't pick it for airliner flight-control software. Different realms have different characteristics and different sets of solutions that work best.
I have worked on a lot of different systems (Apple II's, Macs, Lisas, Sun workstations, NeXT workstations, DOS PC's, Windows 95 PC's, OS/2 PC's, Unix PC's, and various microcontrollers, even a little on old Amdahl mainframes) in a lot of different languages (Fortran, LISP, Pascal, BASIC, assembly of various sorts, Prolog, C/C++, Perl, Python, Java) and done a lot of coding for process automation and instrumentation control (for small companies as well as large cap and multinational companies). I'd still pick what I did as the best course for those various reasons I can go into.
-
I chose it. I did that for a lot of reasons that I can go over if you want me to explain (although please don't ask me to go into it if you're not honestly interested, as it will take me some time to type up). It is clearly not a big fail since these machines and the software on them have just about perfect up time records over the years, not just in our own production facility but in customer facilities in numerous other locations in the US and in other countries (installations in UK, Italy, France, Australia, Switzerland, Canada, China, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Russia), including biology labs with little or no IT support. Yes, we do security updates, and they are hooked to the Internet (through routers and firewalls).
These are for device/equipment control, not as a web server, huge database server, etc. The software they run is software we (mostly I) wrote. I would not recommend Windows machines for running a bank, or airline reservations, or a web hosting business, etc. I wouldn't pick it for airliner flight-control software. Different realms have different characteristics and different sets of solutions that work best.
I have worked on a lot of different systems (Apple II's, Macs, Lisas, Sun workstations, NeXT workstations, DOS PC's, Windows 95 PC's, OS/2 PC's, Unix PC's, and various microcontrollers, even a little on old Amdahl mainframes) in a lot of different languages (Fortran, LISP, Pascal, BASIC, assembly of various sorts, Prolog, C/C++, Perl, Python, Java) and done a lot of coding for process automation and instrumentation control (for small companies as well as large cap and multinational companies). I'd still pick what I did as the best course for those various reasons I can go into.
I guess you've been pretty lucky since XP is suspectible to rapidly spreading worms especially when combined with java and internet access. Are those more like embedded systems where users practically never actually access the desktops? If you need uptime, how do you perform updates? Most of them require a reboot.
I would be crapping my pants if I was responsible for a system like that lol. Best of luck!
-
Do you play black ops? It's physically impossible for you to be first on map if other players are using SSDs :)
Not 100% accurate. If the map has been loaded before it could still be retained in system RAM which is faster than an SSD. Windows 7 is pretty aggressive about that. Personally, I do not care for that, but it is what it is.
-
Not 100% accurate. If the map has been loaded before it could still be retained in system RAM which is faster than an SSD. Windows 7 is pretty aggressive about that. Personally, I do not care for that, but it is what it is.
I haven't played much BO but watching my kid play it on hdd his maps always loaded from the hdd and he has win7 with 8gb ram. So it doesn't cache as far as I can see. He's running the game from raid-0 3x320gb WD hdds and still he gets killed before spawn on every round.
Plus his wording 'always' implies it can't be cached as the first load comes always from the mass memory.
-
I haven't played much BO but watching my kid play it on hdd his maps always loaded from the hdd and he has win7 with 8gb ram. So it doesn't cache as far as I can see. He's running the game from raid-0 3x320gb WD hdds and still he gets killed before spawn on every round.
what drives are you using and what is the stripe sizing on the raid configuration? i've seen raid0 configurations improve the performance of cheap drives but, that was using hardware raid with actual raid controllers, not software raid.
-
what drives are you using and what is the stripe sizing on the raid configuration? i've seen raid0 configurations improve the performance of cheap drives but, that was using hardware raid with actual raid controllers, not software raid.
WD3200AAKS drives, 128kb stripe size. Single drive gives around 80mb/s in raid 0 the 3 drives score 168/167 Mb/s sequential read/write. It doesn't quite scale 1:1 but I'll take double performance any day. And this is software raid.
-
There is more than a good chance the software raid is marking the cache dirty on each access. This is a cheap way to insure drive integrity in a raid.
None of the standard Windows library functions, which read data from a device, can avoid going through the system cache. Then again, 8GB of system RAM may not be enough RAM to contain the cache if the game is taking to much memory. There is some speculation, on my part, as I am not familiar with the game, nor the system being used.
I do know my home computer is loading all data from system memory, once a game has loaded it before. Easy test using Aces High. Before going "Offline", pick a big terrain, such as ozkansas. Go "Offline". It should take a bit. Exit, then go back in again and it will be faster, if your system is really making use of the Windows cache.
-
There is more than a good chance the software raid is marking the cache dirty on each access. This is a cheap way to insure drive integrity in a raid.
None of the standard Windows library functions, which read data from a device, can avoid going through the system cache. Then again, 8GB of system RAM may not be enough RAM to contain the cache if the game is taking to much memory. There is some speculation, on my part, as I am not familiar with the game, nor the system being used.
I do know my home computer is loading all data from system memory, once a game has loaded it before. Easy test using Aces High. Before going "Offline", pick a big terrain, such as ozkansas. Go "Offline". It should take a bit. Exit, then go back in again and it will be faster, if your system is really making use of the Windows cache.
It's win7 native software raid, don't know if it invalidates the cache or not. One would think win7 can manage itself.
-
You know what they say about assumptions. It is, after all, Microsoft. It is pretty easy to test.
-
You know what they say about assumptions. It is, after all, Microsoft. It is pretty easy to test.
Yep but we'll have to wait untill my kid stops playing on the thing!
-
I guess you've been pretty lucky since XP is suspectible to rapidly spreading worms especially when combined with java and internet access. Are those more like embedded systems where users practically never actually access the desktops? If you need uptime, how do you perform updates? Most of them require a reboot.
I would be crapping my pants if I was responsible for a system like that lol. Best of luck!
I don't think it's just a fluke that it works well since we're talking about over 100 machine-years of data here. The Java isn't for the browser -- it's the VM for running the application (consider app + Java VM to be the same as an .exe). Users are not usually going to be using the browser on these systems for much, and they aren't running Outlook or MS Office or much of anything other than the custom app for running the equipment. We need uptime when they are running the process, but there are times between synthesis runs when maintenance and reboots can happen. However, since most installations are at places without much IT support, they just get left on and rebooted if the machine is telling an operator that it needs to be rebooted.
If this setup were susceptible to much and had resulting problems, we (as the manufacturer and seller) would get complaints. I don't remember a failed run ever being a result of OS or software crashing at any customer site. Again, that's not to say that it never happened at any site around the world in the past 5 years, just that it is so rare that I don't remember any.
Alternatives to Windows XP plus Java as the application language all would have cost far more (like double or more) in development resources to get the same level of functionality and uptime; or to surpass the uptime of this system (which again is historically nearly perfect) would have cost several times the development resources we used for very little extra benefit. It's a much different environment of usage than a web app server, db server, etc.
But even for our desktops for workers, those are left on all the time, rebooted only when needed as part of regular updates or as a first step of fixing some software quirkiness (which isn't that often). My experience there is in the 500+ machine years of operation without much trouble in regard to leaving them on. Yes, there is the clueless, bumbling contingent that manage to screw up their computers by installing crapware and the occasional problem because of Outlook (which generates the most trouble of any application we had in common use), but that's not the fault of the OS. And I leave on my home system for weeks at a time before it is rebooted without any trouble.
-
i just totally despise java apps :mad: haven't seen one yet that isn't a clusterf@*k that makes my system run like toejame.
-
i just totally despise java apps :mad: haven't seen one yet that isn't a clusterf@*k that makes my system run like toejame.
Are you talking about Java aps or Java applets?
Either way, you can use any language to create crapware -- that is not an aspect of the language. There is plenty of crapware written in C, for example, yet C is not a bad language.
-
poorly written c programs still run better than anything written in java...at least everything that has been publicly available to see in the past 25 years.
-
poorly written c programs still run better than anything written in java...at least everything that has been publicly available to see in the past 25 years.
I suspect that neither of us has tried every program publicly available in the last 25 years. ;) Also, Java apps weren't around much prior to about 2000, and the first JDK wasn't even available until 1996.
I have used vastly more apps written in C than in Java (probably 100's of times more) and hence have seen many more horrible ones in C than in Java. Most of my experience with Java apps are IDE's written in Java (which were excellent) and bioinformatics tools written in Java (which were excellent).
Again, whether or not an application is horrible depends foremost on the person's programming, not the language. Granted, some languages are less prone to programmer error than others. For example, writing in assembly is more prone to programmer error than C, and C is actually more prone to programmer errors than Java (as Java is more strongly typed, isn't based as much on raw manipulation of pointers, etc.).
Pointers in C historically were a source of a lot of inadvertent programming errors. Back in the days of DOS, this was a huge pain in the neck, since DOS did not have protected memory. So, you could have an errant pointer stomp all over the place -- you might stomp on the code for the printf statement, for example, and not know it until your program crashed on a printf statement, which is nowhere close to where the bug in your code is. That very event back in the early or mid 90's (writing neural network code for financial analysis) was what caused me to make a holy vow never to write another DOS program again and made me switch to OS/2. Windows 95 and Windows NT weren't out yet, and my choice was realistically DOS, OS/2, or Unix, which at the time was very expensive and hugely cumbersome on the PC. I guess one option was the Mac (which I programmed in during grad school), but it was not very friendly to scientific programming in those days for various reasons (although I picked Macs for our office staff, on which we played Marathon after hours -- man, that was fun).
Every language has a set of things it is good at and some things its not good at, too. C has the widest set of uses. Java is great at some things, too.
-
I suspect that neither of us has tried every program publicly available in the last 25 years. ;) Also, Java apps weren't around much prior to about 2000, and the first JDK wasn't even available until 1996.
I have used vastly more apps written in C than in Java (probably 100's of times more) and hence have seen many more horrible ones in C than in Java. Most of my experience with Java apps are IDE's written in Java (which were excellent) and bioinformatics tools written in Java (which were excellent).
Again, whether or not an application is horrible depends foremost on the person's programming, not the language. Granted, some languages are less prone to programmer error than others. For example, writing in assembly is more prone to programmer error than C, and C is actually more prone to programmer errors than Java (as Java is more strongly typed, isn't based as much on raw manipulation of pointers, etc.).
Pointers in C historically were a source of a lot of inadvertent programming errors. Back in the days of DOS, this was a huge pain in the neck, since DOS did not have protected memory. So, you could have an errant pointer stomp all over the place -- you might stomp on the code for the printf statement, for example, and not know it until your program crashed on a printf statement, which is nowhere close to where the bug in your code is. That very event back in the early or mid 90's (writing neural network code for financial analysis) was what caused me to make a holy vow never to write another DOS program again and made me switch to OS/2. Windows 95 and Windows NT weren't out yet, and my choice was realistically DOS, OS/2, or Unix, which at the time was very expensive and hugely cumbersome on the PC. I guess one option was the Mac (which I programmed in during grad school), but it was not very friendly to scientific programming in those days for various reasons (although I picked Macs for our office staff, on which we played Marathon after hours -- man, that was fun).
Every language has a set of things it is good at and some things its not good at, too. C has the widest set of uses. Java is great at some things, too.
I noticed that you talk about unix but disregard linux completely. It would have been a very easy and no cost solution for example 5 years ago, even for running the java app.
-
I noticed that you talk about unix but disregard linux completely. It would have been a very easy and no cost solution for example 5 years ago, even for running the java app.
Our choices for this were made closer to 2000, but regardless I wouldn't choose Linux for this particular application. That's not because I think it's bad -- it's good for many things. In fact, we ran an important part of our company on Debian. It has more to do with the ability for customers to easily get local third party support (to deal with computer problems if needed), drivers for various cards, and ability to run other software packages.
My other mention of Unix was with regard to PC's that ran financial number-crunching programs for another business I was in. That was in 1993 or 1994 when I was choosing. I ended up choosing OS/2, as the non-free Unixes out there (like Xenix) were expensive and very cumbersome to deal with, and the free Unixes didn't seem polished enough yet to me (not that I was the greatest expert on every Unix available, though).
I was very happy with OS/2 and wished it to win out over Windows NT and Windows 95, as at the time of their introductions, to me OS/2 seemed very much superior to either one.
-
Our choices for this were made closer to 2000, but regardless I wouldn't choose Linux for this particular application. That's not because I think it's bad -- it's good for many things. In fact, we ran an important part of our company on Debian. It has more to do with the ability for customers to easily get local third party support (to deal with computer problems if needed), drivers for various cards, and ability to run other software packages.
My other mention of Unix was with regard to PC's that ran financial number-crunching programs for another business I was in. That was in 1993 or 1994 when I was choosing. I ended up choosing OS/2, as the non-free Unixes out there (like Xenix) were expensive and very cumbersome to deal with, and the free Unixes didn't seem polished enough yet to me (not that I was the greatest expert on every Unix available, though).
I was very happy with OS/2 and wished it to win out over Windows NT and Windows 95, as at the time of their introductions, to me OS/2 seemed very much superior to either one.
On 2000 most of the linux distros were still for hardcore users only :)
I bought my first linux cd in 1998, Caldera linux. I didn't even have a broadband connection at that time. It wasn't as easy as the distros now if you know what I mean :)
-
Started with slackware 1.2 , think it was 3 diskettes :old:
-
I suspect that neither of us has tried every program publicly available in the last 25 years. ;) Also, Java apps weren't around much prior to about 2000, and the first JDK wasn't even available until 1996.
ok then more like 16 years... :neener: i'm 52, it's easy to forget a few years when there are so many to remember these days... :cry
I have used vastly more apps written in C than in Java (probably 100's of times more) and hence have seen many more horrible ones in C than in Java. Most of my experience with Java apps are IDE's written in Java (which were excellent) and bioinformatics tools written in Java (which were excellent).
i know what you mean. there are some niche areas where java (well written) is very useful but, where we run into it on a regular basis, someone just tossed some poorly written crap out there and it causes problems. when i started all this silly fascination with computers, it was c and cobol that forever broke me of the desire to pursue a career in programming. probably would have been a different story if i had gone to college and learned it in an academic environment instead of on the job. where i'm at now sooner or later i'm going to have to buckle down and at least learn perl and python...i don't have the patience to try and memorize the million ways to do things.
-
probably would have been a different story if i had gone to college and learned it in an academic environment instead of on the job. where i'm at now sooner or later i'm going to have to buckle down and at least learn perl and python...i don't have the patience to try and memorize the million ways to do things.
I don't think college has a large advantage to learning to program or being good at it. I've built software-development teams, hired software developers and IT people, and then worked with them (i.e., my hiring was as part of the working team, not as an HR person who has no idea if his hiring really worked well). Of the best developers, some majored in computer science in college, some majored in something else in college, and some didn't go to college. I think that learning on your own or on the job can be a great way to go, too.
-
On 2000 most of the linux distros were still for hardcore users only :)
I bought my first linux cd in 1998, Caldera linux. I didn't even have a broadband connection at that time. It wasn't as easy as the distros now if you know what I mean :)
:aok
I remember playing around (only a very small amount, though) with MINIX when it first came out.
Also, I remember using Xenix. Man, what a monstrosity that was to install and get running.
Compared to that, OS/2 was a breeze, and it had everything I wanted: excellent stability, protected memory, multitasking, batch language, low resource needs, and could still run DOS apps very well (like Air Warrior, which I used to run on it).
-
can i come work with you? i've been trying to learn something as simple as regex for the past 4 years and unless i see it in an existing structure, i just can't grasp it all. it's like algebra was in high school, who the hell decided x=10 when y was zero, and how the hell am i supposed to know when to use "$/|\(+)[^]"? :cry
-
can i come work with you? i've been trying to learn something as simple as regex for the past 4 years and unless i see it in an existing structure, i just can't grasp it all. it's like algebra was in high school, who the hell decided x=10 when y was zero, and how the hell am i supposed to know when to use "$/|\(+)[^]"? :cry
:aok The company that I most recently formed is a very small one (7 people currently). We have only a couple of software folks (including me) for machine control and bioinformatics (no web development in this one currently).
Regex is very messy looking in my opinion, too, and was never a specialty of mine.
-
What does your company do?
-
What does your company do?
We build customer-specified sequences of DNA on semiconductor chips, and equipment for doing that. The technology is used in fields related to biological research and diagnostics (to read what a person's sequence of DNA is) and synthetic biology (such as making synthetic genes).
-
We build customer-specified sequences of DNA on semiconductor chips, and equipment for doing that. The technology is used in fields related to biological research and diagnostics (to read what a person's sequence of DNA is) and synthetic biology (such as making synthetic genes).
wouldn't happen to be called cyberdyne systems...would it? :uhoh :noid
(http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080313215658/terminator/images/a/ac/Terminator3-09.jpg)