ok so the 700W is min. if i start having fits ill look to upgrade that to the 850 or 1100. thanks.
yes i will be adding many more fans to cool the system as the room is normally at 80F ambient or more.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- My latest computer insanity
My latest computer insanityFollow
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****. 
The Nadenu of Doom wrote:
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Watch Kao go buy himself an NAS today...
King Nobby wrote:
The Nadenu of Doom wrote:
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****.
And obviously it didn't take up much space.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
King Nobby wrote:
The Nadenu of Doom wrote:
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****.
And obviously it didn't take up much space.
TY Sammi! I so wanted to post that!
Mistress Darqflame wrote:
Samira wrote:
King Nobby wrote:
The Nadenu of Doom wrote:
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****.
And obviously it didn't take up much space.
TY Sammi! I so wanted to post that!
I'm
from 
.Mistress Darqflame wrote:
Watch Kao go buy himself an NAS today...
You playing with a new toy recently or something? ;)
Am I the only one amused by the fact that SAN is NAS spelled backwards? Dunno, just always stuck out for some reason...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
if you haven't already set them up in raid0 and attach a 500GB+ SATAII drive to the onboard connectors in case you plan to extend it further and run scheduleded copies of important things like FFXI macro directories <.<;
looks like you are in IT so probably already doing something along those lines or have better ideas
I'd use a SSD atm for a swapfile if you want to bother with it
8GB version should be fine/plenty but OOS atm
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609260
so
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609261
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609234
looks like you are in IT so probably already doing something along those lines or have better ideas
I'd use a SSD atm for a swapfile if you want to bother with it
8GB version should be fine/plenty but OOS atm
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609260
so
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609261
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609234
Samira wrote:
King Nobby wrote:
The Nadenu of Doom wrote:
I have a 240g HD with 196g free. I need more ****.
And obviously it didn't take up much space.
I'm sayin'...
Levish wrote:
if you haven't already set them up in raid0 and attach a 500GB+ SATAII drive to the onboard connectors in case you plan to extend it further and run scheduleded copies of important things [sm]like FFXI macro directories <.<;
Honestly, there is virtually zero reason to ever use RAID0 on a home system. Actually, there's pretty much zero reason to use it ever anywhere. It's one of those things that PC makers offer to home users on their boards that is "new" to them, so they think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.
It's not... ;)
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Levish wrote:
if you haven't already set them up in raid0 and attach a 500GB+ SATAII drive to the onboard connectors in case you plan to extend it further and run scheduleded copies of important things [sm]like FFXI macro directories <.<;
Honestly, there is virtually zero reason to ever use RAID0 on a home system. Actually, there's pretty much zero reason to use it ever anywhere. It's one of those things that PC makers offer to home users on their boards that is "new" to them, so they think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.
It's not... ;)
*Picture Archive and Communication Systems - with a 56 million patient database the statistics get a little crazy.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
What's really insane is the number of times I have clicked on this thread, only to be perpetually baffled by the contents.
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
So... Kao. If I clean your house/apt and do your laundry will you buy me a system with that in it? 
Edited, Oct 16th 2007 7:42pm by Araxius
Edited, Oct 16th 2007 7:42pm by Araxius
Quote:
but I agree that RAID has little purpose for home/gaming usage.
That's not what he's saying. He said RAID0 is worthless for a home system. Personally, I have never understood RAID0 to begin with. RAID1 on a home system, though, does serve a good purpose. For me it means all I have to be super **** about is the boot drive image. Every month or so I back up the data drives, but if I hadn't RAIDed them I would be doing it damn near nightly what with all of the crap that changes every day.
King Nobby wrote:
We use RAID1 and RAID6...
Neither of which are RAID0. ;)
RAID0 is simple concatenation of filesystems. So you take two drives and make them look like one drive to your operating system. Great! Until one of the drives fails.
The only reason to do this is to use striping to do faster data writes across more heads with the lowest total overhead. The trade off is a massively higher risk of failure. If one disk fails, the entire "drive" is lost (and by "drive" I mean all the drives included in the RAID0 device since the OS sees them all as one filesystem). Gone. Poof! Hope you got a backup...
It's popular for home users I suspect almost entirely because most home users don't actually know how stupid it is to use it. A mainboard manufacturer can bundle in a RAID0 package and sell it for a bit more then a board without, and users assume that since they paid extra for the RAID package that it must be a good thing to do. It's a great example of self created marketing.
Other RAID levels have uses, but IMO not much for home use. All of them cause a performance hit and loss of total disk space (except RAID0, but that's a disaster waiting to happen). Those are all things the typical home user wants to avoid. That's not to say that setting up a RAID5 array for storing massive amounts of mp3 files isn't something a home user might be interested in, but I'd do that by actually buying an external array designed for that, not by utilizing the relatively crappy onboard RAID systems.
For the record, I'm also not to thrilled with RAID6 systems either. It just seems like a paranoid over expense for what you get. IMHO, you are vastly better buying a high quality file server solution then doing this. We've been using NetApp filers for over a decade (which actually uses a customized version of RAID4, so go figure!). In that time we have *never* lost a single piece of data due to a disk failure. That's not to say that disks haven't failed, but that the systems are designed to make a double disk failure virtually unheard of (Hasn't happened).
RAID6 is essentially mirrored RAID5. RAID5 only fails if you lose two disks at the same time (two disks within the same raid group technically). As I stated above, if you go with a solid performer your odds of this happening are virtually zero. More to the point, RAID6 will still fail if you experience a "double double" disk failure (two disks on the primary and two on the mirror all die before you can recover). When you start narrowing down the odds of a single double disk failure occurring, you're down so low that you're hitting the odds of say a building fire, natural disaster, or crazed worker destroying your filer being more likely. Adding mirroring is protecting against a case that's ridiculously unlikely to happen, but literally doubles the total cost of the solution.
But hey. Some admins are a bit crazy about stuff like that...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
You have to remember that these drives will only be holding the OS, and the files for whatever games I happen to be playing at any given moment. Other than that, they are entirely sacrificial. If I lose one of them, aside from the annoyance of replacing hardware, I'm not out any data from them except maybe a few savegame files and some patching. My computer is all about speed.
When I build a new computer or upgrade significantly, I take an image of the drive and store it on the secondary raid 1 array. In the event of a disaster, I would replace the hardware, pop in my handy dandy little custom vistaPE recovery disk, write the image back to the main drive array, and i'm back up and running. The image on teh F:\ drive is then copied over to the secondry computer, and the secondary computer's image to the main once a week. Which with gigabit nics and switch doesn't take too long.
For gaming, the benifit of the raid 0 array doesn't really kick in except during game load, windows load, and other operations that require large amounts of daa transfer from the drive to memory or swap file. I play alot of flight simulators, and those are continually loading map data. MMO's too. I also work with cad files quite often for one of my side ventures. The benifits really don't become apperent until you are loading more than a couple megabytes. With the existing raptor raid 0 setup I dropped about 4 seconds off my boot time over just a single raptor. Right now, my processor and my drives are the system bottlenecks. Once I upgrade the processor it will be all drives.
For a normal home user? Raid 0 is a dangerous waste of time. For me, it's a necessity.
When I build a new computer or upgrade significantly, I take an image of the drive and store it on the secondary raid 1 array. In the event of a disaster, I would replace the hardware, pop in my handy dandy little custom vistaPE recovery disk, write the image back to the main drive array, and i'm back up and running. The image on teh F:\ drive is then copied over to the secondry computer, and the secondary computer's image to the main once a week. Which with gigabit nics and switch doesn't take too long.
For gaming, the benifit of the raid 0 array doesn't really kick in except during game load, windows load, and other operations that require large amounts of daa transfer from the drive to memory or swap file. I play alot of flight simulators, and those are continually loading map data. MMO's too. I also work with cad files quite often for one of my side ventures. The benifits really don't become apperent until you are loading more than a couple megabytes. With the existing raptor raid 0 setup I dropped about 4 seconds off my boot time over just a single raptor. Right now, my processor and my drives are the system bottlenecks. Once I upgrade the processor it will be all drives.
For a normal home user? Raid 0 is a dangerous waste of time. For me, it's a necessity.
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
I am raid, but not once I get my NAS set up. Yes Kao, it's still in the box, in the wrapping, on the table! 
Honestly, there is virtually zero reason to ever use RAID0 on a home system. Actually, there's pretty much zero reason to use it ever anywhere.
It's cheap and significantly faster for home users who do things like video editing or gaming. While it increases the risk of data loss, the reality is that most home users will only ever have 2 disks in their "array" which will increase their chances of data loss due to drive failure to about 1% per 5 years.
Considering most home users don't back up the data on their one hdd *at all* I really don't see this as a huge issue to the usefulness of the technology to them.
It's a price for performance issue, nothing more. It's no different than increasing vcore or overvolting ram or whatever. It increases performance in exchange for slightly increasing risk. The vast majority of home users running raid0 arrays will never have a disk fail. Most of them will likely more technically proficient than the buy a dell at Best Buy crowd and will have backed up important data for like 9 cents a gig anyway so it hardly matters if they do have a drive fail.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
The benifits really don't become apperent until you are loading more than a couple megabytes. With the existing raptor raid 0 setup I dropped about 4 seconds off my boot time over just a single raptor.
What the **** are you loading at startup? My 5 year old Semperon box with 512mb of DDR boots xp pro in about 4 seconds total.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
The benifits really don't become apperent until you are loading more than a couple megabytes. With the existing raptor raid 0 setup I dropped about 4 seconds off my boot time over just a single raptor.
What the @#%^ are you loading at startup? My 5 year old Semperon box with 512mb of DDR boots xp pro in about 4 seconds total.
sorry smash, but XP can not boot in that short of a time, in fact no computer does, it takes that long just to get past the BIOS checks before the OS even starts to boot.
as for a "major" performance of RAID0, there is only a slight performance even for video editing and gaming. in fact if you are running a sATA drive and are not doing video editing that is in excess of 1 hour major films, then you will see next to ZERO performance improvement by going RAID0.
the performance jump is less then 10% in fact it is closer to 4% in most cases. a 4% drop on a 15min render is seconds and thus not worth the risk of the data loss.
now on the other hand a 4% performance is worth it if your renders are taking 2+ hours then we are talking potentially worth the risk, but to be blunt if you are making films that are taking that long to render, you either have a **** pore computer, or you are making the money to have a true RAID5 setup and thus not worry about the hassles of a RAID0.
Singdall wrote:
as for a "major" performance of RAID0, there is only a slight performance even for video editing and gaming. in fact if you are running a sATA drive and are not doing video editing that is in excess of 1 hour major films, then you will see next to ZERO performance improvement by going RAID0.
No. It's a quite noticable performance improvement. Particularily on read operations.
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
sorry smash, but XP can not boot in that short of a time, in fact no computer does, it takes that long just to get past the BIOS checks before the OS even starts to boot.
Hi moron. You're confusing POSTing with booting. Also you're dead wrong. Your dvd player, cable box etc etc are all computers that all post and load an operating system in around a second or less after power you them on. You're aware that you can turn off most of the completely useless bios self tests in most bioses right? Right? It takes about 4 seconds from when the bios loads the MBR on my generic sata HDD to get to my desktop. If I gave a **** I could take about 15 seconds and put ubuntu on a flash drive, boot from that and it would take less than 4 seconds from when I turned the computer on to post here.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Smasharoo wrote:
The benifits really don't become apperent until you are loading more than a couple megabytes. With the existing raptor raid 0 setup I dropped about 4 seconds off my boot time over just a single raptor.
What the @#%^ are you loading at startup? My 5 year old Semperon box with 512mb of DDR boots xp pro in about 4 seconds total.
Vista and a ******** of perephrials for one. My computer boots from cold power on to full non-hourglass (well, ring thingy, but still) desktop in about 17 seconds, give or take. Mem test quick post takes 2 seconds to run through all 4 gb, 5 more seconds to enumerate devices and get through the raid controllers, and 6 more seconds to get to full desktop from the vista loading bar.
If i wanted to go the evil hibernate route, thensure, 2 seconds to "boot".
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
keep dreaming smash. winXP, ubuntu, or any other PC OS will not boot that fast. heck not even DSL will boot that fast.
also when you are booting your computer from cold start, the clock starts from the second you hit the power button.
even if you do not COUNT the BIOS load times in that it still will take longer then 4 seconds for XP to boot and ubuntu even longer. ubuntu is one of the slower loading linux distros out there with RH/FC being among the very longest to load.
also when you are booting your computer from cold start, the clock starts from the second you hit the power button.
even if you do not COUNT the BIOS load times in that it still will take longer then 4 seconds for XP to boot and ubuntu even longer. ubuntu is one of the slower loading linux distros out there with RH/FC being among the very longest to load.
Recent Visitors: 307
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (307)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- My latest computer insanity
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC