Search results

I'm not going for "they won't notice". I'm saying that a quad-core 2.8Ghz CPU with 512KB of cache per core is slower for single-threaded tasks than a dual-core 2.96Ghz CPU with 3MB of cache. Considering that these are users who, for the most part, close Firefox and re-open it again if they are...

Is each core faster? Because these aren't power users, so I doubt even the second core will be worked very hard.

Because it will detect 3.25GB, and it isn't much cheaper to get 3GB.

Because being on the compatibility list of some software is better than pretending to be.

General office use. Nothing special, no local storage requirements. Intel G45 Mobo Intel Core2 Duo 2.93Ghz CORSAIR 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR2 800 OCZ Vertex 30GB Antec NSK 4482B w/380W Power Supply 24X DVD/CD Rewritable Drive Black SATA XP Professional SP3 32-bit - OEM Thoughts?

1920x1080

I was being specific to SSDs. As the latency of SSDs is so close to zero anyway, additional cache isn't going to get you anything.

Yup. They are one of the price/performance leaders at the moment.

I was just informed by a vendor that Samsung's PCL6 implementation is incomplete. Printer: Samsung ML-3050 Firmware: 1.01.07.59 09-18-2007 PCL6 Version: 5.49 06-22-2007 Can't find any updates on Samsung's site. Blah.

Nope. Just run quieter. My machine is pretty darn quiet now, even with everything OC'd, but my office would be 5x quieter without all those fans. The games I play are mostly racing/flying simulators, along with some design software. Even CS4 takes advantage of my GPU.

I have plenty of programs that can do it. But 7 is supposed to (and XP could!). Just annoying, that is all.

The folder contained maybe 400 jpgs that were about 10MB each. I choose "large thumbnails" and started scrolling down through them. It was only generating them on demand; leaving the machine for an hour didn't have any more thumbnails than the screen I was looking at. The cause was scrolling...

Indeed. My (single GPU) 5870 is bigger than my (dual GPU) 295GTX. And now I'm looking into a water block to make it bigger still...

First laugh of the day...

Nope, no excuses, just a typical American keyboard. But a really badly designed one.

Working on an old gateway laptop with the worst keyboard of all time. The space bar is smaller than V, B, and N combined.

Managed to bring my entire main rig to a screeching halt for over a minute, repeatedly. All apps, all windows, even the windows button didn't work. The offense? Rendering thumbnails from a folder of jpgs that sat on a slow network connection (20MB/s). It's this crap that makes me want XPx64 back.

It is the safer of the two options. ;)

I regularly overshot (when I was shooting) without negative repercussions...

Kimono is fun and suggestive. Is the power requirements of the 5850 low enough to ensure compatibility? LotR is always good, but I'm thinking #1 myself.

Raining pretty hard here. Had a blast of a drive around some local roads before my wife woke up with the traction control off, then took her to the rock-gym and looking for some sun. Ended up driving about 150 miles around the whole peninsula. Quite a good day.

? Once you start writing "All work and no play makes..." then I'll start worrying...

Indeed. Whatever caused him to say dfuirbvem caused him to lose half his post...

Sorry to hear it. Snickers bars got me through my first week in asia; after slowly picking up more of the local food, I was fine after that.

<no carrier> ;)

So you got dropped off somewhere cold, shooting on location with that small computer you built? Canada?

Buying faster drives has always been more expensive than multiple drives. The reason RAID-0 wasn't as good before was that it didn't help access time. Now that access time is insignificant, RAID-0 is the affordable way to go. Even the faster SSDs out there just use internal RAID-0. The ICH10R...

That is part of it, yes.

Got down to the mid-thirties here...time to use the heated seats ;)

Pretty much anything is safe if you microwave it long enough ;)

I suspect you are right, which is why our offers have been low so far. Rumor has it that more houses will be released onto the market by major banks Jan 1.

Neither do I. The best way to avoid messing with them is to make sure the hard drive you are installing to is the only one connected when you install the OS. *To get technical, there is always an OS loader. But if the loader thinks it is the only OS on the system, it is silent.

Well, I've put in offers on two houses and not been selected yet. The first guy said he'd rather give it to the bank than accept my offer, the other was a short sale, and the bank turned it down, even though it was the highest. All the other houses in the area are bank-owned or complex...

This is a really slow day....

In all my research I've come to the conclusion that I still want to keep the primary storage local, but I will be using iSCSI to mount my backup locations. Thanks for all the advice!

Nice article, time.

No idea. That is why I don't use them.

What is the price tag on FiberChannel? And what happened to infiniband? Time for more research.

Thanks for that smuggling procedure...worth a laugh. ;)

Thanks Pradeep. Any idea of the impact on access time?

I have one in my newegg shopping cart right now. Next to the 7D and a printer. I wouldn't hesitate if I actually needed one. None of my SSDs saturate the bus yet, so there isn't a need. I also haven't seen a performance increase going to a dedicated RAID card vs. the onboard RAID for RAID-0.

Man, I don't know my IOPS requirements. I stick SSDs in the local machine, and it works great. I want to know what performance hit it will take moving the drives out of the box.

Those are visitor messages, like a bulletin board. There is a way to send private messages, that isn't it.

Anyone seen performance comparisons between local storage and iSCSI for SSDs and the like? I'm evaluating moving the storage on my ESXi out of the server and into a SAN/NAS/whatever. The vendor (of course) says it is fine, but I'd like to see some numbers elsewhere.

If your goal isn't free ice.

And, for the price, it offers a better and easier option. Only once I had a disk it couldn't handle. After the next update (a week?) it went without issue.

I have it, and use it for BluRay and regular DVDs. Works great.

Sorry, yeah, that is what I meant. As opposed to screwing with a boot loader.

It won't. The only reason it wrote stuff to another drive is that it thought that the other disk came first in the boot order. I assume you choose boot drive using the BIOS?