Hardware Discussion Thread

challengemaster · 23-01-2013 4:20pm

Wossack wrote: »

dont see any advantage doing that vs just offering the storage directly

A NAS is far too lightweight to only use the box for. It's not a powerhouse, but it's still a C2D with >4gb ram and an 8800gtx. It'd be a complete waste of resources to just install a NAS. Using a Virtual NAS means I can allocate resources to the other VMs and get the most benefit out of it, and not have it sitting at 0% usage all day.

It means I can run other VMs on the same box without interrupting the NAS. For example, I could set up a VM for F@H or Seti. Much simpler than starting/stopping programs is to just have a VM that can be turned on or off. It also means I can add more computers to a cluster via proxmox at the drop of a hat, and VMs can be moved between boxes. So if at a later date I decide I want a different box to be the master and run the NAS, I can easily migrate the VM and turn the old one into a node.

I should also be able to get full control of the NAS or any of the VMs from outside the network, I'm just not entirely sure on how yet.

Serephucus · 23-01-2013 4:22pm

Chrome RDP extension = win.

Wossack · 23-01-2013 6:04pm

challengemaster wrote: »

A NAS is far too lightweight to only use the box for. It's not a powerhouse, but it's still a C2D with >4gb ram and an 8800gtx. It'd be a complete waste of resources to just install a NAS. Using a Virtual NAS means I can allocate resources to the other VMs and get the most benefit out of it, and not have it sitting at 0% usage all day.

It means I can run other VMs on the same box without interrupting the NAS. For example, I could set up a VM for F@H or Seti. Much simpler than starting/stopping programs is to just have a VM that can be turned on or off. It also means I can add more computers to a cluster via proxmox at the drop of a hat, and VMs can be moved between boxes. So if at a later date I decide I want a different box to be the master and run the NAS, I can easily migrate the VM and turn the old one into a node.

I should also be able to get full control of the NAS or any of the VMs from outside the network, I'm just not entirely sure on how yet.

ah ok

I'd only be concerned about the data protection/recovery of a virtual nas vs a physical counterpart. The added layer of complexity could prove an issue - though Im not terribly familar with the NAS os you mention

also a bit of a pain, starting a relatively powerful pc to just watch a movie on the htpc/ps3 downstairs - though again, dont know your plans for it

Tij da feen · 25-01-2013 1:36pm

Second part of the AMD FX 8350 video. FX 8350 is pretty much neck and neck with the i5. The FX is much better in ARMA 2 and Far Cry 3 than the i5 which was surprising enough. Makes the FX look a lot more attractive, particularly since the 8320 which is around the €150 on HWVS where the 3570k is €205.

BloodBath · 25-01-2013 2:53pm

I think amd are on the verge of a revival again.

I wish I had a few grand spare to get some stock. Prices are still low.

marco_polo · 25-01-2013 3:27pm

Tij da feen wrote: »

Second part of the AMD FX 8350 video. FX 8350 is pretty much neck and neck with the i5. The FX is much better in ARMA 2 and Far Cry 3 than the i5 which was surprising enough. Makes the FX look a lot more attractive, particularly since the 8320 which is around the €150 on HWVS where the 3570k is €205.

While I actually agree quite strongly with the premise of the video, and am quite partial to posting the occasional FX8320 build

, those Far Cry 3 result just don't seem credible on any level.

How on earth is he getting half the frames per second @1080p on the i5 platform, I mean 25FPS with a with a GTX 670 in tow? Seriously?

It is clearly a GPU bound game at highest Ultra quality settings that he claims to be using, so being kind must be wrong with his setup, and techsopt do the exact same kind of tesing on the CPU as he does except with a better GPU (two pages on)

http://www.techspot.com/review/615-far-cry-3-performance/page5.html

BloodBath · 25-01-2013 3:37pm

Ya those fc3 results are a mess.

Arma2 results can't be right either.

There's no way in hell a processor makes that much difference.

I've seen benchmarks of dual core e8400's being only 2-3fps off 3570k's in the likes of bf3.

As long as the cpu ain't bottlenecking the gpu then it should make very little difference.

challengemaster · 25-01-2013 4:04pm

BloodBath wrote: »

I think amd are on the verge of a revival again.

Debatable tbh. They recently just lost a sizable share of the high performance computing sector.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/140174-the-race-to-100-petaflops-cray-and-china-worlds-fastest-supercomputer

For a start, the XC30 marks an interesting shift away from AMD Opteron CPUs to the Intel Xeon — the E5-2600 (Sandy Bridge) family of chips to be exact. With Cray being one of the world’s biggest supercomputer companies, this is a significant loss for the already-ailing AMD.

The reason for this switch is two-fold. First, Intel’s latest Sandy Bridge- and Ivy Bridge-based chips are simply superior to AMD’s offerings, in almost every regard. Second, Intel acquired Cray’s interconnect technology earlier this year. The XC30 debuts the new Aries interconnect — and Intel now owns Aries. It’s a little bit incestuous, but a genius move by Intel to ensure its continued dominance in the high-performance computing (HPC) market. In HPC, the interconnect (the high-speed network that connects every CPU) is everything.

BloodBath · 25-01-2013 4:32pm

challengemaster wrote: »

Debatable tbh. They recently just lost a sizable share of the high performance computing sector.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/140174-the-race-to-100-petaflops-cray-and-china-worlds-fastest-supercomputer

Maybe but AMD's graphics market is still strong and I think they are starting to compete on the cpu front again.

If they can keep momentum they will pick up more contracts.

Let's not forget that all 3 next gen consoles are using AMD gpu's and possibly cpu's.

With share's currently around 2.50 I can easily see them pushing 10 by this time next year.

Easy money if you ask me. If I had 100k in the bank I'd be putting at least 50k of it into AMD shares.

glynf · 30-01-2013 11:03am

Good review of the Aries II on guru3d, and the got two of them for 4 way Crossfire as well the lucky bastards).

dwighet · 30-01-2013 11:27am

glynf wrote: »

Good review of the Aries II on guru3d, and the got two of them for 4 way Crossfire as well the lucky bastards).

I just have to have one right now. gimmee gimmee:cool:

BloodBath · 30-01-2013 4:50pm

Amd/Ati official cata 13.2 betas are on their site now. Massive frame latency fixes, well worth downloading.

http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/windows/Pages/radeonaiw_vista64.aspx

ED E · 30-01-2013 5:47pm

Dropped them in, hopefully will fix the odd flickers I've been having with LoL.

N64 · 06-02-2013 8:01pm

I'm not overly familiar with RAM myself. Would these set of ram sticks work with my friends motherboard?

The ram page doesn't seem to mention that frequency?

challengemaster · 06-02-2013 8:02pm

Yup, should work

Deano12345 · 06-02-2013 8:17pm

N64 wrote: »

I'm not overly familiar with RAM myself. Would these set of ram sticks work with my friends motherboard?

The ram page doesn't seem to mention that frequency?

PC3-12800 is 1600MHz, you'll be fine

segasega · 07-02-2013 12:35am

Quick question, Im waiting on a Corsair h60, should be here tomorrow, have everything else for the build, think its ok to pop the APU and Ram in the board and install it in the case? Or am I better off waiting for the H60 and leaving the APU in its package till I have the H60?

Just wouldnt mind getting some of the build done tonight, to save time tomorrow?

Serephucus · 07-02-2013 1:11am

If you have a board with a CPU cut-out, then it won't make a huge amount of difference. The Corsair units come with sticky crap on the back of the backplate, so they'll stick to the motherboard once placed.

segasega · 07-02-2013 1:13am

Well its a FM2 so the corsair just screws down onto it. Has a cut-out anyway, its an Antec One.

segasega · 07-02-2013 2:37am

Just hope all my header pins are right now, I hate doing that.

farna_boy · 07-02-2013 4:45pm

Found this website earlier.

http://cpuboss.com/

You can use it to compare two CPUs. I found it very useful especially for comparing lower spec processors/ processors you may not be familiar with.

Monotype · 07-02-2013 6:44pm

farna_boy wrote: »

Found this website earlier.

http://cpuboss.com/

You can use it to compare two CPUs. I found it very useful especially for comparing lower spec processors/ processors you may not be familiar with.

I was expecting a load of useless sweeping statements, but it actually presents quite useful information. You do need to weigh the facts yourself a bit, of course.

deconduo · 07-02-2013 7:22pm

Monotype wrote: »

I was expecting a load of useless sweeping statements, but it actually presents quite useful information. You do need to weigh the facts yourself a bit, of course.

Yeah its not bad. I'd still go to Anandtech's benchmarks to compare CPUs first though.

N64 · 11-02-2013 7:04pm

Right, I got the memory from memoryc in the mail today. I installed it and everything seems to be okay but the ram timings in the bios/cpuz don't seem match the specs listed on the website/ram modules.

http://www.gskill.com/products.php?index=239

http://i.imgur.com/7WleSCb.jpg

I was reading on the gskill forum that its not advisable to go with what the motherboard assigns as this can cause system instability ? or do these readouts seem to be okay?

Monotype · 11-02-2013 9:10pm

Do a screen grab of the memory tab as well. That tab doesn't tell you much of what speeds your RAM is actually running at.

N64 · 11-02-2013 9:32pm

Sorry, my bad

Monotype · 11-02-2013 9:40pm

TBH, I think you could tighten up those timings. You've just got a 5MHz overclock, so I think you should be able to run that on top of the specified speeds of 9-9-9-24.

You could run a couple of rounds of memtest to see that it's okay or prime95. I'd be surprised if there was an issue though, unless you were unlucky with getting a bad stick.
Mind you, you're pretty unlucky so I wouldn't be assuming anything! :P

N64 · 12-02-2013 1:47am

Right, sorry about all these newbie questions, this is the first time I have ever delved as far as I have into my BIOS before :pac:

I changed them to as what you said. Everything look alright ? I was also looking at the gskill fourm and they said you may need to up the voltage going into the CPU NB?

marco_polo · 12-02-2013 2:03am

N64 wrote: »

Right, sorry about all these newbie questions, this is the first time I have ever delved as far as I have into my BIOS before :pac:

I changed them to as what you said. Everything look alright ? I was also looking at the gskill fourm and they said you may need to up the voltage going into the CPU NB?

The CPU NB voltage doesn't really have anything much to do with the RAM timings, its for the memory controller and L3 cache on the CPU. There shouldn't really be any need to go near it unless you are overclocking the CPU and/or NB and are failing prime95 on a blend or large FFT test (but passing small FFT and memtest) as while they stress the CPU cores, these two tests shift alot of data between the CPU cache and main memory as well. The reason for upping the CPU NB voltage would be if these parts of the CPU were showing signs of instability, not the RAM itself

If you are just setting the RAM to it rated timings you shouldn't have to go near any voltages at all (unless the RAM voltage is not at its rated setting).

Monotype · 12-02-2013 11:55am

Looks better alright. You might as well bump tRC up to 33 as well. You just have to keep it above tRAS + tRP.
http://www.techpowerup.com/articles//overclocking/AMD/memory/131/2

Hardware Discussion Thread

Comments