[Thunderg0d]

I know the price of this is fucking shit...but look at the speeds of a single drive....Raid 0 would require the 4-5 drives to make that happen. Problem with that is data corruption chances goes up close to exponentially with each drive added. Despite this being a desktop and not moving around like a laptop...HDDs are still mechanical and are more prone to failure. I'm not saying SSDs are risk-free, but pretty much only magnetic trauma or electric surge are its' enemies.

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820148348

SATA III has a reason with that drive IMO.

[cms]

Thunderg0d, on 14 June 2010 - 07:44 PM, said:

I know the price of this is fucking shit...but look at the speeds of a single drive....Raid 0 would require the 4-5 drives to make that happen. Problem with that is data corruption chances goes up close to exponentially with each drive added. Despite this being a desktop and not moving around like a laptop...HDDs are still mechanical and are more prone to failure. I'm not saying SSDs are risk-free, but pretty much only magnetic trauma or electric surge are its' enemies.

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820148348

SATA III has a reason with that drive IMO.

lol you posted before I finished editing my above post


I still dont understand how 300mb/s translates into 6gb/s, unless it is a byte vs bit thing.

*edit* answered my own question, it is a bit vs byte thing.

thus 3gb/s = 300MB
and 6gb/s = 600MB

Thinking back I probably did the time conversion wrong. it would take much longer to transfer 1TB of data.... simple fix, just times the time by 10.

This post has been edited by cms: 14 June 2010 - 07:04 PM

[Thunderg0d]

Transfer rates are always fucked up. They typically go by 1000 rule vs the 1024 for Drive storage. Also mb is megabytes...6gb is gigabits...so go by 6000 and divide by 8. They aren't able to utilize the pipe to even 1/2 way yet, but it is an improvement over SATA II and begs that SATA III was actually needed for either party to be able to realize improved speeds.

Got to play with some super high end drives that do like 80-90k IOPS that were closer to $500/GB, and they are pretty freaking sweet, just obviously only for enterprise segments for now.

This post has been edited by Thunderg0d: 14 June 2010 - 07:03 PM

[cms]

Im so jealous of Enterprises, why do they always get the good crap

Some NASA desktops have dual xeons and I even saw one with a Nehalem EX "Octo"-Core

[Thunderg0d]

cms, on 14 June 2010 - 08:09 PM, said:

Im so jealous of Enterprises, why do they always get the good crap

Some NASA desktops have dual xeons and I even saw one with a Nehalem EX "Octo"-Core

That's cause NASA took a 40 yr old design (The Capsule) and tried to pawn it off as something worth replacing the shuttle with...silly little engineers, we know these marketing tricks!

[cms]

Thunderg0d, on 14 June 2010 - 08:11 PM, said:

That's cause NASA took a 40 yr old design (The Capsule) and tried to pawn it off as something worth replacing the shuttle with...silly little engineers, we know these marketing tricks!

I know it was a rhetorical statement though it's an interesting discussion.

The shuttle itself is a 30 yr old design, and it cant leave earth's orbit for very long. Its fragile as Styrofoam. Capsules are really the only inexpensive structure that we can use to get to places like the moon.


The shuttle is not going away, they replaced it with the X-37B, which is a ship I cant tell you what its being used for even if I did know.

other than that we have reasonable semi heavy lifters (delta II/IV, Atlas V and the new falcon 9 which blew up over australia last week) Joy right? I laughed so hard at the youtube vids crying ALIENS!!! = http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

Blame Obama for ruining our plans to build the Ares V which would easily put a semi truck into space.

This post has been edited by cms: 14 June 2010 - 07:33 PM

[madhatter256]

It's like Im reading old TerranUp posts that are long as John Grisham novels but they don't make any sense and my IQ drops from reading his posts...

I'm mad.

[ibfreeekout]

madhatter256, on 14 June 2010 - 08:59 PM, said:

It's like Im reading old TerranUp posts that are long as John Grisham novels but they don't make any sense and my IQ drops from reading his posts...

I'm mad.

I'll second this post, except I never read any of TNup's older posts, since I've only been at the school for a year.... I guess it just proves that IB students love to get into arguments even if they are outmatched in nearly every way... sounds familiar.

[TerranUp16]

ibfreeekout, on 14 June 2010 - 09:10 PM, said:

I'll second this post, except I never read any of TNup's older posts, since I've only been at the school for a year.... I guess it just proves that IB students love to get into arguments even if they are outmatched in nearly every way... sounds familiar.

Except I was never in IB AP

[madhatter256]

You know what normal people call these? *edited*

This post has been edited by madhatter256: 14 June 2010 - 09:29 PM

[Thunderg0d]

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16820227543 Decent drive at a "decent" price for an SSD of that size/performance.

[cyb.tachyon]

Hey guys, try to stay on topic here. I know some admin was deleting posts, sorry, we're not supposed to do that unless it's an obvious double post or it violates the UCF Golden rule. Again, my apologies.

A bunch of the posts were off topic: so I moved them here: http://www.lanknight...5543-lol-u-mad/

• -staff

cms, consumer grade hard drives are definitely bottlenecks. Unless you spent an exuberant amount of money on your system, the average modern PC will always bottleneck on loading data from the hard disk. That's just what people were 'WTFing' about.

[Brain?!]

cyb.tachyon, on 15 June 2010 - 02:07 PM, said:

Hey guys, try to stay on topic here. I know some admin was deleting posts, sorry, we're not supposed to do that unless it's an obvious double post or it violates the UCF Golden rule. Again, my apologies.

A bunch of the posts were off topic: so I moved them here: http://www.lanknight...5543-lol-u-mad/

• -staff

cms, consumer grade hard drives are definitely bottlenecks. Unless you spent an exuberant amount of money on your system, the average modern PC will always bottleneck on loading data from the hard disk. That's just what people were 'WTFing' about.

DON'T WORRY, THE POSTS WEREN'T DELETED! They were just moved! I put them back because I'm not a massive tool like this "mysterious admin" seems to be. DOCTOR TO THE RESCUE!

Edit: Just FYI, the posts even got their own shiny new thread! It's over here: http://www.lanknight...at-gamma-moved/

This post has been edited by Brain?!: 15 June 2010 - 01:11 PM

[Oen386]

Brain?!, on 15 June 2010 - 02:09 PM, said:

DON'T WORRY, THE POSTS WEREN'T DELETED! They were just moved! I put them back because I'm not a massive tool like this "mysterious admin" seems to be. DOCTOR TO THE RESCUE!

I guess I don't see the reason for deleting posts. I mean if someone is clearly wrong, and has been proven so, it only makes sense to show why they are wrong and discredit their posts so that the whole club doesn't come off looking like a bunch of idiots because one fanatic keeps posting incorrect stuff understand the assumption he/she knows best.

This post has been edited by Oen386: 15 June 2010 - 01:13 PM

[cms]

cyb.tachyon, on 15 June 2010 - 02:07 PM, said:

cms, consumer grade hard drives are definitely bottlenecks. Unless you spent an exuberant amount of money on your system, the average modern PC will always bottleneck on loading data from the hard disk. That's just what people were 'WTFing' about.

Makes sense

I understand that transferring data from harddisk to ram (launching programs) is dictated by the speed of the harddisk.

It takes days to compile a wire mesh on a 3d object which is solely CPU-RAM intensive. (thus would explain my bias on what is/is not a bottleneck.)

Examples that arnt bottlenecked by how fast a hardrive is:
Games (after the loading screen)
Rendering Videos
Rendering 3D models
Any microsoft Office program (except maybe Microsoft Access)

Examples that are bottlnecked by hardrive:
Booting windows (or any other OS)
Launching Programs
Browsing the web

This post has been edited by cms: 15 June 2010 - 02:09 PM

[TerranUp16]

cms, on 15 June 2010 - 03:03 PM, said:

Examples that arnt bottlenecked by how fast a hardrive is:
Games (after the loading screen)

Not entirely true, and this is 99% the reason why ib had so many issues with Flight Simulator X. Any game that streams levels/terrain/etc during gameplay while only leveraging an initial load screen is likely going to be bound to some degree by the hard drive (unless you have 8+GB of RAM AND the game is SMART about using that potential to its advantage- most games aren't smart with this).

[cms]

ah ok,

so it is not smart programs tha is the problem (lol jking)

[TerranUp16]

Really it's consoles that are the problem Ever since consoles started using streaming levels it's kinda been, "Yeah we've got like no RAM here so uh... we need to load from the disc or HDD so we should just always plan on that" which is... dur dumb and doesn't work on PC (hell, doesn't work on consoles, but lolframerates for consoles).