Login to Account Create an Account
New rig and some questions
Posted 20 June 2013 - 07:28 PM
When you OC a "K" labeled CPU, you do that with the multiplier of the CPU, so you would set it to 46x (100MHz) for example (34x stock).
Posted 21 June 2013 - 09:09 AM
Better (newer) board, better (newer) CPU, different socket, same basic RAM specs.
Do you read these?
Hmm... still shows ALL "recommended" as "(O.C.)" beyond DDR3-1600.
And their recommended supported is rather more limited for the "(O.C.)" as compared to the OTHER one.
So, there ya go even with a MoBo decision change. Same-old same-old...
The assertions still stand, even though I missed the flip-over.
I highly recommend you follow the Manufacturer's (Asus) suggested supported associated hardware.
Be happy and OC away. Pick one Mobo or the other. Again, your cash, your choice.
edit (side note) - puntoMX is also steering you in the right direction.Heed the suggestions. Funny how you disrespect me, but it doesn't matter. I tried...
Edited by submix8c, 21 June 2013 - 09:14 AM.
Someday the tyrants will be unthroned... Jason "Jay" Chasteen; RIP, bro!
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:24 AM
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:39 PM
Will pick the best ram I find for my budget, my target being 2x4Gb 1866Mhz CL9 1.5V. Whatever (no crap) brand I find.
Posted 22 June 2013 - 10:55 AM
2 Good sets:
G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900)
G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)
and one of it's best for it's price: CORSAIR DOMINATOR GT 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (only if you really want to play with high clock speeds on the RAM, best RAM I ever played with).
Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:09 AM
Pagefile with SSD is kind of a problem. You don't want the pagefile on the SSD because you don't want the read/write wear on the SSD that would cause, but you also almost always need some kind of pagefile, as you have stated. So I would think that the best solution would be to use as much memory in your system that your motherboard, OS, and wallet can fit to minimize the need for any pagefile, and put a small pagefile on the fastest spinning HDD in your system.
well if you have a SSD put your main pagefile as "fixed size" in your mechanical HDD, a small one on your SSD (it's sometimes needed) and live with it. Scratch file goes to HDD or RAMdisk (out of ram) if you will.
Well for you guys worried about pagefile on SSD, I by chance stumbled over a trustful link explaining it, I was already convinced but hopefully you now too.
Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs?
Yes. Most pagefile operations are small random reads or larger sequential writes, both of which are types of operations that SSDs handle well.
In looking at telemetry data from thousands of traces and focusing on pagefile reads and writes, we find that
* Pagefile.sys reads outnumber pagefile.sys writes by about 40 to 1,
* Pagefile.sys read sizes are typically quite small, with 67% less than or equal to 4 KB, and 88% less than 16 KB.
* Pagefile.sys writes are relatively large, with 62% greater than or equal to 128 KB and 45% being exactly 1 MB in size.
In fact, given typical pagefile reference patterns and the favorable performance characteristics SSDs have on those patterns, there are few files better than the pagefile to place on an SSD.
I also read from this kind of trustful webs that you should place at least one pagefile on your OS drive, even if your main pagefile is on D: or E:, because data blocks will be kept on same drive/partition. My thought is that (as explained above) only small amounts of information is normally needed by OS, so set a small fixed pagefile on OS drive, and when your programs get really hungry then they will fallback on the bigger D: pagefile. I think this is an optimal configuration.
About SSD, I'm currently reading. I use WindowsXP which doesn't have TRIM builtin so I need to use a SSD with good "garbage collector" (GC), normally this is controller ridden. I am between 3 drives, Samsung 840 Pro, Crucial m500, and any of newer Intel's, all below 128Gb. I have more questions than answers at this stage, for example, I need to "align" the SSD, or that I can't install the mobo's Intel RST AHCI drivers (because it will override the internal SSD's controller which does the GC). Any insight on this?
Then there come's which one does the GC best, I'm not sure, I'm leaning towards the crucial m500 but a good thing on Intel is that I keep everything in line (CPU, mobo, SSD) and that it also has a "manual" tool for TRIMMING, which I might need in XP.
@puntoMX: I like all the ram sticks linked, but they are far too expensive. I don't plan to spend more than 80$ probably for them. I'm really more looking forward to understanding features than having models offered in that sense.
Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:11 AM
Posted 24 June 2013 - 06:15 AM
Desktop cases are metal, laptop screen bezels are plastic, that will be the difference. You need something sticking out the Faraday cage.
4.[...] I wonder why can't they be internal like with laptops, or maybe that is not an optimal design?
I could be wrong about this, but I think with laptops with built-in WiFi that the antenna is hidden behind the display, The old school WiFi add-in cards, for laptops without built-in WiFi, also had antennas sticking out of the card.
Cheers and Regards
Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:31 PM
I'm really not going to write anything on the SSD. Only OS, programs, and when everything is settled down, the eventual files programs write onto "programfiles" since I will set Documents&Settings to D:. I will make 2 partitions one for XPx86 another for XPx64.
The problem with the 840 Pro is that I haven't seen models with less than 120Gb
Posted 24 June 2013 - 08:26 PM
Yes, I know that the 840 Pro might work, with might meaning it might not work as well. I look forward more concise answers by people with experience with these drives (830, 840). One thing is that the Magician tool software is XP compatible, and another that Samsung sell their SSD to Vista and later. Which leaves me scratching my head...
Indeed 840 Pro smallest capacity is 128GB and SSD Magician might be able to trigger trim command even on XP (see the release notes there).
To add to the mix, this note on the release notes:
The Performance Optimization feature relies on the ATA PASS THROUGH
feature to pass the TRIM command to the SSD. This feature may be
disabled by Windows XP/2003 if your SSD is less than 137GB in size.
Microsoft provides a hot fix for this issue at
edit: What I have at last unfortunately decided is to switch XP x64 for 7 x64 in my dual boot. I need x64 for CG work, but the samsung doesn't support XP x64, by installing Win7 I also ensure to do the TRIM once in a while... my main OS will still be WinXP so well... let's live with it, XP starts to show its age (sigh : '(
Edited by Dogway, 24 June 2013 - 09:12 PM.
Posted 25 June 2013 - 01:41 AM
I will most likely make a similar move soon as some x86 apps doesn't work properly under XP x64 and i tried to only use XP x64 for a few month.
Os support (from software developper and devide manufacturer) is laking a lot nowadays and the x86 to x64 migration isn't smooth and have bad side effects.
I think you took the best decision there.
Posted 25 June 2013 - 02:25 AM
SSD TRIM command, AVX/AVX2 support, "better" multicore performance, VS2012 made software (XPx64 support dropped), dedicated CG Software (Mari,etc), and more than probably lack of drivers for new(er) systems.
it could be interesting if there are more to add. Still main use is x86, but for the eventual renders/encodings of 100% workload W7 could be a safe bet, even as much as I hated it. Linux is another option but I'm too tired to start with a new OS from scratch, I don't have that spare time, energy to dive in, but great option too.
Edited by Dogway, 25 June 2013 - 02:26 AM.
Posted 26 June 2013 - 02:45 AM
and I believe most of these applications make extensive use of a graphics card to run their heavy computations. These days, not only 3D games use a graphics card!
So I suggest to check which applications benefit from it (video encoding is nearly sure, Photoshop probably as well) and take a good graphics card.
These heavy applications are highly paralleled to take advantage of the multicore Cpu, so an i7 would be advantageous here.
Posted 26 June 2013 - 03:37 AM
About Photoshop I use CS3, that's a fine version for me and IIRC previous to all the rage with GPU acceleration which I tried and disliked so much.
I agree with you I need a GFX Card specially for CG, but I don't have that money now, I will go with the cheapest Quadro when I resume my CG works. In the same vein I am going with i5, i7 is a bit pricey, I will try to shave those 30% of increased performance HT gives you by overclocking the i5. I'm coming from a 2.0Ghz Core 2 Duo system from 2007, DDR2 RAM at 1333. Any rig I make now will feel like blazing fast, add to that that I am building a miniPC and it's ok for me not having the latest of the latest. I'm excited though haha but still need to wait a few more months for some components.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users