| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Comments:
<0> :p
<1> with my 3.0ghz p4 and my 3.4ghz p4, i notice minimum benefits
<0> figured
<2> Depends upon the processor.
<0> yeah
<0> its pentium 740 or 750 :p
<2> Oh, probly wount make a **** of a differnce.
<0> figures
<0> better display it is
<0> its only a 14.1" screen tho
<2> Arn't they normaly not 4:3?
<1> Widescreen resolutions can be a bit confusing at times. The industry standard way of talking about resolutions is to use acronyms for a particular resolution - for example, 640x480 is called VGA. The acronyms stem from the graphics adaptors that were capable of supporting a particular resolution early in the history of PC's. VGA stands for Video Graphics Array, coined by IBM when they were PC's. XGA (1024x768) stands for eXtended Graphics Arra
<0> 1400 x 1050
<1> A widescreen resolution simply adds a W prefix to the industry acronym. The biggest problem is when non-standard resolutions falsely use the industry acronym. There isn't an awful lot that anyone can do about that, though, so it's just more or less just a case of getting used to being confused.
<0> it is 4:3
<3> does using raid really increase speed?
<2> Depends.
<2> What RAID type?
<3> the one you can do with 2 harddrives
<0> diditric, that's EVERY kind
<4> 0 raid
<0> well...
<1> raid 0 yes
<1> raid 1 no
<0> oh man! the basic screen is 1024x768, if I had known that there'd be no question about the screen
<2> I would not use a RAID0 for a drive that contained any thing that you value.
<3> hoe why not
<2> Hard drives are not _that_ reliable. And now that you're in an instance where if one fails, all the data goes, you're chances of pulling the short straw have gone up.
<2> But yes, you should get a near 2 fold increase over a single drive when using RAID0.
<3> does using raid decrase the life expectancy?
<2> My 2x250gb Seagate 7200.8 RAID0 gets over 100mb/s.
<2> No, but if one drive goes, all of the data is gone.
<5> Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 250GB 3.5" SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive - OEM
<5> whats that mean?
<2> There is no parity.
<2> AMDMan what part of it?
<5> 250gigs or 3.0
<3> Hoe`` what do you get without using raid0
<2> It's 2500gb.
<5> wow
<5> whats SATA 3.0Gb/s mean?
<3> can i get 10 gig raid capable drives
<2> diditric: You'd get 2 seperate volumes, but if one drive goes, only the data on that drive goes.
<2> You really should read up on the subject.
<2> AMDMan: Market babble. I ***ume thearetical speeds from the interface.
<3> hoe but what bandwidth do you get if you don't use raid0
<1> same
<2> It changes depending upon the drive. My drives could normaly pull about 55mb/s. In a RAID0, I get just over 100mb/s.
<3> i don't understand how can using raid0 double the speed?
<2> Because you need to use two drives.
<1> diditric: two drives write data at the same time
<2> It "stripes" data across them.
<1> diditric: part of the file is written on one drive, the other on the other drive (striping)
<3> if i use 2 modem: can i double my speed?
<2> Technicaly, yes.
<1> diditric: heh, if you have two different connections it may be possible
<3> i want to double my dial-up model speed
<2> The problem being that the protocols, and many many other factors, wount work out so nicely.
<3> modem*
<1> you;d have to have another phoneline and ud have to have two accounts
<3> eneergy i see
<2> Can we throw this conversation into the garbage can and chalk it up to bad luck?
<2> You need to google this stuff. There's many well structured (as well as extremely incorrect) stuff out there about RAID as is.
<3> where can i get sataII 3.0Gb/s controller card
<1> sonic
<1> newegg.com probably has them
<3> is SATAII pointless?
<1> some say it is
<1> i've noticed on newegg sataII is usually cheaper
<2> nidO has a whole SATAII rant. If you're lucky, my words will summon him.
<3> why is interface getting faster but Harddrive not getting faster
<2> They are getting faster.
<3> 7200 existed 5 years ago
<2> Seagate's up to... a 166gb disk density?
<2> Yes? 5 years ago 15k rpm drives existed.
<1> ide is uber slow compared to sata
<1> 7200
<3> then how come optical drives don't use sata
<2> Some do. Hopefuly it gets the market saturation soon that it has with hard drives.
<3> or how come flash doesn't use sata
<1> hmm
<2> Flash? Don't most flash drives work through a usb interface?
<1> usb 2.0 is 60megs/sec
<3> does flash even do 60Meg/s
<6> omg my PC is sO oldddd
<3> free how old
<6> what is the best cpu for encoding?
<3> can you do raid with IDE drives?
<3> free2b encoding what
<1> an x2 probably
<6> i think you have to but a pci raid controller or something
<6> ecoding like video files
<7> how much are you talking about spending
<1> yeah x2
<6> why an x2 exactly
<3> free2b why encode? just leave it
<7> the answer usually revolves around x2 with pretty much anything
<1> its dual core and it outperforms intel's dual core
<7> :P
<1> hehe
<1> x2 is the best cpu right now
<1> so the best will be x2 almost all the time
<1> opteron dual cores are good as well
<6> how about a mid range cpu, which is the best buy for encoding
<3> i rather have dual CPU than x2
<1> single core... pentium 4 3.8ghz
<1> well
<3> i rather have dual single-core CPU than x2
<6> i don't think dual cores have major benefits yet
<1> yeah, most ppl's motherboards only has 1 cpu slot though
<6> i think you should wait until vista
<3> actually what is the difference between dual singlecore CPU and dualcore cpu
<7> you're talking about encoding, and think dual cores dont have benefits?
<1> heh
<6> i mean in general
<1> the 3800+ x2 is 282$ right now
<7> 241 at dell, today
<7> get one
<1> whatever
<3> dualcore seem pointless, just get dual cpu
<1> 2 41
<7> its always people who dont have one who say they "seem useless"
<1> diditric: dual cpu is for a server motherboard
<6> 90% of the software out there isn't optamized for dual core
<1> free2b: encoding software is though
<3> free2b what about dual cpu?
<1> uhh
<1> diditric: thats the same thing
<1> it's multithreaded
<3> then what is the point of dualcore
<6> dual cpu is 2 actual cpus
<3> just use dual-cpu
<1> ffs diditric: dual cpu motherboards are server motherboards
<7> its a more expensive prospect
<2> Erm, for one, you're talking about a whole nother world of **** when you talk dual cpus. You can't just dual cpu any thing.
<3> EneergE, there is no rule that you can only buy non-server motherboards
<2> And XP home wount support SMP.
<2> diditric: Have fun wth ECC Registered ram prices.
<6> dual core dual cpus! wooT
<3> Hoe`` does winxp home support dualcore?
<1> hoe: yah there ya go
<1> ECC ram is slower and also more expensive
<2> XP home works with single processors, dual core included.
<1> only with the latest service pack
<3> how is it possible that xphome support dualcore but not dual-cpus
<6> does XPhome recognize ht cpus?
<2> And I hope you need PCI-X, because you'll get it.
<1> sp2 does
<2> diditric: Microsoft's lisen
<2> ing terms.
<1> if you have less than service pack 2.. ht, dualcore, dual cpu will not function properly
Return to
#hardware
or
Go to some related
logs:
#winxp
#flash
#stocks
#politics
#networking
#windowsxp
xtor pet
#iptables
#mirc
#computers
|
|