Actually more than just consumer. And Intel will most likely block ECC support on purpose again on this platform? Do you expect that to happen? Will Intel require Xeon's again for that?
Thats the only reason they can sell 18C now whiout killing Xeon sales.
Typical Intel
there was zero point in a Xeon,
I sure loved the interchangeability of consumer and Xeon CPU's in socket 775, 1366 and 2011. If they make those separate now, I may have to go other places for my CPU's.
Not sure why you're upset. It's still typical Intel.
thats worse than tipical Intel actually.
its for PROsumer, not your standard L33t gamer RGB maniac, data redundancy is a must have feature, especially now that TLC ssd taking hold in ssd market (never have and will never ever consider TLC with its sub-par reliability), so in the even that i can't purchase MLC SSD i can at least raid 1, the drive.
and lack of raid 1 option in NVME is what holding me out to move out from sata interface.
RAID1 isn't a backup.
What exactly is the benefit of having RAID 1? RAID1 isn't a backup. If you have a spare ssd and proper backup and restore procedure in place, it will take maybe 2 hrs at worst to be up and running again. If that is not acceptable, then obviously you need to pay up because whatever you do with the workstation is worth the $100 bucks.
I wonder if threadripper will support raided m.2?
I wouldn't want Phi as my main CPU. But I'd happily pick SKL-X just because it has AVX-512 (at least provided it's not slower than AVX2).Who the fuck cares about AVX-512? If you do, there is no discussion needed and you should probably buy Xeon Phi anyway in that case.
I'm reading and hearing rumors that socket 2066 was designed for 10 cores max and in order for clock speed (or other compatibility issues) to be higher on 14,16 and 18 core CPU's, Intel will need to release a socket 2066 V2 to accompany the higher core count chips. This would mean all the X299 boards won't support more than 10 cores. I'll provide the link below. It makes sense to me. Try running a 16 or 18 core skylake with an all core OC of 4.3-4.5ghz with board power delivery designed for 160w. Could you? A board designed for 200 watts like the link below suggests makes more sense.
This would line up with Intel rushing out a hasty announcement of more than 10 core variants even though they designed their board for 10 cores max. Hmm. IF this is true, and I do mean a titanic IF, then Intel will suffer terribly because of this. Imagine all those people buying a fancy, ultra expensive X299 board only to learn, either before hand or after, that they can't upgrade to the higher core count chips. Oh god another socket. Disaster would follow.
http://www.bitsandchips.it/52-engli...commercialize-a-v2-edition-of-the-socket-2066
Well, the last Raid 1 I remember having was from an nforce2 Socket A and it was a mirror of drive c to e. And the second disk (e) was an exact copy IIRC. It was a long time ago though. I don't remember outright booting from it but know it had everything drive C did that was important. That's the last time I did Raid 1 though.
Yes it's a copy but if your house burns down you lose both copies. hence not a backup.
I'm reading and hearing rumors that socket 2066 was designed for 10 cores max and in order for clock speed (or other compatibility issues) to be higher on 14,16 and 18 core CPU's, Intel will need to release a socket 2066 V2 to accompany the higher core count chips.
Tom's Hardware said:We know that the 18-core model has a 165W TDP, but await further details on the remainder of the SKUs.
a copy is a definition of back up, and by your description its not a back up unless it was offsite back up??
No it's not. Your files on your RAID1 get hit by Cryptolocker. What do you do? Oh, right, you can't do anything because you don't have backups, just RAID1.
a copy is a definition of back up, and by your description its not a back up unless it was offsite back up??
RAID is never a backup, it's for availability or speed (RAID 0). Fire is extreme. But could be local fire just in your case or electrical damage due to a surge like from a thunderstorm or you spilling a drink over you PC. Here a simple external drive would already be superior.If you accidentally delete a file, it will instantly be removed from both mirrored copies.
If your disk is corrupted by a software bug or virus, the corruption will be done to both mirrored copies simultaneously.
If you're hit by a bad enough power surge, it'll probably fry both disks at the same time.
If someone breaks into your house, they'll steal the box that holds both disks.
If your house gets flooded or burned, both disks will be ruined.
So, Anywho - Intel seems to have put itself in an odd position by introducing Kaby-X and SKX HCC dies into the HEDT equation here. I don't know what is going on (aside from 'artificial' segmentation) - maybe a good chunk of it is poor messaging (per Linus, even system integrators are frustrated). So, I hope Intel clears thing up better by the SKX release date. Having something as awesome on the platform as VROK and then limiting it to only RAID 0 is just going to aggravate people who are spending big $$s on the x299 HEDT platform. I think Intel should at least off RAID 1 at no extra charge (that probably 95% of potential users needs).
so what is the purpose of this X299 platform if they lock basic raid function ?? i mean this is not mainstream platform, that majority use only for gaming.
i mean even RAID 1 is locked, its very important for me, because i want to use it as database server, and data redundancy, is quite important.
I'm still can't believe it that intel can be this stupid.
You're right. But still can't believe Intel wouldn't allow motherboard makers to offer ECC support instead of Intel outright blocking it unless they trully worry about their Xeon sales. At least AMD doesn't outright artificially block it, even on a non-server platform.