Viper96720
Diamond Member
- Jul 15, 2002
- 4,390
- 0
- 0
Why not get a motherboard with support for lot's of memory. Then use a ramdrive. Asus SK8V and other opteron boards has 8GB support. 1GB for OS and stuff and 7GB for a ramdrive.
Originally posted by: Viper96720
Why not get a motherboard with support for lot's of memory. Then use a ramdrive. Asus SK8V and other opteron boards has 8GB support. 1GB for OS and stuff and 7GB for a ramdrive.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Damn, would that ever boot fast.
Originally posted by: knouri
What do you need a solid state drive for?
You sound like Intel.
Originally posted by: sharq
hehe good point. What does a home user need a 64bit processor for? That is for right now, I'm sure 64bit cpu's will become the standard at one point when the limits of a 32bit cpu are reached, or 64bit one's just become cheap (whichever comes first). I'm guessing years back if anyone said they were getting a 64bit comp for their home use people would have said it was a waste of money, not sure how many are saying that now. Maybe it's cause they're more affordable now?
Those of you saying that a company wouldn't make something that would last a long time, look at cpu's. Take the 486 for example. A friend of mine has a 486 box that is 10years old at the least, it's working great for him as a firewall. The only reason these got outdated was cause the manufacturers came out with something better and faster.
Originally posted by: AIWGuru
Originally posted by: sharq
hehe good point. What does a home user need a 64bit processor for? That is for right now, I'm sure 64bit cpu's will become the standard at one point when the limits of a 32bit cpu are reached, or 64bit one's just become cheap (whichever comes first). I'm guessing years back if anyone said they were getting a 64bit comp for their home use people would have said it was a waste of money, not sure how many are saying that now. Maybe it's cause they're more affordable now?
Those of you saying that a company wouldn't make something that would last a long time, look at cpu's. Take the 486 for example. A friend of mine has a 486 box that is 10years old at the least, it's working great for him as a firewall. The only reason these got outdated was cause the manufacturers came out with something better and faster.
We've seen that x86-64 offers many performance advantages in a lot of different desktop apps.
It costs nearly nothing in terms of die space to implement. Your arguement is that because 32bit procs haven't maxed out we should just ignore this performance enhancing feature? Okay, then no more SSE since 32 bit procs can still get faster without it...no more extra L2 cache...processors can still get faster without it...
Please.
I'm not going to be buying one, of course the price is absolutely insane at the moment.
However, in 5-7 years it just might make headway, I see no reason to dismiss the technology out of hand just because it's expensive at the moment.
Originally posted by: AIWGuru
We've seen that x86-64 offers many performance advantages in a lot of different desktop apps.
It costs nearly nothing in terms of die space to implement. Your arguement is that because 32bit procs haven't maxed out we should just ignore this performance enhancing feature? Okay, then no more SSE since 32 bit procs can still get faster without it...no more extra L2 cache...processors can still get faster without it...
Please.
The reason current hard drives aren't rated for 50 year use is because nobody needs it.
But if current HDDs could be rated for even 20 years, you'll bet that that would be a great selling point for servers and data storages.
It would be a great selling point for reliability reasons. Of course any drive would be totally obsolete before 20 years but it's good to know that the drive is unlikely to die at, say, 4 years.I doubt it. Any network admin who knows anything about technology knows, a HD in 20 years will be worthless. Think about a 1984 HD.
Originally posted by: zephyrprime
It would be a great selling point for reliability reasons. Of course any drive would be totally obsolete before 20 years but it's good to know that the drive is unlikely to die at, say, 4 years.I doubt it. Any network admin who knows anything about technology knows, a HD in 20 years will be worthless. Think about a 1984 HD.
Originally posted by: CQuinn
For reliability reasons, you could:
buy 21 WD Raptor drives
Set 2 drives up in the system as a Raid 1 array - with an extra drive in a removable bay to be attached once a
week as an offsite backup.
Swap the 2 "working" drives out every 2 years with two "fresh" drives from your original purchase set to improve
your chances of them lasting (store the rest in a cool, dry place until needed).
And you'd have a cheaper storage solution that would last over 20 years. Of course, the server you build them
in would be obsolete long before you run out of drives.
Originally posted by: JackBurton
I'll take two for a RAID-0 setup.
Originally posted by: Joeyman
drool............with HD as the primary system bottleneck this would make any system fly. Just gotta win the lottery now.
Hey Anand, you should try to get your hands on one of these drives to review. More public exposure to this tech would drive the costs down faster.