GPUs & CPUs & Enthusiast hardware: Questions, Discussion and fanboy slap-fights - Nvidia & AMD & Intel - Separe but Equal. Intel rides in the back of the bus.

geckogoy said:
AM5 motherboards have really been eating it, IDK if they niggerified the PCB design department industry wide or what, I am on my second mini-itx board and this one at least boots reliably but the wifi card is dead (turns out its a very common issue for the ASRock AM5 (there is only one mini-itx ASRock board))

(first was in fact a gigabyte)
Click to expand...
Umm, akshully there's more than one mITX from Asrock.
B650E PG-ITX WiFi
B650I Lightning WiFi
A620I Lightning WiFi
 
geckogoy said:
Seems legit tbh, I was honestly just kindof concerned since a lot of raid controllers use a proprietary raid array that isn't always recoverable if the card dies, and then was a bit dubious of the whole '5 euro sas controller lmao'. To be honest I think I was being a little needlessly rude about it
Click to expand...
I'm just using JBOD mode to a mergerfs pool, so hopefully it doesn't matter what the raid controller is. I'd like to try flashing this one to IT mode so I don't have to deal with option ROMs and such.
 
The Ugly One said:
Designing complex systems is hard. The design flaw that Meltdown exploits was created in the 1990s. The Meltdown vulnerability wasn't discovered until 2017.

Intel's not the only chip maker that had these vulnerabilities, either, just the most prominent. AMD had some issues with Spectre, but not Meltdown.
Click to expand...
I mean I can see where that can happen, especially over decades. You just don't think about the vulnerability and it grows over time, because you're just trying to get the chip to work at all
 
WelperHelper99 said:
I mean I can see where that can happen, especially over decades. You just don't think about the vulnerability and it grows over time, because you're just trying to get the chip to work at all
Click to expand...

It's more that you have a system with literally billions of interlinked parts, and this makes it extremely hard to predict every possible way it can be broken.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: WelperHelper99 and Vyse Inglebard
The Ugly One said:
It's more that you have a system with literally billions of interlinked parts, and this makes it extremely hard to predict every possible way it can be broken.
Click to expand...
Literally billions in the case of a chip. And Intel does not like to keep things simple, just look at their hybrid cores. Even if the Meltdown issue was before that, it might have only became a real problem when they started experimenting, hense it was discovered at all in the first place.
 
WelperHelper99 said:
Literally billions in the case of a chip. And Intel does not like to keep things simple, just look at their hybrid cores. Even if the Meltdown issue was before that, it might have only became a real problem when they started experimenting, hense it was discovered at all in the first place.
Click to expand...

Nobody keeps things simple, because otherwise, your processor will be painfully slow. The reason is that executing computer code as written, in the most naively simple way, would result in your processor spending most of its time waiting for data. This complex voodoo allows a CPU to, in practice, execute more instructions per clock cycle. Processors from the 80s might average one instruction per every two cycles. More modern CPUs can easily hit two or more instructions per cycle due to all this fancy technology.

In other words, if you could somehow run a 386 at 4 GHz, it would be about 1/4 as fast as a single modern core from AMD or Intel.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Kane Lives, N Space, George Lucas and 1 other person
The Ugly One said:
In other words, if you could somehow run a 386 at 4 GHz, it would be about 1/4 as fast as a single modern core from AMD or Intel.
Click to expand...
1/8th if you're doing floating point, because of the floating point bug forcing compiler workarounds that halve FPU performance.
 
Less nerd speak is needed for us dumber folk.

Currently rocking a NZXT H440 case for my NAS build. Big beautiful bitch, but only has space for 5 3.5" HDDs and 2 2.5" (worthless). Wanted the Fractal Design 804 node because cube and 8 (!!) 3.5" bays, but couldn't justify the $135-160 shipped cost for one.

Randomly checked my Amazon wishlist this morning and BAM, 11 of those bitches in stock, sold by Amazon with Prime, for $72. Throwing in two be Quiet 140s I just bought in to it, too if I can. I'll just need a SATA power splitter to run 4 additional drives and I'm golden.

Also picked up 16GB of RAM on eBay for it for a total of 24GB, even though it wasn't even utilizing barely any of the original 8 to begin with.
 
You're MDNWU said:
Less nerd speak is needed for us dumber folk.

Currently rocking a NZXT H440 case for my NAS build. Big beautiful bitch, but only has space for 5 3.5" HDDs and 2 2.5" (worthless). Wanted the Fractal Design 804 node because cube and 8 (!!) 3.5" bays, but couldn't justify the $135-160 shipped cost for one.

Randomly checked my Amazon wishlist this morning and BAM, 11 of those bitches in stock, sold by Amazon with Prime, for $72. Throwing in two be Quiet 140s I just bought in to it, too if I can. I'll just need a SATA power splitter to run 4 additional drives and I'm golden.

Also picked up 16GB of RAM on eBay for it for a total of 24GB, even though it wasn't even utilizing barely any of the original 8 to begin with.
Click to expand...
Soon you'll be one of us and figuring out where you can get a surplus Sun x4500 case with 48 drive slots.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Betonhaus
Found out the V3000+ can do 16 if you buy Lian Li's hotswap HDD holders.

Still debating if I want to throw a mini itx in it and run all my drives on a 2nd computer since the case supports dual systems.
 
davids877 said:
Soon you'll be one of us and figuring out where you can get a surplus Sun x4500 case with 48 drive slots.
Click to expand...
At that point you might as well just get a half rack and invest in blade servers and storage solutions.
 
Betonhaus said:
At that point you might as well just get a half rack and invest in blade servers and storage solutions.
Click to expand...
Blade chassis aren't for storage, they're for compute, geez don't you people know anything?
 
davids877 said:
Blade chassis aren't for storage, they're for compute, geez don't you people know anything?
Click to expand...
You can get several storage blades and hook them to your server. That's why many raid cards have external ports, right?
 
Betonhaus said:
You can get several storage blades and hook them to your server. That's why many raid cards have external ports, right?
Click to expand...
Not called blades. Just called arrays or enclosures. Blades are a specific type of compute where you have a multi-u chassis with a bunch of boards inside them, mostly fallen out of favor these days it seems to me.

What you're talking about is basically this: 2 controllers(NAS) and all the storage enclosures.
ptWmLP8.jpeg
Of course, these days that's probably like 2 enclosures with modern drive sizes and not 2 racks.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Vecr and You're MDNWU
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back