| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1119785751k@trad... In article writes: If you are putting a new box together today, the price of 64 bit components is not that much higher than what you would spend for a similarly high end box. Might as well get a Socket 939 MB and a cheap Athlon 64 processor. You can upgrade the processor to a socket 939 compatible dual core Athlon 64 in another 6 months when the prices come down and upgrade to XP 64 or Longhorn So you're suggesting that I might want to buy something that I'll upgrade in six months? You obviously don't know me. I occasionally make a mistake and buy something that breaks in six months, but I don't buy things that I'll have to, or even want to upgrade in six months. Think about it Mike. I upgraded to the A64 right after the ECJF you spent a couple of days helping me with. That was almost 18 months ago now, and I'm only now bringing it online as my main computer. It does the video fine and rendering is quite quick in comparison to the old computer, and mostly for audio it seems fine, however I'm having some new problems since the computer was taken offline for a few days whilst the plumbers did their job in the studio and control room. More than likely it's the fact that I've added a number of daily functions to the computer it didn't have to contend with previously, but then again, the XP1600+ recorded as many tracks as I have converters for (24) without a problem, so I have no doubt that I'll whip this one into shape too. The point being that the ability to upgrade in 6 months isn't the same thing as being necessary to upgrade in 6 months. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio in the next year of so and still be pretty cutting edge. I think it would be foolish to purchase 32 bit only hardware at this point in time given the immanent changes upon us. It depends. When I bought my PII (that I'm still using), between the CPU and memory, I saved about $200 by going with a 266 MHz system rather than the state-of-the-art 300 MHz system. I wanted to put that $200 into a larger or faster disk drive but couldn't find a 5400 RPM (at the time state-of-the-art) drive at a civilized price, so I settled for a 4 GB 4200 RPM drive. That worked just fine. I eventually upgraded to a 30 GB 5400 RPM drive (which cost about $80 at the time I bought it) but not because I needed more storage for audio, I was working on a manual with a lot of graphics and screen shots. Since it was for a piece of studio equipment, it was most practical to write it on the studio computer. By that time, I wanted to add more memory (from the original 64 MB) but slow enough memory chips were getting hard to find. When I mentioned that on this newsgroup, someone was kind enough to donate a cast-off to me. Nice that some people do upgrade their computers on a regular basis. It keeps old parts in the pipeline, as long as we don't let them get too old. g -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pooh Bear wrote in
: snip I recall when buying a Pentium 350 for a clent of old, one director asked if I shouldn't 'future proof' - lmao - it by getting the 400MHz version ! snip Graham I agree that buying a few extra MHz for "future" proofing very rarely works, though if the increment is almost free, it is probably a good idea. I've had some luck in getting extra lifetime without modification on systems I configured for my daughters by buying extra RAM, buying bigger hard drives, and care in selecting OS (specifically, _not_ buying Windows ME when that was Dell's only official option for home sales. On the phone, they were happy to sell me Windows 2000, and my daughter reports it was still working OK in her college environment this spring, while her friends with equally old Windows ME machines with less RAM were having heavy weather of it). Full disclosure--I worked for Intel most of the years between 1974 and 2004, and still own enough stock that I'll be slightly better off if each of you wastes money buying a higher speed grade. Peter A. Stoll |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:06:54 -0700, donaldjcecil
wrote: I am thinking on getting a 64-bit Intel chip. Any prerequisites I should know about? Do I need a special configuration/software/etc..I will mostly be running Reason and Cubase, and I think I will be getting an m-audio fireware sound system. 32-bit, coming 64-bit... its just fine but _the_ bottleneck in audio and video processing are still hard disks. Here, I'd opt for an U320 SCSI RAID0 set with at least 2, if not 4, fastest disks as of today, Seagate Cheetah 15K.4, Maxtor Atlas, Fujitsu{IBM} MAM series... this would give a real world 70-90 MB/s constant across platters throughput of large files and it would be really the time-saver. Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1119821019k@trad... In article writes: Think about it Mike. I upgraded to the A64 right after the ECJF you spent a couple of days helping me with. Gee, I didn't even know they had A64s back then. Shows how much I don't keep up. I'm having some new problems since the computer was taken offline for a few days whilst the plumbers did their job in the studio and control room. Maybe computers are more like mechanical beasts than we think. My VCR worked find last time I used it, maybe 8 months ago, and when I tried it last week, the capstan didn't turn. I have a pretty good cassette deck in the studio that I haven't used in a couple of years. When I tried that recently, I found that the capstan didn't turn. The cassette deck was easy - two belts had stretched to about 1-1/4 times their length and just weren't contacting the pulleys any longer. But somehow I have a feeling that if I had it in constant use, I'd have found out about it long agon. The point being that the ability to upgrade in 6 months isn't the same thing as being necessary to upgrade in 6 months. Right, but having that ability costs some money over not having it, and unless you upgrade before it becomes obsolete, you won't recover that extra cost - so there's a certain motivation to upgrade even if you don't really need it. True. Used to tell my older son to take up being a ditch digger. That way he wouldn't have to constantly upgrade his shovel! g Alas, I don't take my own advice either and it ends up taking me a couple of months to shake out the bugs and know what will and won't work with a new computer. For instance, I'm having problems on dinky little two track playback on some of my stored mixes and no problem on others. Plus I can play back multitrack recordings still stored on the computer just fine. My current thinking is it has something to do with having transferred the data over from a single drive on the old computer onto raid drives on the new computer and the interleaving of the tracks isn't the same. But then that doesn't explain the tracks that do play fine and reside on the same raid. SO, for right now, upgrading and then making the upgrade the only computer hasn't been the most successful thing I've done in audio or computers! g -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, it *is* winter here right now, but yup, my Athlon64 *really* does run
at about 25 degrees with an ambient room temp of about 18 degrees C. My Athlon XP 3200 by comparison runs about 20 degrees hotter! So there must have been some real advances in core technology between the two types of chip. Not sure what the power comsumption is, but I do remember reading that the AMDs are currently consuming far less than the P4s. Bill. "Pooh Bear" wrote in message ... Bill Ruys wrote: snip (2) AMD64 Winchester and Venice cores run cool (less than 25 degrees Celcius on a 3200+) Which must mean they've reduced power consumption to something sensible. Any idea how many watts they consume ? Surely you don't *actually* mean 25C though. Ambient temp itself can easily be more than that ! snip (5) There are quantifiable benefits in running a 64-bit DAW on a 64-bit OS with 64-bit plug-ins Which means that until such a date that happens there's no clear benefit worth having of any note. Possibly other than the new CPUs having a 'cleaner' internal design that may give them a little extra efficiency processing some ( 32 bit ) instructions. Graham |
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1119717723k@trad... Most motherboards today have SATA ports. I don't know what PCI-E or DDR2 are, and what does anyone need 4 gigabytes of RAM for (or who here even wants to spend that much money on a computer)? We're not data base mechanics, we're audio engineers. One thing to be *very careful* about when choosing a PC with serial ATA. All of the early SATA adopters ran a 3rd party SATA chip which in turn hung off the PCI bus. This was fine for office workers or game players, but for serious audio it bites. This is because SATA would totally saturate the PCI bus causing serious glitches for audio cards, particularly those of us trying to run a low latency. So the rule for audio is: Make sure SATA is supported directly from the chipset, not from a 3rd party solution internally wired to the PCI bus. Most of the current Intel chipsets are fine, as are the likes of the Nforce4 chipsets. Bill. |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bill Ruys wrote:
One thing to be *very careful* about when choosing a PC with serial ATA. All of the early SATA adopters ran a 3rd party SATA chip which in turn hung off the PCI bus. This was fine for office workers or game players, but for serious audio it bites. This is because SATA would totally saturate the PCI bus causing serious glitches for audio cards, particularly those of us trying to run a low latency. Good point. I think at least one RAP regular ended up with one of these turkeys. So the rule for audio is: Make sure SATA is supported directly from the chipset, not from a 3rd party solution internally wired to the PCI bus. Good first cut - but there seems to be more to it than that. I have a machine with a SiS chipset Athlon 32 chipset that runs SATA very poorly. This is in contrast with the SIS A64 machines that run quite well. Most of the current Intel chipsets are fine, as are the likes of the Nforce4 chipsets. IME Via has a pretty good SATA implementation in their A64 chipset, too. |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Good first cut - but there seems to be more to it than that. I have a machine with a SiS chipset Athlon 32 chipset that runs SATA very poorly. This is in contrast with the SIS A64 machines that run quite well. Most of the current Intel chipsets are fine, as are the likes of the Nforce4 chipsets. IME Via has a pretty good SATA implementation in their A64 chipset, too. Sure, I think as long as SATA is not hung off of the PCI bus, it probably doesn't matter so much who's chipset you run. And every manufacturer has jewels and lemons. My last motherboard (an Nforce2 for Athlon XP) had 3rd party SATA. I just disabled it in Cmos settings and ran with good old IDE which ran directly off the southbridge. It was totally impossible to do audio using SATA on that board. Fine if you know what you are buying, but many don't know the pitfalls. It will be interesting to see how PCI Express pans out. Right now it seems that only 16-lane PCIe video cards are available. But from what I have read, even single lane PCIe has better bandwidth than traditional PCI. Also, PCIe uses a switched topology, not unlike switched ethernet. This to me seems to be an answer to PCI bus contention which has been a real problem for audio over the years. Time will tell, I guess. Bill. |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter A. Stoll wrote:
Full disclosure--I worked for Intel most of the years between 1974 and 2004, and still own enough stock that I'll be slightly better off if each of you wastes money buying a higher speed grade. Wouldn't you be still better off if each one of us bought a bunch of appliances with 8048s in them? --scptt -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
Bill Ruys wrote: One thing to be *very careful* about when choosing a PC with serial ATA. All of the early SATA adopters ran a 3rd party SATA chip which in turn hung off the PCI bus. This was fine for office workers or game players, but for serious audio it bites. This is because SATA would totally saturate the PCI bus causing serious glitches for audio cards, particularly those of us trying to run a low latency. Good point. I think at least one RAP regular ended up with one of these turkeys. So the rule for audio is: Make sure SATA is supported directly from the chipset, not from a 3rd party solution internally wired to the PCI bus. Good first cut - but there seems to be more to it than that. I have a machine with a SiS chipset Athlon 32 chipset that runs SATA very poorly. This is in contrast with the SIS A64 machines that run quite well. Most of the current Intel chipsets are fine, as are the likes of the Nforce4 chipsets. IME Via has a pretty good SATA implementation in their A64 chipset, too. Do you know about SATA implementation on the ASUS A8V-E Deluxe? The chipset listed for the product is VIA K8T890 and VIA VT8237R. |
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bill Ruys wrote:
Sure, I think as long as SATA is not hung off of the PCI bus, it probably doesn't matter so much who's chipset you run. And every manufacturer has jewels and lemons. My last motherboard (an Nforce2 for Athlon XP) had 3rd party SATA. I just disabled it in Cmos settings and ran with good old IDE which ran directly off the southbridge. It was totally impossible to do audio using SATA on that board. Fine if you know what you are buying, but many don't know the pitfalls. In contrast the current NForce4 chipset seems to do things right. It will be interesting to see how PCI Express pans out. Right now it seems that only 16-lane PCIe video cards are available. But from what I have read, even single lane PCIe has better bandwidth than traditional PCI. Yeah, but traditional PCI has been passe' for video for years. Not that it isn't good enough for audio. Also, PCIe uses a switched topology, not unlike switched ethernet. This to me seems to be an answer to PCI bus contention which has been a real problem for audio over the years. Time will tell, I guess. My first NForce4 system seems to move along quite smartly, even with just an A64-3000. |
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
donaldjcecil wrote:
Do you know about SATA implementation on the ASUS A8V-E Deluxe? The chipset listed for the product is VIA K8T890 and VIA VT8237R. http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/ch...series/k8t890/ looks pretty good on paper! ;-) |
|
#61
|
|||
|
|||
|
"donaldjcecil" wrote in message
news:yaTve.6816$ro.6087@fed1read02... Do you know about SATA implementation on the ASUS A8V-E Deluxe? The chipset listed for the product is VIA K8T890 and VIA VT8237R. SATA is supported from the VT8237R southbridge on that board. That *should* be OK, but I personally don't have a lot of experience with that particular chipset. Mr Krueger sounds like he knows a lot more that I do regarding the Via chipsets, so I'll let him chime in... Bill. |
|
#62
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Yeah, but traditional PCI has been passe' for video for years. Not that it isn't good enough for audio. Very true. PCI video was a curse - thank goodness AGP came along. Audio is of course low bandwidth and so is no big deal for PCI. But that's not the problem - it's what is co-existing on the bus. Even an 802.54g wireless network card sitting on the same bus can upset audio. I don't know why, but 54g cards (most all of them use broadcom chipsets) seem to generate intermittent bursts of data on the bus. Just enough to cause a crackle if you are trying to run low latency. And forget about sharing a PCI bus with a Gigabit NIC or anything else that generates high traffic. This is where I think PCIe will be better, as each set of PCIe lanes are not shared. My first NForce4 system seems to move along quite smartly, even with just an A64-3000. Agreed. I have just recently built a Socket 939 A64-3200 based on the NForce4. It looks like it will be one of the best chipsets yet for audio. Bill. |
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#64
|
|||
|
|||
|
If it's had 5 new handles and 3 new heads, then don't you see that you no
longer have your grandfather's axe? -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1119806721k@trad... In article writes: Incidentally I have a old 486 sitting next to me. It started life as a 33Mhz and worked up via 66 and 100MHz over a period of about 10 yrs to a 133 MHz 586. It has to be said that the only original components left are the case, 5-1/4 FDD, keyboard amazingly ( an ALPS one ) and PSU ( but the fan in that has been replaced 3 times ). I have my grandfather's axe here by the fireplace. It's had five new handles and three new heads. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... Roger W. Norman wrote: "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1119821019k@trad... In article writes: Think about it Mike. I upgraded to the A64 right after the ECJF you spent a couple of days helping me with. Gee, I didn't even know they had A64s back then. Shows how much I don't keep up. I'm having some new problems since the computer was taken offline for a few days whilst the plumbers did their job in the studio and control room. Maybe computers are more like mechanical beasts than we think. My VCR worked find last time I used it, maybe 8 months ago, and when I tried it last week, the capstan didn't turn. I have a pretty good cassette deck in the studio that I haven't used in a couple of years. When I tried that recently, I found that the capstan didn't turn. The cassette deck was easy - two belts had stretched to about 1-1/4 times their length and just weren't contacting the pulleys any longer. But somehow I have a feeling that if I had it in constant use, I'd have found out about it long agon. The parts of computers that are most prone to go bad on the shelf are no surprise, the parts that spin. That means fans, hard drives, and optical drives. Floppies are IME less susceptible, but of course they spin a lot slower. The point being that the ability to upgrade in 6 months isn't the same thing as being necessary to upgrade in 6 months. Right, but having that ability costs some money over not having it, and unless you upgrade before it becomes obsolete, you won't recover that extra cost - so there's a certain motivation to upgrade even if you don't really need it. True. Used to tell my older son to take up being a ditch digger. That way he wouldn't have to constantly upgrade his shovel! g This is way too funny! In short, if you don't want the slings and arrows of high tech, then don't use high tech. ;-) Absolutely. However, Arny, I think I'm experiencing problems with SATA being hung off the PCI bus and that's not good when my old 1600+ could play the multitracks fine, or more specifically, everything fine. Then again, since it's Samplitude, maybe I have to go back and rebuild the VIP, but if that's the case then it means I'll never get the mix right again because some of my East Coast Jazz performances had as many as 3 or 400 edits/objects/fader changes, etc. But it seems that I remember something about malfunctioning VIPs and rebuilding them. So far I've saved them as different VIPs, saved/moved to different drives, etc., but I'm getting consistent results. Either a two track or a set of tracks play, or they don't, no matter what I've done to them on this new machine. So I guess I'm the regular you were thinking of that had his SATA drives hung off the PCI bus. Max burst is 90 MB/s with average of 78 MB/s, so you'd think that would be plenty. Video playback is not a problem. Do you have any ideas other than upgrading to the 939 board, which I've just been researching. At least one good thing is with a new 939 Gigabyte I can use both ATA and SATA drives all in one raid. Or maybe I should just start buying SCSI for my 29160 board. It's kinda stupid to have video run just fine and audio from Samplitude acting stupid. Guess I'll slide over and ask at the Samp forum. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio |
|
#66
|
|||
|
|||
|
Roger W. Norman wrote:
However, Arny, I think I'm experiencing problems with SATA being hung off the PCI bus and that's not good when my old 1600+ could play the multitracks fine, or more specifically, everything fine. Agreed. So I guess I'm the regular you were thinking of that had his SATA drives hung off the PCI bus. Agreed. Max burst is 90 MB/s with average of 78 MB/s, so you'd think that would be plenty. Video playback is not a problem. Somehow audio seems to like to be pickier. Do you have any ideas other than upgrading to the 939 board, which I've just been researching. I'm pleased with my first 939-based computer, but I really didnt' stress it for audio. At least one good thing is with a new 939 Gigabyte I can use both ATA and SATA drives all in one raid. It seems to be implemented as just a driver. Or maybe I should just start buying SCSI for my 29160 board. It's kinda stupid to have video run just fine and audio from Samplitude acting stupid. Guess I'll slide over and ask at the Samp forum. Good idea. I don't run it so I can shed very little light. |
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
Les Cargill wrote: It might halve the number of bus cycles for transfers, but it's probably still PCI, which (SFAIK) is inherently 32 bit. I know of no 64 bit versions of PCI. *Shrug*? The memory/processor bus isn't PCI. It's much faster and much wider. I can't remember what it's called, though. My point is that no matter how wide or fast it is, shuffling more data (the upper word of long integers which will be zero for audio apps if used at all) through it can only be a penalty. There are performance benefits especially when doing 64bit computations on a 64bit processor. -- Aaron |
|
#68
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#69
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#70
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... Roger W. Norman wrote: However, Arny, I think I'm experiencing problems with SATA being hung off the PCI bus and that's not good when my old 1600+ could play the multitracks fine, or more specifically, everything fine. Agreed. So I guess I'm the regular you were thinking of that had his SATA drives hung off the PCI bus. Agreed. Max burst is 90 MB/s with average of 78 MB/s, so you'd think that would be plenty. Video playback is not a problem. Somehow audio seems to like to be pickier. Do you have any ideas other than upgrading to the 939 board, which I've just been researching. I'm pleased with my first 939-based computer, but I really didnt' stress it for audio. At least one good thing is with a new 939 Gigabyte I can use both ATA and SATA drives all in one raid. It seems to be implemented as just a driver. Or maybe I should just start buying SCSI for my 29160 board. It's kinda stupid to have video run just fine and audio from Samplitude acting stupid. Guess I'll slide over and ask at the Samp forum. Good idea. I don't run it so I can shed very little light. Well, I don't really think it's a Samplitude problem. Just bits and pieces of what I remember over the years and should have been taken care of in the upgrades. But hey, you never know. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio |
|
#71
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1119886643k@trad... In article writes: True. Used to tell my older son to take up being a ditch digger. That way he wouldn't have to constantly upgrade his shovel! g Hey, even my late songster and gravedigger friend John Jackson had a backhoe for the big jobs, but he got more gigs working in small graveyards with a shovel, where there was no room to bring in the high tech machinery. Alas, I don't take my own advice either and it ends up taking me a couple of months to shake out the bugs and know what will and won't work with a new computer. For instance, I'm having problems on dinky little two track playback on some of my stored mixes and no problem on others. Plus I can play back multitrack recordings still stored on the computer just fine. Something to keep your mind off plumbing and stone laying is always nice even if it's another thing that's a pain in the butt. I disagree. **** really starts to stink when it comes in flavors! g -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:58:55 -0400, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote: ------------8-------------------- Do you have any ideas other than upgrading to the 939 board, which I've just been researching. At least one good thing is with a new 939 Gigabyte I can use both ATA and SATA drives all in one raid. Or maybe I should just start buying SCSI for my 29160 board. It's kinda stupid to have video run just fine and audio from Samplitude acting stupid. Guess I'll slide over and ask at the Samp forum. -- If you already have a 29160 controller (and a LVD twisted pair cable and an active LVD/SE terminator), why not obtain a good 15 KRPM disc? -- A 36GB Cheetah 15K.4 shows 95 MB/sec. at the beginning, some 60 MB/sec and it gives 80 MB/sec. average read. It is very robust, but good cooling is mandatory. You can't run it without enough cooling air flow as it could go hot beyond SMART treshold I presume (65 deg. C on longer term; short term overheating wouldn't hurt acc. to Seagate manual). With a good cooling, however, it has an 38 to 42 degrees C average temperature. At 2960, you can attach for instance a Plextor Plexwriter and Ultraplex 40 Max CD ROM, and they will work quasi indepedent of your PC processor. It that case, you normally would disable these Plextors in Adaptec ScsiSelect BIOS scan as Windows takes care of them. You can attach an another SCSI drive for work and swap file. Such a combination _is_ fine with me and properly connected and set up, there's no problems whatsoever. Maxtor Atlas drives are great too. Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1119886960k@trad... Kind of like "what microphone should I buy?" I guess. Definitely one integrated into the chipset. PCI bus microphones have limited bamdwidth. geoff |
|
#76
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Edi Zubovic" edi.zubovic[rem wrote in message
... On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:58:55 -0400, "Roger W. Norman" wrote: ------------8-------------------- Do you have any ideas other than upgrading to the 939 board, which I've just been researching. At least one good thing is with a new 939 Gigabyte I can use both ATA and SATA drives all in one raid. Or maybe I should just start buying SCSI for my 29160 board. It's kinda stupid to have video run just fine and audio from Samplitude acting stupid. Guess I'll slide over and ask at the Samp forum. -- If you already have a 29160 controller (and a LVD twisted pair cable and an active LVD/SE terminator), why not obtain a good 15 KRPM disc? -- A 36GB Cheetah 15K.4 shows 95 MB/sec. at the beginning, some 60 MB/sec and it gives 80 MB/sec. average read. It is very robust, but good cooling is mandatory. You can't run it without enough cooling air flow as it could go hot beyond SMART treshold I presume (65 deg. C on longer term; short term overheating wouldn't hurt acc. to Seagate manual). With a good cooling, however, it has an 38 to 42 degrees C average temperature. At 2960, you can attach for instance a Plextor Plexwriter and Ultraplex 40 Max CD ROM, and they will work quasi indepedent of your PC processor. It that case, you normally would disable these Plextors in Adaptec ScsiSelect BIOS scan as Windows takes care of them. You can attach an another SCSI drive for work and swap file. Such a combination _is_ fine with me and properly connected and set up, there's no problems whatsoever. Maxtor Atlas drives are great too. Actually I have two Fujitsu 10k rpm 18 giggers sitting on the floor right now. And a 33 gig 15k rpm 1 gigabit fiberchannel drive. They didn't test any better than my 80 gig ATA Baracudas, but for some reason one gets the impression that they are stronger, if that's even a term one can use with a drive. Robust may be better. But then again, I have/need a lot of data on my computer because of the way I work and the fact that I'm moving into video along with audio for those location recordings. On my last location shoot there was 36 gigs of 16/44.1 track data alone, minus the video transfer data requirement. Once the shoot/audio was edited and compiled it still took two full DVDs. So that's kinda what I'm shooting for. Enough SCSI for work like that will cost about 4 times the money for simple ATA or SATA drives. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
|
#77
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
donaldjcecil wrote: Do you know about SATA implementation on the ASUS A8V-E Deluxe? The chipset listed for the product is VIA K8T890 and VIA VT8237R. http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/ch...series/k8t890/ looks pretty good on paper! ;-) Arny, so based off that diagram you can in your best judgment say that that via chipset doesn't have routing that could bog down the PCI bus? I appreciate the help I am receiving as I would not have been able to figure this out on my own. |
|
#78
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
wrote: There are performance benefits especially when doing 64bit computations on a 64bit processor. Most certainly, but what's in question is the relevance of that to a DAW. Right now, it's totally irrelevant. But I bet it turns out to make it easier to design good fast reverbs. Double-precision floats can be a good thing for reverb simulation. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#79
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote: Bob Cain wrote: wrote: There are performance benefits especially when doing 64bit computations on a 64bit processor. Most certainly, but what's in question is the relevance of that to a DAW. Right now, it's totally irrelevant. But I bet it turns out to make it easier to design good fast reverbs. Double-precision floats can be a good thing for reverb simulation. I may be wrong but I think that FP units have 64 bit wide data paths even in 32 bit machines. In and of itself, 64 bit is really about integers and addresses. That there is a larger register set in 64 bit mode, which I think is pretty meager in 32 bit x86 architecture, is a definite plus. Anybody know what the number of addressable registers is in each? Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#80
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:52:18 -0400, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote: -------------8-------------------- Maxtor Atlas drives are great too. Actually I have two Fujitsu 10k rpm 18 giggers sitting on the floor right now. And a 33 gig 15k rpm 1 gigabit fiberchannel drive. They didn't test any better than my 80 gig ATA Baracudas, but for some reason one gets the impression that they are stronger, if that's even a term one can use with a drive. Robust may be better. But then again, I have/need a lot of data on my computer because of the way I work and the fact that I'm moving into video along with audio for those location recordings. On my last location shoot there was 36 gigs of 16/44.1 track data alone, minus the video transfer data requirement. Once the shoot/audio was edited and compiled it still took two full DVDs. So that's kinda what I'm shooting for. Enough SCSI for work like that will cost about 4 times the money for simple ATA or SATA drives. -- Yes, the cost is an issue here. If the time plays a role, it can pay back as the work is done sooner. For such big files as video, a SCSI RAID0 would be even better. But unfortunately, it takes a much greater costs toll, yes. On the brighter side, SCSI drives are getting faster with each generation and their prices, while being still higher, seems to be more keen compared to those of sveral years ago. Why RAID0 in such cases -- from some test graphs which can be found in the HD Tach 3.0* benchmark program database, I've seen that the transfer rate remains constant all the time. So I think, in RAID0, one disk reads the data as usual, from a to z, but the other disk reads the same data the other way, from z to a. This I think compesates for transfer rate droop due to disk geometry. So this can add to time savings in work too. For instance, I just opened a recording I made yesterday evening in a theatre, it's about 1hr 12min and has about 770 MB. It took some 8 sec. to open it from the first instance and abt. 2,5 sec. to open it again. With a RAID0, it would take slightly less but had I a couple of GB file, it could spare some time depending how much area at the platter are covered by that data. * This is the link, the database comes with the program. http://www.simplisoftware.com/Public...request=HdTach Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Why Windows is Easier than Linux For An End User, Especially for Multimedia work. | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
