Search posts, tags, users, and pages
Defo get SSD and HDD.
SSD for OS, programs + core games
HDD for other games and standard files. + RAID.
For the HDD's I defo wouldn't go any lower than 7200RPM.
Also, Have you considered the hybrid or helium drives? They might be a slightly better option for long term media storage.
Another option to consider might be moving it to a microserver? Like this HP one? That way you can move all your shared stuff and just access it without further degrading your full rig.
I've not done/seen anything with the SAS models so couldn't comment on those apart from the 12gb/s is quite appealing, but unless you can get a deal it's probably not worth the extra dosh.
Finally, nice CPU. Really wouldn't bother switching to a new one any time soon unless you need the extra cores, in which case probs a new mobo and hexacore/similar CPU might be in order. :)
So, I think I'd go with the $900 approach but I don't think I'd go for a 1TB version, I'd drop the capacity and just optimise file/program/game locations. And I'd probs get the microserver and just stick all the RAID HDD's in there.
For compatibility issues:
uk.pcpartpicker.com
Can you explain why the SSD when a 3 drive RAID 5 can match it on reads and 4 drive is FASTER? I mean sure, write times, but is read speed where one really actually needs/uses more speed?
I think that -- along with my distrust of the technology due to replacing dead ones for other people at a 10:1 rate compared to HDD's the past five years -- is what keeps pushing me away from the technology.
Particularly when I REALLY don't care about boot time, something that with said system happens once a month at most.
I'm just wondering what practical benefit it has to justify the crazy cost per tb. More so given that when you go down from the 1tb to the 512 gig, the cost rises from ~$170/tb to $200/tb or more. I was looking at the 1's because they're the cheapest per TB right now.
I had considered microservers but their power draw ends up being higher given that this media center machine would already be going 10-12 hours a day anyways for various reasons. It ends up cheaper to use the system that's already on half the day for the whole day, than to put another machine in -- since peak draw in the current config is ~600 watts (on a 850 PSU since I over-engineer everything) and during the low times draws 80 watts. whilst something like that proliant draws around 150-180 watts once you put drives in it during use. Assuming that peak use would only drop around 50 watts depending on where the drives are, It ends up being significantly more power use during peak and not enough less during down-time to offset that.
Part of why I don't understand having an NAS if you have a media center PC.
But there seem to be a lot of choices people make I just don't understand -- so I see what everyone else is doing, consider doing it, then end up going WHY?!?
Hence the real holdup here is "throwing money away" on a SSD when I can get the performance or better out of a HDD RAID array that's just going to be sitting right next to it regardless of the config.
... since again, as I'm going 4 drives in RAID 5 that gives me 720Mb/s reads (240x3), which I'm pretty sure is greater than the 550Mb/s you get peak from a single SATA SSD. (though I'm tempted to use $170 of that $200 difference to go for 5 drives and 4x reads)
What would the SSD be getting me in that case? Less reliable storage, smaller harder to use storage, and for what, faster writes which isn't really a bottleneck in anything?
I don't get it. I feel like I'm missing something since everyone keeps saying SSD, SSD, SSD to me and I cannot fathom why. Hence why I asked this in the first place. Why the SSD, what is its magic other than bandwagon? Do people REALLY do that hardcore a writes to a device we keep being told to minimize writing to by putting static high read stuff on it?
Read speed is important when considering things like games. The SSD approach is just easier as well. If you're really not fused about the speed then no need to fork out for stuff you don't need. It does sound like you're well over engineering this setup. SSD's are less power draw and safe from magnets (not that any drive should really be near a magnet anyway).
In what way is an ssd harder to use?
How are you maxing out at 600W? Is that when you're gaming etc - otherwise I really don't understand how you could be drawing so much.
Hipkiss I've got a lot more going on there than what I listed in terms of hardware. Such as the E-Mu 1616M, two stage computer controlled pre-amp, several USB 3 powered devices sucking a few watts apiece, etc, etc.
A situation that's only getting worse with this build since I'm moving all my audio production stuff to this rig -- which means adding a PCIe x1 to twin standard PCI adapter so I can get the Audigy Extreme with front-panel MIDI and quarter inch jacks, E-Mu Morpheus, etc, etc, over to it.
The Morpheus is a odd duck, cannot find ANY documentation for it or even drivers -- I don't think it was actually made by E-Mu systems. I got it when I was doing professional arranging/transcribing for a karaoke company back in '99. It has FOUR EMU10K1 chips on it (same chip as the SB Live!) with a gig of RAM (crazy for the time) dedicated for soundfont capabilities -- end result is a whopping 512 voices accessible over 128 midi channels spanning eight ports. 25 pin connector on the back that runs to a breakout box with four SP-DIF and four stereo quarter-inch jacks.
AMAZINGLY even Windows 10 recognizes it if you install an Audigy card alongside it, coming up as just more EMU10k chips in the device manager. All ports exposed and working for Reaper and Sonar.
I could go on. I'm one of those people who runs out of expansion slots FAST. The only reason this machine isn't filled to the brim is the lack of standard PCI slots, and as I just said I'm fixing that too.
Which also means a new case -- amazingly I'm eying a rosewill... I know right? ROSEWILL? Has he lost his mind?!?
I'm ordering the THOR. six 5.25" bays front, six internal 3.5" bays, and can fit a ten expansion slot ATX motherboard. My mobo is only 7 slot, but the two slot x1 to standard PCI requires a empty slot "gap" to fit the cabling, so it should be a perfect fit. The three 230mm fans (top, center, front) are just icing on the cake.
Also why I'm upping the supply -- said little expansion board also needs a SATA power connection.
Oh, and as Scotty would say, "a good engineer is always just a wee bit conservative, at least on paper." You figure out how much you "need", and then you DOUBLE IT! Safety margins are important.
Case looks good, when I built my rig, couple years ago, I went for the (AeroCool Mechatron white steel edition)[aerocool.us/pgs/pgs-b/mechatron_b.htm]. But I don't have the side fans. I did actually buy 2 more 230mm fans to sit on top though - it got a bit warm one summer haha. Thankfully I've never really needed to expand further than what it offers - mainly due to budget but in the next couple of years ima get some upgrades.
I'm the same, always apply a safety factor haha.
As for the audio production stuff (i know very little about this area) given that some of the stuff is 20 years old, it might be time to upgrade that. And that is quite impressive that windows 10 recognises it. Sounds (see what i did there) like a cool rig/project.
Have fun with it!
Hipkiss Sad part is the older stuff is more capable. Everything has been moving towards soft-synths which tend to be higher latency -- worse support for direct API's like ASIO is evaporating at the OS level, leaving music production high and dry and resulting in many working professionally having to run decade old copies of OSX or two decade old copies of Windows.... with Linux not even being in the running given the dumbass way hardware is isolated from software at the Kernel level.
Though admittedly a LOT of those software synthesizers blow the old hardware out of the water -- see the stuff SampleModeling does with woodwinds and brass -- in many cases you want the older "fat" classic sound and modern digital can struggle with that.
It's a bit like professional MIDI composition, where a LOT of people to this day still use an Atari ST just because it's more reliable, better built, and the software is easier/faster/better than any of the new stuff. Not bad for a three decade old system.
If ALL I'm working with is MIDI, I'll still stack Cakewalk 5.1 for DOS against the most recent release of Sonar.
But thanks to the "Adlib era" people scoff at MIDI because they've never heard it done "right" with proper hardware/software; or if they have heard it -- in the backgrounds of pop music or the beds of TV shows/movies -- they never even knew it.
It's funny because a lot of times I talk about MIDI and people go "eeew!" because all they can think of is garbage like "canyon.mid" from windows 3.x / 95 being played over Yamaha OPL:
cutcodedown.com/music/canyon_mid_SB16_CT1740_OPL3…
They don't think what a well crafted MIDI can sound like on a professional workstation. (probably my best transcribe, the horns need some tweaking though)
cutcodedown.com/music/sexBomb_morpheus_demo.mp3
World of difference between them.
Oh, and I did take your advice on going lower capacity, but... well, see my latest update post.
They sound quite clean - I like it! The second is definitely smoother. It's crazy that decades old stuff still produces better quality. Although, it makes sense especially considering I've got a 4790k cpu and after almost 5 years i still can't see any better for a similar price.
MIDI is definitely something I need to look into, I have a DM6 ALESIS drum electric drum kit but never really explored it.