RE: [expert] hard drive experiences (was 8.0 final --brakes MANY applications (Software Installeris first on that list))
I think that most of the manufacturers mentioned before (WD, Seagate, Quantum, Fujitsu, IBM) had lemons, as well as good models and all improved the technology during the years. I just remembered that WD had for a while issues with UDMA transfers - I think they corrected it by now - but it does worth double-checking ! Maxtor drives are pretty good - most of the drives I'm using are from Maxtor. 3 yrs warranty (which I think it's a quasi standard by now). However, for higher end I'd choose IBM (having to pay the luxury hard-drive tax for their products). Before buying I'd check the speed, sustained and burst transfer speed, access speed, warranty, MTBF. If risk of data loss is unacceptable, there is RAID (software, as well as SCSI)... I'd stay away from IDE RAID - not (so well) supported and if you'd bleed if you lose data, then you might want to pay more and get the real thing (SCSI) ! Just my 2 cents ;-) Hope it helps ! Oleg On Friday, April 27, 2001 1:43 PM, David E. Fox [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Whoa, do you think I should move to IBM drives now? Maxtor IMHO still makes good drives. But I went for a 30 gig IBM Deskstar last October. David E. Fox Thanks for letting me [EMAIL PROTECTED]change magnetic patterns [EMAIL PROTECTED] on your hard disk. ---
RE: [expert] Dual processor MB ?
Totally agree on the price / performance ratio in the favor of Athlon / Duron ... But are there any SMP motherboards supporting AMD CPUs available out there ? Oleg On Friday, April 13, 2001 5:59 AM, Joan Tur [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: "David E. Fox" escribi: Right, and the Athlon has quite a bit of level 1 cache (128K) along with 256K (or maybe 512K?) of level 2 cache, plus that runs at the full clock speed of the CPU. Duron: 128k L1 + 64k L2 Athlon: 128k L1 + 256k L2 -- Joan Tur. Ibiza - Spain [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ 11407395 Joan.Tur.pagina.de www.ClubIbosim.org Linux: usuari registrat 190.783
RE: [expert] Dual processor MB ?
Depends what are you doing with your machine ... I've got several dual PPro (these should run very cheap these days). Also, ABIT has a dual - Celeron MB - BP6. Also, a dual P3 might be OK ... If more cache is more important for your apps than raw MHz, try sticking to P3 = 600. I think P3 - 600B were the last "regular" P3-s to host 512KB L2 Cache (at 1/2 the speed of the core). Unless you want to spend really BIG bucks and get yourself Xeon MB + processors (don't do it if it's for fun only). For more, check (and subscribe) Linux SMP mailing list - [EMAIL PROTECTED] It might still be that clustering single CPU machines would lead to better performance... Oleg On Tuesday, April 10, 2001 1:44 AM, Joan Tur [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Hallo! I'm thinking about upgrading my CPU (K6-3-400) and, as i'm using linux 95% of my time i suppose it's better a dual processor architecture, isn't it?? If so... what MB should you suggest? And what processor/speed ?? Thanks ;) Joan Tur. Ibiza - Spain [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ 11407395 Joan.Tur.pagina.de www.ClubIbosim.org Linux: usuari registrat 190.783
