Posted: 8/23/2011 1:37:24 PM EDT
|
Went from a 3.2GHz P4 with 3GB RAM to a 2.8GHz Phenom II X4 with 8GB RAM. Windows XP to Win7. 300GB disk to 1TB disk. Had the P4 for eight years. Have had the Phenom II less than a year. Want to upgrade already.
I don't play games. The only thing I care about with regard to the new system is responsiveness under load. I want the user interface side of Windows to scream, even if the system is busy and totally bogged down. Right now the system has been on for almost six months and I have 11GB memory in use (plenty swapped out to disk, obviously). I do a lot of data transfers of large files (mostly mapping data and related imagery) and I think that my single 1TB disk is bottlenecking me. I use a lot of applications and I leave them open. I don't shut the system down and it doesn't go to sleep or get rebooted. Windows is virtually incapable of mopping up after itself under these conditions. Processes run away a lot, temp files never get cleaned out, and the system bogs. I miss my workstation days working on interactive IRIX and Solaris systems –– they were balls-dead reliable and remained fast even when they were busy running intensive tasks in the background. I was hoping to achieve this same result with the Phenom; alas I have not. I'd be running Solaris if I could, but the applications I use are only available on Windows. So I'm stuck with a horrible OS and need to bump up the hardware under it to compensate. I have been looking at more cores, but no single core has ever gone to 100% for very long since I built this new machine, so I'm thinking maybe faster cores instead of more. More CPU cache. Obviously more RAM. The Z68 chipset is interesting. I'm wondering if a pair of mirrored 2TB disks with an SSD cache device, and 16-20GB RAM, would sufficiently bump my system's overall responsiveness under load. I'd likely pair it with the fastest-clocked quad Xeon or i5 I could afford. I don't think lack of CPU horsepower is killing my current system's performance, I think large applications bases in main memory and swapping large amounts of data out to the disk is the problem. Any input? |
|
Quoted:
Went from a 3.2GHz P4 with 3GB RAM to a 2.8GHz Phenom II X4 with 8GB RAM. Windows XP to Win7. 300GB disk to 1TB disk. Had the P4 for eight years. Have had the Phenom II less than a year. Want to upgrade already. I don't play games. The only thing I care about with regard to the new system is responsiveness under load. I want the user interface side of Windows to scream, even if the system is busy and totally bogged down. Right now the system has been on for almost six months and I have 11GB memory in use (plenty swapped out to disk, obviously). I do a lot of data transfers of large files (mostly mapping data and related imagery) and I think that my single 1TB disk is bottlenecking me. I use a lot of applications and I leave them open. I don't shut the system down and it doesn't go to sleep or get rebooted. Windows is virtually incapable of mopping up after itself under these conditions. Processes run away a lot, temp files never get cleaned out, and the system bogs. I miss my workstation days working on interactive IRIX and Solaris systems –– they were balls-dead reliable and remained fast even when they were busy running intensive tasks in the background. I was hoping to achieve this same result with the Phenom; alas I have not. I'd be running Solaris if I could, but the applications I use are only available on Windows. So I'm stuck with a horrible OS and need to bump up the hardware under it to compensate. I have been looking at more cores, but no single core has ever gone to 100% for very long since I built this new machine, so I'm thinking maybe faster cores instead of more. More CPU cache. Obviously more RAM. The Z68 chipset is interesting. I'm wondering if a pair of mirrored 2TB disks with an SSD cache device, and 16-20GB RAM, would sufficiently bump my system's overall responsiveness under load. I'd likely pair it with the fastest-clocked quad Xeon or i5 I could afford. I don't think lack of CPU horsepower is killing my current system's performance, I think large applications bases in main memory and swapping large amounts of data out to the disk is the problem. Any input? Before you result to building a new system you should consider adding a raid setup and or ssd to your current system to see if that solves your performance issues. These HDD's http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Spinpoint-3-5-Inch-Internal-HD103SJ/dp/B002MQC0P8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136618&sr=8-1 http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_124/1221916_equipment_question.html This SSD: http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Version-2-5-Inch-Solid-State-Drive/dp/B004OR0GRC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136726&sr=8-1 |
|
Quoted:
I would get an i5 2500k, a z68 motherboard, and some fast DDR3. That's what I'm doing. The i5 2500k is the best processor for the money. You can easily OC the i5 to 4.5+ ghz if you choose to. I'm not a big overclocker guy, but I'd be willing to give it a shot. I don't want a huge tower with an external Volkswagon-Beetle-Sized cooling apparatus to cool the CPU, however. Mini-ITX is as big as I am willing to go, and I have a Shuriken cooling the Phenom right now –– that's about all I have room for. Case is staying the same, only the internals are getting swapped out. I have a 1KW PS and have modified the case with a few 120mm fans, but I run them at < 1000rpm. The present system is cool, essentially silent, but sluggish. I'd like a system that is cool, essentially silent, and fast. |
|
Quoted:
Before you result to building a new system you should consider adding a raid setup and or ssd to your current system to see if that solves your performance issues. These HDD's http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Spinpoint-3-5-Inch-Internal-HD103SJ/dp/B002MQC0P8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136618&sr=8-1 http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_124/1221916_equipment_question.html This SSD: http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Version-2-5-Inch-Solid-State-Drive/dp/B004OR0GRC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136726&sr=8-1 I am running all Samsungs now, love them. I won't run an SSD as a primary disk until they're bigger, cheaper, and don't have the limited read/write cycle problem. I want a (hardware) mirrored primary disk subsystem, and I'm willing to give the SSD a shot as a cache device. 64GB, as I recall, is what Intel is allowing reserved for cache with the new chipset, with the balance being assigned a drive letter. Maybe a 120GB SSD with a 64GB cache partition and the rest assigned as a drive for the paging file? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Before you result to building a new system you should consider adding a raid setup and or ssd to your current system to see if that solves your performance issues. These HDD's http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Spinpoint-3-5-Inch-Internal-HD103SJ/dp/B002MQC0P8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136618&sr=8-1 http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_124/1221916_equipment_question.html This SSD: http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Version-2-5-Inch-Solid-State-Drive/dp/B004OR0GRC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1314136726&sr=8-1 I am running all Samsungs now, love them. I won't run an SSD as a primary disk until they're bigger, cheaper, and don't have the limited read/write cycle problem. I want a (hardware) mirrored primary disk subsystem, and I'm willing to give the SSD a shot as a cache device. 64GB, as I recall, is what Intel is allowing reserved for cache with the new chipset, with the balance being assigned a drive letter. Maybe a 120GB SSD with a 64GB cache partition and the rest assigned as a drive for the paging file? That was fixed with trim (performance wise). As far as longevity is concerned, they should last nearly as long as a mechanical HDD, if not longer. |
|
Quoted: Went from a 3.2GHz P4 with 3GB RAM to a 2.8GHz Phenom II X4 with 8GB RAM. Windows XP to Win7. 300GB disk to 1TB disk. Had the P4 for eight years. Have had the Phenom II less than a year. Want to upgrade already. I don't play games. The only thing I care about with regard to the new system is responsiveness under load. I want the user interface side of Windows to scream, even if the system is busy and totally bogged down. Right now the system has been on for almost six months and I have 11GB memory in use (plenty swapped out to disk, obviously). I do a lot of data transfers of large files (mostly mapping data and related imagery) and I think that my single 1TB disk is bottlenecking me. I use a lot of applications and I leave them open. I don't shut the system down and it doesn't go to sleep or get rebooted. Windows is virtually incapable of mopping up after itself under these conditions. Processes run away a lot, temp files never get cleaned out, and the system bogs. I miss my workstation days working on interactive IRIX and Solaris systems –– they were balls-dead reliable and remained fast even when they were busy running intensive tasks in the background. I was hoping to achieve this same result with the Phenom; alas I have not. I'd be running Solaris if I could, but the applications I use are only available on Windows. So I'm stuck with a horrible OS and need to bump up the hardware under it to compensate. I have been looking at more cores, but no single core has ever gone to 100% for very long since I built this new machine, so I'm thinking maybe faster cores instead of more. More CPU cache. Obviously more RAM. The Z68 chipset is interesting. I'm wondering if a pair of mirrored 2TB disks with an SSD cache device, and 16-20GB RAM, would sufficiently bump my system's overall responsiveness under load. I'd likely pair it with the fastest-clocked quad Xeon or i5 I could afford. I don't think lack of CPU horsepower is killing my current system's performance, I think large applications bases in main memory and swapping large amounts of data out to the disk is the problem. Any input? As somebody that used to build and maintain systems to do exactly what you are doing, a raid with a dedicated raid card (or NAS/raid server) would help the most, as it would with any data intensive work. Your problem is your underlying hardware is shit for the work you do. You need a workstation, with workstation hardware. Buying or building will become expensive. 4/6 core Xeon w/ HT 24GB+ memory whatever video card, just to keep the GUI fast (unless you are doing CUDA/GPU work) OS on fastest drives you can pop for in a Raid 0 (store nothing on them, just applications) Data drive Raid array either in it's own box or off dedicated PCIe RAID board internally With the proper hardware, a modern OS will manage it's own resources far better than you ever could. Let it do so. Also don't allow any files to touch the C drive, keep them floating between the RAID and memory. Turn off the swap. That will keep your application and OS drive clean. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I would get an i5 2500k, a z68 motherboard, and some fast DDR3. That's what I'm doing. The i5 2500k is the best processor for the money. You can easily OC the i5 to 4.5+ ghz if you choose to. Mini-ITX is as big as I am willing to go, and I have a Shuriken cooling the Phenom right now –– that's about all I have room for.  Mini ITX? Pics? |
|
http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?pid=235&area=en
Mini-ITX board in this allows room for a dual 120mm Lian-Li PCI slot cooler and three 120mm case fans, all at <1krpm. Corsair PS with upgraded Nexus fan. I can go Micro ATX in the new system but would like to stay with Mini-ITX to allow for the same cooling. I've got three 3.5" bays internally along with the 5.25" –– I may put in a Lian-Li 5.25" slim line adapter to run a slim DVD-ROM and have one additional 3.5" or two 2.5" bays along with it. New MB I am considering supports two 3gbps and two 6gbps SATA ports. Wondering how to configure that. Hard disk on 6gbps channels and SSD on 3gbps or vice-versa? Assuming all 6gbps disks of course. Would my performance be better with disks running at 6gbps or the SSD cache device running at 6gbps? If I go with a RAID card I'd probably do three 3.5" Velociraptors on the controller in RAID5, a pair of mirrored 2.5" system disks on the 6gbps ports, and the DVD and cache SSD on the 3gbps ports... Comments? |
|
me thinks you have conflicting design goals that can only be solved by liberal amounts of cash. Edit: what is the nature of your workload? You go on and on about cache and swap file, but what is your data and how are your manipulating it? Edit edit: You have not answer the above question because I just asked it, but in the mean time, as of now, your problem sounds I/O bound. Put the OS on one drive, it doesn't need to be large or super fast. I don't know what application you use, so they can either go one their own drive or on the OS drive. Put your windows profile's temp directory on a 2nd drive. (not the system temp folder) Put your swap file on a 3rd drive, if you choose to keep swap enabled. Also, I don't what type of data you have or how it gets processed, so I can't give a good drive setup recommendation, but it should go on a 4th drive. (do you spend more time reading one file and writing another, or do you spend more time read and writing to the same file; do you copy a lot of files; are the file large or small?) It maybe that your data drive and your temp drive can be one.. again, it depends on what your data is and how it just manipulated by you and internally by the application. |
| Data are large files in google earth and other GPS mapping software, large image files, Outlook with numerous 1GB PST files open, and browsers that, combined, sit in between 6-8GB RAM in use at any one time by themselves and are therefore constantly swapping out to page. The system runs reasonably well as it is, but trying to manipulate satellite data in google earth while playing an HD youtube video bogs the system to where the interactive user interface begins to slow down. |
|
Quoted:
Mini-ITX is as big as I am willing to go, and I have a Shuriken cooling the Phenom right now –– that's about all I have room for. Case is staying the same, only the internals are getting swapped out. I have a 1KW PS and have modified the case with a few 120mm fans, but I run them at < 1000rpm. The present system is cool, essentially silent, but sluggish. I'd like a system that is cool, essentially silent, and fast. You need to go bigger than mini-itx. You're essentially buying a Mini Cooper while saying that you need to carry 8 people in it and pull heavy trailers. It doesn't suit your needs. |