X570 Chipset to have 40 PCIe 4.0 lanes

IdiotInCharge said:
This is going to be like trying to observe subatomic particles- you can't observe without changing the result ;)

At best, you could use an external recorder.
Click to expand...

Heisenberg got something right?

I get the recording affects things, should affect them all equally - right?
 
Elf_Boy said:
I get the recording affects things, should affect them all equally - right?
Click to expand...

I honestly wouldn't make that assumption. I get the premise- but when I consider that not only will read latency and speed affect the game (to whatever degree they do), they will also affect the recording chain.

This is also not necessarily consistent between storage types. For terabytes of sustained data writing, you're still best off with spinners unless you can afford the very best flash. And even then you'd want to take precautions with the flash that you likely wouldn't want to have to remember to do while actually gaming.

Overall this is something that I'd appreciate being investigated, but that I'm also not quite sure how to investigate empirically, especially without a dedicated hardware investment.
 
Elf_Boy said:
Anyone out there have a good full screen capture utility to recommend? Were I to capture some game play with a spinner, ssd and nvme for comparison?
Click to expand...

I do t think screen capture is a good way to convey the experience. You are better off measuring some metric (I like minimum fps) and comparing it based on that.

A screen recording is not representative of gameplay.
 
Dan_D said:
Its an outlier of a situation. That game is much larger than the Unreal Engine 3.0 typically allows for. So this was one of the methods they used for getting around it.
Click to expand...

It has an even bigger effect with RAGE. Having an SSD has a major impact when the game is streaming textures. It's part of the reason why levels are being loaded almost instantly.
 
dgz said:
It has an even bigger effect with RAGE. Having an SSD has a major impact when the game is streaming textures. It's part of the reason why levels are being loaded almost instantly.
Click to expand...

I play a few games regularly where NVME loading has a marked improvement. FFXV with HD textures, loads went from 1+ minute to about 10 seconds. Also with Cities Skylines with a ton of mods, the load times went from multiple minutes to about 45 seconds when first loading a big city.
Also seemed noticeable on Battlefield V, however the way that game keeps rebuilding its shaders kinda fucks with the load times.

I really, really wish there was a common benchmark with Cities Skylines, talk about a CPU-limited game!

Loading from my RAM cache is even more noticeable, I love primocache for this reason. The main reason I want more PCI-E lines is so I can cache my PLEX server better with NVME Caches to alleviate some of the seek times on my spinning disks....
 
TheSlySyl said:
I play a few games regularly where NVME loading has a marked improvement. FFXV with HD textures, loads went from 1+ minute to about 10 seconds. Also with Cities Skylines with a ton of mods, the load times went from multiple minutes to about 45 seconds when first loading a big city.
Also seemed noticeable on Battlefield V, however the way that game keeps rebuilding its shaders kinda fucks with the load times.

I really, really wish there was a common benchmark with Cities Skylines, talk about a CPU-limited game!

Loading from my RAM cache is even more noticeable, I love primocache for this reason. The main reason I want more PCI-E lines is so I can cache my PLEX server better with NVME Caches to alleviate some of the seek times on my spinning disks....
Click to expand...

Eh. I think I understand how you're feeling but don't actually make your setup too perfect cause eventually you're going to start paying more attention to the content and realize how bad most stuff is.

Never really played with RAM disk myself. Always wanted it but there was never enough memory. How's the new Doom with it? Or Civilization IV. Man, turns seem to take FOREVER as the game advances. Part of the reason I stopped playing this amazing game.
 
funkydmunky said:
Ahhh.......somebody needs a hug?
Click to expand...

No but imagine if you bought something that didnt come out long ago. Then the same company released a product that has better cores and the same amount for half the price without ever saying shit about it in thier long term roadmap.

Its kind of douchebag to maintaining customer loyalty.

When the threadripper 2nd gen was released, no one knew shit about a regular desktop having 16 cores.

It's like AMD is moving so fast they are going to piss directly on the heads of tens of thousands of HEDT owners.

I guarantee you the benches have the 500 dollar desktop part run circles around the $1000 hedt part.

So take your sarcasm and shove it.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Has anyone actually done any benchmarking on the significance of dual vs quad channel RAM in practical applications for the Zen architecture?

It would be interesting to see a maybe a 2950x Threadripper with many cores run some benchmarks in both quad channel and dual channel mode in some common practical applications and benchmarks to get a preview of how much dual channel will limit high core count Ryzens.
Click to expand...
Good question. From what I understand scientific workloads and similar can be memory sensitive, so for these types of users then it makes sense.

Best place to look would be the apus as many are single channel in cheap laptops. There are performance differences between single and dual channel for gaming and general use.
 
dgz said:
Never really played with RAM disk myself. Always wanted it but there was never enough memory. How's the new Doom with it?
Click to expand...
This is also my fist time messing around with one, I put 32GB into my system at Ryzen launch, (back when memory was cheap) and then recently added another 16GB (because memory is cheap again.). My plan is for this memory to last me when I upgrade to X570 and Ryzen 3000+ either later this year or early next year, and my current system is mostly gonna be passed down to my lady.
Doom 2016 has load times? Other than that one weird long ass load at first startup, Doom loads everything in seconds with my setup.
The turn time for Civ games is entirely CPU based. Civ IV wasn't multi-threaded AFAIK so with a big game it just hit a single core super hard and tended to choke. I haven't touched Civ IV in years, but Civ VI late game turns are pretty quick, although I have issues with the late gameplay. I wonder if the newest expansion would fix that.

I'm stuck in a hotel room away from my main home PC for another month, but my laptop that I bought for this trip is using a Samsung 870 QVO over SATA as its "bulk" storage combined with a pretty snappy Intel NVME drive for its windows storage. There is a difference if I switch games between the two of em for load times. A lot of people don't seem to mind a few seconds here and there when it comes to loading, but I'm pretty much against any time that doesn't involve me actively playing something so I'll do what I can to reduce it. I don't have the free time I used to have and staring at a loading screen is not how I want to spend my time.

I also do a decent amount of audio editing and such and the difference with an NVME there is HUGE, I'm sure that it'll be even more accelerated when I move onto actually editing video, but I haven't gotten there yet. (Applying a filter to a 1.5+ hour raw audio file takes time).

Honestly the best advice I can give for load times and in general is to use multiple Drives. Don't get bottlenecked by a single one. Get a small, fast NVME drive for the OS, grab another fast SSD for the games, leave media on a different separate spinner. The less things that can bring a drive to full load the faster everything will work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
tangoseal said:
No but imagine if you bought something that didnt come out long ago. Then the same company released a product that has better cores and the same amount for half the price without ever saying shit about it in thier long term roadmap.

Its kind of douchebag to maintaining customer loyalty.

When the threadripper 2nd gen was released, no one knew shit about a regular desktop having 16 cores.

It's like AMD is moving so fast they are going to piss directly on the heads of tens of thousands of HEDT owners.

I guarantee you the benches have the 500 dollar desktop part run circles around the $1000 hedt part.

So take your sarcasm and shove it.
Click to expand...

So you're mad that AMD could be releasing a product that is a real improvement over the previous one? You'd rather them go the Intel route just so your epeen isn't bruised?
 
TheSlySyl said:
I play a few games regularly where NVME loading has a marked improvement. FFXV with HD textures, loads went from 1+ minute to about 10 seconds. Also with Cities Skylines with a ton of mods, the load times went from multiple minutes to about 45 seconds when first loading a big city.
Also seemed noticeable on Battlefield V, however the way that game keeps rebuilding its shaders kinda fucks with the load times.

I really, really wish there was a common benchmark with Cities Skylines, talk about a CPU-limited game!

Loading from my RAM cache is even more noticeable, I love primocache for this reason. The main reason I want more PCI-E lines is so I can cache my PLEX server better with NVME Caches to alleviate some of the seek times on my spinning disks....
Click to expand...

Very cool. So I understand, better vs ssd? Or better vs spinner?

My experience is that some games are effectively "maxed" by a ssd, some -not all- get minor to significantly better on an nvme.

Again, not the initial game load, but in game load times.
 
tangoseal said:
Bad time to own a 2950x sigh....

AMD better not shit on thier hedt users. Maybe offer a heavily reduced trade in program or something.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this.

If you found the performance and features of a 2950x worth it when you bought it, those features have not changed.

There is always something better faster and cheaper around the corner in our hobby. If it goes faster, like it did from ~1999-2005 that is a GOOD thing.

Just because newer CPU's can do more for less doesn't mean your existing CPU is any less capable and you are forced to upgrade. The only thing you lose out on is the bragging rights, and those are kind of stupid anyway.

Granted, back when things moved faster and we were excited about it and upgraded more often, things were also cheaper. When the Athlon XP 1800+ launched and was the fastest CPU on the planet it had alaunch price of $252 (and in reality sold for less). That's $360 adjusted for inflation from October 2001 to March 2019 (latest available data) dollars.

I wish we still lived in a world where the fastest consumer CPU money could buy cost $360. If anything the disparity in pricing between now and then shows how Intel's dominance on the marketplace has been bad for consumers.

Things certainly have improved since Zen launched but wake me when the top end CPU from either manufacturer costs less than $400. That's when we know we have a competitive market again.

2001 remains my CPU and GPU pricing baseline. GPU's need to drop to 2001 pricing as well.
 
Last edited:
Even with 64gb the games I really would like to get much better are too big to go the ram disk route.

Wow, eso and other modern mmo/rpg type games are 50-75 gb or bigger.

I'd need at least 96-128gb (imo) to pull it off.

Windows disk caching is really nice though, the second time I teleport or go to an area/zone in the same session there is a huge difference.

From what I have read and seen online shooters don't get the same gains as open world rpg type stuff.

I've played path of exile from a ram drive, before ggg did a bunch of optimizations you almost had to, not do much a difference now.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I disagree with this.

If you found the performance and features of a 2950x worth it when you bought it, those features have not changed.

There is always something better faster and cheaper around the corner in our hobby. If it goes faster, like it did from ~1999-2005 that is a GOOD thing.

Just because newer CPU's can do more for less doesn't mean your existing CPU is any less capable and you are forced to upgrade. The only thing you lose out on is the bragging rights, and those are kind of stupid anyway.

Granted, when the Athlon XP 1800+ launched and was the fastest CPU on the planet it cost $252 (and in reality sold for less). That's $360 adjusted for inflation from October 2001 to March 2019 (latest available data) dollars.

I wish we still lived in a World where the fastest consumer CPU money could buy cost $360. If anything the disparity in pricing between now and then shows how Intel's dominance on the marketplace has been bad for consumers.

Things certainly have improved since Zen launched but wake me when the top end CPU from either manufacturer costs less than $400. That's when we know we have a competitive market again.

2001 remains my CPU and GPU pricing baseline. GPU's need to drop to 2001 pricing as well.
Click to expand...

Everything costs a hell of a lot more to research and make now days than in the early 2000s as well. CPUs are orders of magnitude more complicated these days. AMD and Intel simply cannot produce chips for the same prices as they used to, so costs go up. The market can bare the weight of higher priced parts, so costs go up. Prices not reaching 2001 level prices does not mean that we don't have a competitive market.
 
Elf_Boy said:
Even with 64gb the games I really would like to get much better are too big to go the ram disk route.

Wow, eso and other modern mmo/rpg type games are 50-75 gb or bigger.

I'd need at least 96-128gb (imo) to pull it off.

Windows disk caching is really nice though, the second time I teleport or go to an area/zone in the same session there is a huge difference.

From what I have read and seen online shooters don't get the same gains as open world rpg type stuff.

I've played path of exile from a ram drive, before ggg did a bunch of optimizations you almost had to, not do much a difference now.
Click to expand...


Yeah, the only game I've ever run from a RAM Disk was Red Orchestra 2. The only benefit there was initial level load time.

The game is structured such that as you join you get to choose which class you want to play. All the best classes naturally go first, so the last to join only get to choose from regular riflemen armed with bolt action rifles.

Those of us who were more established on our server would run from RamDisk and do various console tweaks to get the game to load faster, not because we wanted an unfair advantage of always playing the better classes, but because an entire game gets ruined if some noob picks the commander or team lead classes because they want the SMG and go our running and gunning instead of playing the class right.

Commanders need to plan strategy for the team, and call in strategic air strikes in the right place to support advances/defense. Team leaders need to help the commanders by tagging potential airstrike locations, and serving as mobile spawnpoints in strategic locations so their teams spawn on them to support taking (or defending) territory. These classes are so important to winning a round that if even one of the commander or (typically) three team leads is someone who doesn't care and just wants to run around and shoot, it's an almost guaranteed loss.

So those of us who knew how to play the roles and had the knowhow to make the game load faster (fast SSD's, RAMDisk and/or console tweaks to disable pre-calculating tesselation and other things) would go out of our way to make sure we were always in first, and in these three roles.
 
Derangel said:
Everything costs a hell of a lot more to research and make now days than in the early 2000s as well. CPUs are orders of magnitude more complicated these days. AMD and Intel simply cannot produce chips for the same prices as they used to, so costs go up. The market can bare the weight of higher priced parts, so costs go up. Prices not reaching 2001 level prices does not mean that we don't have a competitive market.
Click to expand...

Partially true. There is an impact here. Processes are more complicated and expensive producing lower yields and R&D takes more work and is more involved.

What I think people forget - however - is the absolutely massive volumes these costs are spread out over.

Intel sells between 300 and 400 MILLION CPU's in a year. Architectures tend to stay around for up to two years, so that's 600-800 million CPU's per architecture. So, even if it costs $10 Billion to develop a tock architecture, that's only between $12.50 and $16.67 per CPU. This does not come even close to justifying the $2,000 price tag of some CPU's on the x299 platform.

It has much more to do with the concept of "we have no real competition, we can charge whatever we want". There is less of that now that Zen is in the marketplace, but its still not gone. It will be interesting to see what AMD's 7nm launch does to CPU pricing.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Partially true. There is an impact here. Processes are more complicated and expensive producing lower yields and R&D takes more work and is more involved.

What I think people forget - however - is the absolutely massive volumes these costs are spread out over.

Intel sells between 300 and 400 MILLION CPU's in a year. Architectures tend to stay around for up to two years, so that's 600-800 million CPU's per architecture. So, even if it costs $10 Billion to develop a tock architecture, that's only between $12.50 and $16.67 per CPU. This does not come even close to justifying the $2,000 price tag of some CPU's on the x299 platform.

It has much more to do with the concept of "we have no real competition, we can charge whatever we want". There is less of that now that Zen is in the marketplace, but its still not gone. It will be interesting to see what AMD's 7nm launch does to CPU pricing.
Click to expand...

Costs might come down a bit, but we're unlikely to ever see early 2000s prices on any high-end computer hardware again (even accounting for inflation). I wouldn't be at all surprised if the top end Zen 2 Ryzen is close to the price of the 9900K, especially if it really is 16/32.
 
My point is that you CANT make an socalled super high end HEDT and then literally make a desktop part that runs circles around it for half the price just mere months later.

Otherwise you completely invalidated the whole reason for hedt

How can a 16 core threadripper compete with its

Pcie4x
Quad ddr4 channels

Against

15 to 20% faster cores of the same count
Pcie5
40 lanes on a desktop
Dual chan ddr5 slots?

Massively more bandwidth
Better faster lanes
Faster cores

Half the price.

Its shitting on your customers is all I'm saying.

But no one cares because the world is one big apathetic internet keyboard commando unrealityville.
 
Last edited:
tangoseal said:
My point is that you CANT make an socalled super high end HEDT and then literally make a desktop part that runs circles around it for half the price just mere months later.

Otherwise you completely invalidated the whole reason for hedt

How can a 16 core threadripper compete with its

Pcie4x
Quad ddr4 channels

Against

15 to 20% faster cores of the same count
Pcie5
40 lanes on a desktop
Dual chan ddr5 slots?

Massively more bandwidth
Better faster lanes
Faster cores

Half the price.

Its shitting on your customers is all I'm saying.

But no one cares because the world is one big apathetic internet keyboard commando unrealityville.
Click to expand...

You do realize that all of this stuff (assuming its all real) will also come to 3rd gen Threadripper, right? Also, its not shitting on customers. Shitting on customers is what Intel has done for years. Shitting on customers would be artificially holding back technology for no reason. Shitting on customers would be charging more for a product solely because it makes some people less pissy about their expensive purchase. Big gen-to-gen improvements used to be the norm, its nice to see that happening again. You're demanding that AMD artificially hold back its products because it makes you feel bad. That's a pretty shallow reason to demand tech be held back.
 
Derangel said:
You do realize that all of this stuff (assuming its all real) will also come to 3rd gen Threadripper, right? Also, its not shitting on customers. Shitting on customers is what Intel has done for years. Shitting on customers would be artificially holding back technology for no reason. Shitting on customers would be charging more for a product solely because it makes some people less pissy about their expensive purchase. Big gen-to-gen improvements used to be the norm, its nice to see that happening again. You're demanding that AMD artificially hold back its products because it makes you feel bad. That's a pretty shallow reason to demand tech be held back.
Click to expand...

No I'm not. I'm just stating that there should be an incentive program or something like... a discount on a 3rd gen threadripper or something if you trade in or show ownership of a 2nd gen. That's all. Nothing more.

You can armchair judge if you want but you know you too have been fucked by a corporation at some point in your life.

Like when I traded in a Galaxy S7 for 400 off a Note 9. I gave Verizon the phone physically. I'm still fighting 7 months later for my discount.
 
You didn't know ryzen 2 was in development?

The whole chiplet thing has been in the news for some time.

On another tangent, Ryzen 2 chiplet based thing is improving yelds, dies per wafer, streamlining the production processes allowing multiple product lines with just 2 ish masks. 1 for i/o 1 for cores. Only needing to make 1 set of tools to test and diagnose the cpu cores across 3 lines.

This is simplification on a massive scale. Amd could perhaps charge more but they don't need to they are producing a competitive product at a much lower cost.

Intel seems to work on the sell less (mid to high end) units with a very high margin. Amd has a lower cost, lower margin, and going for higher volume is my guess.
 
tangoseal said:
No I'm not. I'm just stating that there should be an incentive program or something like... a discount on a 3rd gen threadripper or something if you trade in or show ownership of a 2nd gen. That's all. Nothing more.

You can armchair judge if you want but you know you too have been fucked by a corporation at some point in your life.

Like when I traded in a Galaxy S7 for 400 off a Note 9. I gave Verizon the phone physically. I'm still fighting 7 months later for my discount.
Click to expand...

We've all been fucked by companies before, difference is I don't think AMD is fucking anyone here. AMD finding a way to increase cores and performance a good amount and still maintain consumer level price points it not fucking anyone over. You make it sound like AMD set out to screw over 2nd Gen Threadripper buyers.
 
Derangel said:
We've all been fucked by companies before, difference is I don't think AMD is fucking anyone here. AMD finding a way to increase cores and performance a good amount and still maintain consumer level price points it not fucking anyone over. You make it sound like AMD set out to screw over 2nd Gen Threadripper buyers.
Click to expand...

Not intentionally screw. But come on man. 2nd gen threadripper hasn't even been out a full calendar year as far as I can remember and here we are getting regular desktop parts tens of percentage faster in all areas or more.

I dont think they are intentionally doing anything. You are not invested in so called HEDT apparently, maybe you are, I dont know. You would feel the same way.

I agree that Intel has inte tonally fuxked thier customers gleefully and intentionally. Yes I agree.

Even a 3rd gen threadripper is not going to compete with thier desktop version if the numbers are right especially in price. AMD might as well ditch hedt and just do all desktop and server class. Stop playing some middle ground that they clearly cant balance.

Honestly do not think hedt should be offered anymore. Either buy all server grade or all desktop. Hedt is just too risky. Look at Intels handling of x299.

These things are not apparent to hedt owners until it's too late especially with Intel. Didnt used to be this way at least.

Some of your comments are trolling and some are making me think differently. That's all Inwas asking. Help me see the error of my ways without being a flame filled cunt troll.
 
Last edited:
tangoseal said:
Not intentionally screw. But come on man. 2nd gen threadripper hasn't even been out a full calendar year as far as I can remember and here we are getting regular desktop parts tens of percentage faster in all areas or more.

I dont think they are intentionally doing anything. You are not invested in so called HEDT apparently, maybe you are, I dont know. You would feel the same way.

I agree that Intel has inte tonally fuxked thier customers gleefully and intentionally. Yes I agree.

Even a 3rd gen threadripper is not going to compete with thier desktop version if the numbers are right especially in price. AMD might as well ditch hedt and just do all desktop and server class. Stop playing some middle ground that they clearly cant balance.

Honestly do not think hedt should be offered anymore. Either buy all server grade or all desktop. Hedt is just too risky. Look at Intels handling of x299.

These things are not apparent to hedt owners until it's too late especially with Intel.
Click to expand...

Early adopter fee and when you bought it, it was the best determined option.
Also I would argue that Zen+ is basically Zen.

Anyway, I don't like the idea of artificially slowing progress to please very bleeding edge customer, they knew they wouldn't get best perf/dollar and also that bleeding edge changes very quick.
Would you be pissed if they release Threadripper with double the core count for same price ? Is it just because of product name ?
 
MMitch said:
Early adopter fee and when you bought it, it was the best determined option.
Also I would argue that Zen+ is basically Zen.

Anyway, I don't like the idea of artificially slowing progress to please very bleeding edge customer, they knew they wouldn't get best perf/dollar and also that bleeding edge changes very quick.
Would you be pissed if they release Threadripper with double the core count for same price ? Is it just because of product name ?
Click to expand...

Well no not really. I guess shits moving so damned fast now at speeds we've never seen before. How does one even react? Tech is moving faster than ever I guess. What can you do about it?

Nothing I suppose. Sure my chip is gonna be a fast workstation. It's just a bummer that a half priced desktop chip is going to be much faster. It's kind of a turn off to even staying in computing. Might be better off just going fishing more and fuck computing. At least fishing is basically the same as it has been... well forever now, and hasn't changed hardly any save for advanced rod and reels.

I still have a plasma TV because I cant keep up with the Jones. Plus I am not deriving happiness from the Jones race.

I'm happy with my computer. Screw it. Waste of post space to continue this convo honestly.
 
tangoseal said:
Not intentionally screw. But come on man. 2nd gen threadripper hasn't even been out a full calendar year as far as I can remember and here we are getting regular desktop parts tens of percentage faster in all areas or more.

I dont think they are intentionally doing anything. You are not invested in so called HEDT apparently, maybe you are, I dont know. You would feel the same way.

I agree that Intel has inte tonally fuxked thier customers gleefully and intentionally. Yes I agree.
Click to expand...

I bought in on the whole HEDT thing three years ago. Will probably go back to consumer stuff since I really don't need all the HEDT features. If you are on HEDT for what the platform offers, you're going to be getting something a hell of a lot better with 3rd gen Threadripper. If HEDT follows the same path as consumer (again, assuming this is all true) consider what the new TR4 chips will bring. If consumer is going up to 40 lanes, what kind of lane boost will HEDT see? If 16/32 is the new high-end for consumer, what will the new high-end for HEDT be? Both will get PCI-E 4.0 support on new chipsets. If AMD goes for DDR5 support with Zen 2 (I think its unlikely, but we'll see) I imagine that would be exclusive to HEDT for the first generation. HEDT will still retain quad-channel memory support while consumer will still have dual-channel. If all this pans out both market segments will see some big improvements.
 
Pyromaneyakk said:
I got this switch -- at the time it was $199. Not cheap but not insane either.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0765ZPY18/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...

To reply to this again, yeah that is not a bad price at all. The port count is a little bit of an issue though. I definitely couldn't get away with only 8 ports.

In May 2012 I paid $274 for a HP Procurve 1810G-24 managed 24 port gigabit switch. It has been great, but as you can see below, it is heavily utilized.

procurve-cropped.jpg



So, I have 3 ports that are not utilized. 4 additional ports go to my server, but if I had a 10gig capable uplink port those 4 ports could be replaced by one 10gig line instead.

So I could get away with 24 ports, but I'd probably be more comfortable with 48 at this point.

If that Netgear switch existed in a configuration with 24x to 48x gigabit ports and 4x 10GBaseT "uplink" ports and cost maybe $600 or less, it would essentially be an instant buy for me, as long as it supported VLANS and link aggregation.

And this switch may even exist for all I know. Netgears product lineup is so confusing it is difficult to tell :p
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Z, why not grab a used Aruba S2500 (or better) off the bay? <US$200 shipped usually, I paid less than that, with 48 x 1Gbase-T and 4 x SPF+. Trunked two of the SFP+ to an HPE 10Gbase-T workgroup switch that has two SFP+.

The Aruba has a nice terminal. Main concern is noise, I'm currently working on upgrading the fans to Noctuas before I lock it into my new minirack.
 
Derangel said:
I bought in on the whole HEDT thing three years ago. Will probably go back to consumer stuff since I really don't need all the HEDT features. If you are on HEDT for what the platform offers, you're going to be getting something a hell of a lot better with 3rd gen Threadripper. If HEDT follows the same path as consumer (again, assuming this is all true) consider what the new TR4 chips will bring. If consumer is going up to 40 lanes, what kind of lane boost will HEDT see? If 16/32 is the new high-end for consumer, what will the new high-end for HEDT be? Both will get PCI-E 4.0 support on new chipsets. If AMD goes for DDR5 support with Zen 2 (I think its unlikely, but we'll see) I imagine that would be exclusive to HEDT for the first generation. HEDT will still retain quad-channel memory support while consumer will still have dual-channel. If all this pans out both market segments will see some big improvements.
Click to expand...

Wow reading your quote of mine. I rely on my phone to make too many errors sigh haha I should proofread what my phone is printing on screen before I hit post reply.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Z, why not grab a used Aruba S2500 (or better) off the bay? <US$200 shipped usually, I paid less than that, with 48 x 1Gbase-T and 4 x SPF+. Trunked two of the SFP+ to an HPE 10Gbase-T workgroup switch that has two SFP+.

The Aruba has a nice terminal. Main concern is noise, I'm currently working on upgrading the fans to Noctuas before I lock it into my new minirack.
Click to expand...

I'm not familliar with those. I will have to read up.

Honestly, I am trying to avoid anything that requires a transducer though. I had such a horrible experience with my brocades that I never want to mess with transducers or fiber ever again. Looking to stay 10GBaseT if possible.

Also, I have little to no need for anything Layer3, but I guess it doesn't hurt if they are this cheap. Just because you have it doesn't mean you need to use it...
 
Derangel said:
If HEDT follows the same path as consumer (again, assuming this is all true) consider what the new TR4 chips will bring. If consumer is going up to 40 lanes, what kind of lane boost will HEDT see?
Click to expand...

Expect no change: the consumer 'upgrade' is coming from the chipset, not the socket. That's fine and perhaps even good for the consumer side, but unless AMD is able to add lanes with the same socket, there would be limited utility in providing a similar 'expansion' of PCIe lanes for their HEDT line. Essentially, adding lanes that are not direct to CPU are of less benefit to workstation users than they are to consumers, as workstation users are much more likely to expect full simultaneous bandwidth availability of all lanes than consumers, including most power users and gamers.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Z, why not grab a used Aruba S2500 (or better) off the bay? <US$200 shipped usually, I paid less than that, with 48 x 1Gbase-T and 4 x SPF+. Trunked two of the SFP+ to an HPE 10Gbase-T workgroup switch that has two SFP+.

The Aruba has a nice terminal. Main concern is noise, I'm currently working on upgrading the fans to Noctuas before I lock it into my new minirack.
Click to expand...
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm not familliar with those. I will have to read up.

Honestly, I am trying to avoid anything that requires a transducer though. I had such a horrible experience with my brocades that I never want to mess with transducers or fiber ever again. Looking to stay 10GBaseT if possible.

Also, I have little to no need for anything Layer3, but I guess it doesn't hurt if they are this cheap. Just because you have it doesn't mean you need to use it...
Click to expand...

That said, the Fiber Store has SFP+ to 10GBaseT adapters for only $59 now, so that could actually make this Aruba thing doable for me.

I'm not quite sure how they do this though, as the 10GBaseT power spec is greater than that of SFP+. That, and I wonder if they add any latency...

The Arbua S2500 almost seems too good to be true at that price.

Are there any reasons WHY it's this cheap? Like, pulls 200W at idle, requires fancy licensing, etc. etc.

You said it s alittle loud. How loud?
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm not familliar with those. I will have to read up.

Honestly, I am trying to avoid anything that requires a transducer though. I had such a horrible experience with my brocades that I never want to mess with transducers or fiber ever again. Looking to stay 10GBaseT if possible.

Also, I have little to no need for anything Layer3, but I guess it doesn't hurt if they are this cheap. Just because you have it doesn't mean you need to use it...
Click to expand...

HPE bought Aruba- so the product is still around. Support is thin for stuff that was branded Aruba, but as basic switches, they work as well as anything else.

With respect to the SFP+ (I assume you meant 'transceivers'?) stuff, I picked up custom DAC cables from FiberStore for mine. The 10Gbase-T HPE switch hooks up my workstation and NAS, for now, while everything else goes through the Aruba.

Note that if you have the Mikrotik, you can use their 10Gbase-T SFP+ transceivers too. You can get an eight-port version and mix and match as needed.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Are there any reasons WHY it's this cheap? Like, pulls 200W at idle, requires fancy licensing, etc. etc.

You said it s alittle loud. How loud?
Click to expand...

They're old. Like, really old. But they work. They don't need licensing to work as 'workgroup' switches; they were originally used to run wifi APs, and that's what their licensing is for IIRC.

With respect to noise, they have the familiar datacenter 'drone' to them once booted up, but are unequivocally loud while booting up. Not bad for a closet, but you don't want to have to sit next to one.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
HPE bought Aruba- so the product is still around. Support is thin for stuff that was branded Aruba, but as basic switches, they work as well as anything else.

With respect to the SFP+ (I assume you meant 'transceivers'?) stuff, I picked up custom DAC cables from FiberStore for mine. The 10Gbase-T HPE switch hooks up my workstation and NAS, for now, while everything else goes through the Aruba.

Note that if you have the Mikrotik, you can use their 10Gbase-T SFP+ transceivers too. You can get an eight-port version and mix and match as needed.
Click to expand...

What is the configuration like? All command line? Is the interface easy to learn? Or is there maybe a web interface alternative?

I doubt I'll need support. In my 7 years of owning my ProCurve switch I've never once contacted support.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
That said, the Fiber Store has SFP+ to 10GBaseT adapters for only $59 now, so that could actually make this Aruba thing doable for me.

I'm not quite sure how they do this though, as the 10GBaseT power spec is greater than that of SFP+. That, and I wonder if they add any latency...
Click to expand...

I have one, Ubiquiti branding I think, that I plan to try out. May be the same part.

Generally, if you're not trying to say push 10Gbit great lengths, the power requirement isn't too bad, and newer switches (especially Mikrotik) have been built for the purpose.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
What is the configuration like? All command line? Is the interface easy to learn? Or is there maybe a web interface alternative?

I doubt I'll need support. In my 7 years of owning my ProCurve switch I've never once contacted support.
Click to expand...

The S2500 has both terminal and web. As you'd expect, the terminal side is more featureful, and the GUI side is more for monitoring.

I was able to stumble around the terminal and set everything I needed with a small amount of web searching for support. It's a good CLI, structured more like Linux, but as responsive as Ciscos. Realistically if all you need to do is turn on / off ports, set addresses, and enable a trunk (LDAP), you're golden.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
The S2500 has both terminal and web. As you'd expect, the terminal side is more featureful, and the GUI side is more for monitoring.

I was able to stumble around the terminal and set everything I needed with a small amount of web searching for support. It's a good CLI, structured more like Linux, but as responsive as Ciscos. Realistically if all you need to do is turn on / off ports, set addresses, and enable a trunk (LDAP), you're golden.
Click to expand...


Yeah. probably the most convoluted thing I'll ever do is configure VLAN tagging.

I have to say I'm intrigued.

IdiotInCharge said:
The S2500 has both terminal and web. As you'd expect, the terminal side is more featureful, and the GUI side is more for monitoring.

I was able to stumble around the terminal and set everything I needed with a small amount of web searching for support. It's a good CLI, structured more like Linux, but as responsive as Ciscos. Realistically if all you need to do is turn on / off ports, set addresses, and enable a trunk (LDAP), you're golden.
Click to expand...

Nice, so you just SSH in to it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top