learners permit
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 1,815
I run raid 0 on a pair of sabrent rocket nvme drives on X570. Definitely a pain to get setup but flawless since then and really fast writes particularly.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I run raid 0 on a pair of sabrent rocket nvme drives on X570. Definitely a pain to get setup but flawless since then and really fast writes particularly.
While I do (now) generally prefer Dell, they aren't perfect. You can get a bad Broadcom and/or Intel NIC from Dell (of course, just as easily gotten from others as well)We've kept plenty of spares for Gen7+ HP RAID controllers. I'm still wondering who received the bribe to force us to use HP equipment (and Cisco, for strictly layer 2 work) for our main program. I much prefer the Dell stuff that we used on another. Mostly prefer Dell in general...
If you have to ask the question, the answer is generally 'no'.Is there really a benefit?
And we have / did, but generally I'll take a bad NIC over most any other part failingWhile I do (now) generally prefer Dell, they aren't perfect. You can get a bad Broadcom and/or Intel NIC from Dell (of course, just as easily gotten from others as well)
Yet, the A0 revision also had an OPN.... Figure that one out. And zen2 had an OPN listed for engineering samples also. OPN is just an assigned code for the specific processor line. Not sure why you think this wouldn't be the case this time when this was the exact case last time.The Y subfix indicates this is not an engineering sample. Moreover OPN means "Orderable Part Number" and engineering samples do not have OPN. This is the final chip or something close to it (QS or a preproduction sample).
Yet, the A0 revision also had an OPN.... Figure that one out. And zen2 had an OPN listed for engineering samples also. OPN is just an assigned code for the specific processor line. Not sure why you think this wouldn't be the case this time when this was the exact case last time.
Edit:.Just wanted to share link for zen2 ES with OPN...
https://www.techspot.com/amp/news/78452-amd-next-12-core-cpu-appears-benchmark-database.html
Don't bother, he does the same thing every launch. He did it with Rome at the first leak, when the clocks were 1.4/2.2 or something similar, and not a peep when not even the 64 core parts were clocked that low, or anything close.
Yet, the A0 revision also had an OPN.... Figure that one out. And zen2 had an OPN listed for engineering samples also. OPN is just an assigned code for the specific processor line. Not sure why you think this wouldn't be the case this time when this was the exact case last time.
Edit:.Just wanted to share link for zen2 ES with OPN...
https://www.techspot.com/amp/news/78452-amd-next-12-core-cpu-appears-benchmark-database.html
Huh? 800mhz umm im done replying after that comment
Don't bother, he does the same thing every launch. He did it with Rome at the first leak, when the clocks were 1.4/2.2 or something similar, and not a peep when not even the 64 core parts were clocked that low, or anything close.
Oh I know, I just like to point it out that way anyone else reading isn't mislead... I don't expect he'll change his ways, I just don't want it to spread .Well, he very clearly spells out he is Anti-AMD. Hard to believe anything he says about AMD...
AMDs boost clocks are not Intel's boost clocks -- that's the biggest issue with reports of higher boost clocks on AMD parts and making a comparison IMO, unfortunately, and it really doesn't tell us if AMD will close the single-thread gap with the release of Zen 3 CPUs.My 3600x stablizes at 3875MHz all-core at 100% load in a stress test like prime95 small fft.
AMDs boost clocks are not Intel's boost clocks
I run raid 0 on a pair of sabrent rocket nvme drives on X570. Definitely a pain to get setup but flawless since then and really fast writes particularly.
While I do (now) generally prefer Dell, they aren't perfect. You can get a bad Broadcom and/or Intel NIC from Dell (of course, just as easily gotten from others as well)
AMDs boost clocks are not Intel's boost clocks -- that's the biggest issue with reports of higher boost clocks on AMD parts and making a comparison IMO, unfortunately, and it really doesn't tell us if AMD will close the single-thread gap with the release of Zen 3 CPUs.
So, 11th gen is moving to pcie 4.0, does that include the DMI link to the PCH? Seems this has been an issue for a long time with Intel (RAID 0 with 2 NVME drives sharing the pcie 3.0 x4 lanes with other things as well). I guess they want you to move up to workstation grade, but they don't even have much for you there.That's what the flash memory used on NVMe excels at.
I doubt it. Ryzen and its descendants simply don't clock as well as Intel's architectures do. We've seen this time and time again.
So, 11th gen is moving to pcie 4.0, does that include the DMI link to the PCH? Seems this has been an issue for a long time with Intel (RAID 0 with 2 NVME drives sharing the pcie 3.0 x4 lanes with other things as well). I guess they want you to move up to workstation grade, but they don't even have much for you there.
Well, if they are getting 4.8ghz (nobody knows how the different SKUs will boost yet) and that rumoured IPC increase is anywhere near 10%+, I think it will help close that last bit of gap. Hopefully they can get the latency issues resolved, we saw what difference a single ccx did with the 3300x vs 3100... Huge difference even at identical clocks. I'm hopeful but not banking on it .
How many people really use the Mobo's RAID option really? I never have, I just use disk management/storage spaces and freenas, and if I had a RAID card...
I use to use it all the time with spinning rust. The only problem I have encountered was the 10k raptor drives themselves taking a shit. With how fast SSD are now it makes little sense to do.It's probably more common than you think.
How does latency affect word and such? I don't fully understand ram stats like that, but am genuinely curious how it affects real world work (rather than just tuning for a benchmark because more is better). I just got some new ram for my ryzen so hoping to tune it.It was said tongue-in-cheek. If Ryzen 4000 improves the memory OC situation and I can re-use the DDR4-4400 I've got singing on Z390, then I'll definitely be doing a build.
Because I cannot stomach MS Word, Chrome or notepad.exe on anything slower than 35ns latency, sorry.
View attachment 267883
I use to use it all the time with spinning rust. The only problem I have encountered was the 10k raptor drives themselves taking a shit. With how fast SSD are now it makes little sense to do.
This is something of a misconception. The only problem you have with this is making sure that when replacing a motherboard, you configure the new one correctly and that you don't jump from Intel to AMD and vice versa. Other than that, it's not a big deal. Intel's RAID volumes are backwards compatible going back to the virtual dawn of IRST.
I can't imagine they can double the DMI link on the z490 if it wasn't built in to start, but if it's pcie 4.0 compatible maybe it can run at 2x bandwidth like AMD has. Something tells me this won't be the case and it'll just ungrade to have pcie to the CPU links (aka, GPU). Who knows though without more info. I feel they are just making a faux pass at pcie 4.0 just to hold over their investors and to be able to say they have it also until pcie 5.0 comes around.Honestly, I have no way of knowing at this time. Just because the PCIe controller in the chipset is PCIe 4.0 capable doesn't mean that the DMI link will be, or that the chipset will be fully enabled as PCIe 4.0 compatible. I've heard only one rumor that Intel will still use DMI 3.0, but that the link count is going to double. I don't know how true this is as I've not been able to verify or disprove this in any way shape or form. We'll have to wait until some more definitive information comes out to know for sure.
I can't imagine they can double the DMI link on the z490 if it wasn't built in to start, but if it's pcie 4.0 compatible maybe it can run at 2x bandwidth like AMD has. Something tells me this won't be the case and it'll just ungrade to have pcie to the CPU links (aka, GPU). Who knows though without more info. I feel they are just making a faux pass at pcie 4.0 just to hold over their investors and to be able to say they have it also until pcie 5.0 comes around.
Yeah, I hear you, I'm just saying if people are buying now they are probably stuck with what they have. Another chipset it's possible they may upgrade the DMI link finally, either 3.0 x8 or 4.0 x4 (basically doubling bandwidth one way or another) and be on par with AMD finally. Really this only affects a minority of people and work loads, but hey . My server runs RAID 10, my desktop just has a single NVME and then 2 spinners in RAID 0. Seems odd that AMD has had 24 lanes (20 direct to cpu, 4 for chipset link) for so long and Intel is still sitting with 16 + DMI x4. I was hoping the 10 series was going to fix this deficiency even if it was still 3.0, but alas... still waiting.I believe the rumor was concerning another chipset or variant, but I could be mistaken. As I said I hadn't verified any of that so I can't speak authoritatively towards the validity of it. And, if I did have official information about it, I'd probably be under NDA anyway.
Mostly, it's not much of a deficiency beyond spec-sheet comparisons. Even if you have the drives attached, you're still just talking about peak transfer rates, which you'd need to be able to use continuously at those speeds to really make a difference in some workload completion time.Seems odd that AMD has had 24 lanes (20 direct to cpu, 4 for chipset link) for so long and Intel is still sitting with 16 + DMI x4. I was hoping the 10 series was going to fix this deficiency even if it was still 3.0, but alas... still waiting.
If they can get the sustained all-core speeds well above the middling 4.0 to 4.2 that they currently top out at, that'd be about right for me. Then I just need to find a pair of 32GB DDR4-3600 C16 DIMMs that'll run at speed...4.9GHz? https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-16-core-zen3-ryzen-9-4950x-engineering-sample-boosts-up-to-4-9-ghz
4% clock bump + 15% IPC + improved latency seems like a pretty decent upgrade
You guys ready to see AMD CPUs cost nearly as much as Intels? I sure am. They cant/wont keep their prices at the floor when the chips performance is at the ceiling.
I mean... my 3950 nopes right out the building the second it sees anything close to 4.5 all-core.
If these 4xxx chips are ES all-core'ing out of the box at the boost speed of the 3xxx gen chips, then rip Intel. Get those exploits dusted off or something.
Yeah, I agree, most people would never notice. The only time a normal person would even notice is when transferring (sequenctial) data from 1 nvme to another nvme. You benchmark and get 3500MB/s on both drives individually, but get less than 2,000MB/s (which, lets be honest is still ridiculously fast). It's just for those trying to push the limits or are on the cusp of a HEDT build but aren't ready to make the leap yet. That being said, I was hoping for some sort of advancement... DMI 2.0 had 4GB/s connection back in 1155 (3rd series intel chips).... they "upgraded" to DMI 3.0 with Skylake, which brought the bandwidth down to 3.93GB/s.... here we are over 11 years later still stuck with the same PCH bandwidth (actually, it went slightly down). I guess if it ain't broke don't fix it. If 99% of the population wouldn't see a difference, not much point in changing things, but people running 10900k's have not point in trying to run an NVME RAID is just... dissapointing even if mostly academic and only really going to be noticeable in a benchmark.Mostly, it's not much of a deficiency beyond spec-sheet comparisons. Even if you have the drives attached, you're still just talking about peak transfer rates, which you'd need to be able to use continuously at those speeds to really make a difference in some workload completion time.
And then you'd have to make the case for using consumer instead of HEDT / workstation hardware
You guys ready to see AMD CPUs cost nearly as much as Intels? I sure am. They cant/wont keep their prices at the floor when the chips performance is at the ceiling.
Yeah, welcome to Intel fanboism . If Intel does it, it's fine, if people even think AMD might do it, they're evil. Like it's AMD's sole purpose in life to keep Intel prices cheap. Even then their prices went down, for example 1700x was $399 to 3700x was $349. If the 4700x (5700x?) is back up to $399 and runs a good bit faster than the 3700x... it'll probably be sold out for the first 3-6 months. If the price is $349, it'll still be sold out. What sense does it make to not sell it for as much as you can? It's not a charity just as Intel isn't a charity.So it's ok for Intel to normalize the industry at said price/perf tiering for what, a solid decade and then some - and now all the sudden it's a huge red flag / issue if their competitor possibly follows suite?
I could only hope AMD does such a thing. At least we'd have more than 4c/8T / PCIe 3.0 / DDR4.
It's not chip designs that are the issue -- it's the fabs to produce them. AMD was lucky to partner with TSMC, who had the breakthrough that Intel (and GloFo and Samsung and...) haven't yet made. Otherwise AMD will still be at pre-Skylake levels of performance.They aren't in the same position as they were in 15 years ago with a backup chip design team
So it's ok for Intel to normalize the industry at said price/perf tiering for what, a solid decade and then some - and now all the sudden it's a huge red flag / issue if their competitor possibly follows suite?
I could only hope AMD does such a thing. At least we'd have more than 4c/8T / PCIe 3.0 / DDR4.
You say that, as Intel releases information about them being a year behind on 7nm (although, they said the 1 year behind is only going to affect them by 6 months?). Going by recent Intel mis-steps, I think it's going to take a little bit longer to get themselves back into gear.It's not chip designs that are the issue -- it's the fabs to produce them. AMD was lucky to partner with TSMC, who had the breakthrough that Intel (and GloFo and Samsung and...) haven't yet made. Otherwise AMD will still be at pre-Skylake levels of performance.
Now, supposing that Intel does get their fab tech online, AMD and TSMC will have a fight on their hands, and based on the respective companies' history (that is, Intel and TSMC), it's more likely for Intel to fix their fabs than for TSMC to continue to lead.
I say that based on established history, because Intel has been lying to themselves first all these years. I don't expect to get concrete information out of them until they have shipable products in the pipeline.You say that, as Intel releases information about them being a year behind on 7nm (although, they said the 1 year behind is only going to affect them by 6 months?). Going by recent Intel mis-steps, I think it's going to take a little bit longer to get themselves back into gear.