The Upgrade Bug Got Me -- BAD ....... UPDATE: IT'S ALIVE!!!! (and I don't feel empty)

[Sunny129]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Amused

I was able to justify it by looking at various benchmarks and seeing that the 3.2 paired with good memory is nearly twice as fast as the 2.0. I had promised myself I wouldn't upgrade until the 4.0 came out. But I revised that to "twice as fast."

Barring hitting the lotto, my current plan is to wait until I can get roughly 8-10x the performance of my processors. That would be about 240-300 on the Content Creation Winstone 2003. The P4 3.2 gets 52.2.

don't hold your breath...j/k.

 

[Jeff7181]

I'm surprised nobody's said he should have waited for the new Raptors to appear on shelves =)

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I'm surprised nobody's said he should have waited for the new Raptors to appear on shelves =)

My box sounds like a tornado already (5 80mm case fans in an Antec 10xx file server case). I doubt a little whine from a couple of HDs is even going to be audible.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I'm surprised nobody's said he should have waited for the new Raptors to appear on shelves =)

My box sounds like a tornado already (5 80mm case fans in an Antec 10xx file server case). I doubt a little whine from a couple of HDs is even going to be audible.

It's not the noise difference I'm talking about... it's the HUGE performance increase.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I'm surprised nobody's said he should have waited for the new Raptors to appear on shelves =)

My box sounds like a tornado already (5 80mm case fans in an Antec 10xx file server case). I doubt a little whine from a couple of HDs is even going to be audible.

It's not the noise difference I'm talking about... it's the HUGE performance increase.

How huge? I thought it was 10% or less.

At any rate, if I keep waiting for the next big thing before I upgrade... I'll never upgrade.

 

[Jeff7181]

Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

Check out the SCSI drive comparisons. In all the ones I've looked at, the larger drives among the same make and model are faster.

 

[poppyq]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Looks nice, I'll probably be getting the P4C800-E when I finally upgrade, and it's what I recommended to my brother for his upgrade a month ago.

Please post on whether you like the Zalman once you've installed it, I'm still trying to decide between it and being lazy and using a retail HSF.

I use the zalman on my AMD barton 2500+ and it's almost silent, you can speed it up or slow it down, and even with it slowed down to silentmode it still cools my cpu (oc'd to 3200+) just fine.

 

[txxxx]

You'll grow out of it

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: txxxx
You'll grow out of it

I know. But I'll have fun along the way

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

Check out the SCSI drive comparisons. In all the ones I've looked at, the larger drives among the same make and model are faster.

The Raptor is not a SCSI drive =)

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

Check out the SCSI drive comparisons. In all the ones I've looked at, the larger drives among the same make and model are faster.

The Raptor is not a SCSI drive =)

It's not?! :Q



I know, but I figured the same thing applied. Each successively bigger WD JB drive has been faster, too.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Sunny129

don't hold your breath...j/k.

Well, it will be a few years before I can afford it, and in 2000 a 500MHz system was very respectable. Clock speeds have sextupled since then, and I'm sure they're much more than 6x faster.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

Check out the SCSI drive comparisons. In all the ones I've looked at, the larger drives among the same make and model are faster.

The Raptor is not a SCSI drive =)

It's not?! :Q



I know, but I figured the same thing applied. Each successively bigger WD JB drive has been faster, too.

Because they've increase the data density of the platters.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Storage Review Article

Supposedly the STR of the new Raptor is supposed to be above 60 MB/s average, as opposed to the just under 50 average of the origional Raptor.

Seek times have been reduced... I/O performance is record breaking... even makes SCSI drives look silly.

And then there's the noise factor... SR says it's almost as quiet as Seagate's Barracuda drives... although it's hotter than any other ATA drive, nearing SCSI drive temps.

Yeah, but those performance numbers are for the 74GB model. Of course a larger drive is going to be faster. How does the new 37 GB Raptor compare to the old 37 GB Raptor?

Larger drive does not = faster. There shouldn't be much difference between the 74 and 37 GB models... the 74 GB model just has 2 platters... same data density... but there has been other improvements that are listed in that article.

Check out the SCSI drive comparisons. In all the ones I've looked at, the larger drives among the same make and model are faster.

The Raptor is not a SCSI drive =)

It's not?! :Q



I know, but I figured the same thing applied. Each successively bigger WD JB drive has been faster, too.

Because they've increase the data density of the platters.

Really? I thought they just added platters. Hmmm...

 

[txxxx]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: txxxx
You'll grow out of it

I know. But I'll have fun along the way

And show you have very little disversification in anything other than computing
Good luck

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: txxxx

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: txxxx
You'll grow out of it

I know. But I'll have fun along the way

And show you have very little disversification in anything other than computing
Good luck

Of course. I'm a geek.

Seriously, though. I do have other interests. Home Theater (check out my DVD collection), body building and general fitness, and I run my own business.

Hell, I even have 2 ex-wives and a GF.

 

[Amused]

Well, the mobo, cpu, Zalman, WinXP and Raptors showed up today from ZZF. I don't think the rest from Newegg will show up until Friday. If I only had the Memory, I could start playing!!

The mobo is beautiful.

And DAMN, this HSF is HUGE!!!

I set it on the socket and it easily clears everything, but STILL. It's almost as big as the mobo itself. :Q

 

[Amused]

Well, after two RMAs for a faulty mobo AND faulty RAM, not to mention finding a bug in Prime95 version 23.7 software that causes windows errors on some hardware... I finally have this thing together and running smooth at 225 1:1 FSB, 3.6GHz with 2-2-3-7 timings and Prime95 + Superpi stable overnight.

Here is my PCMark04 score:

5642

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm04=87382
----------------------------

PCMark02 Scores:

CPU: 8921

Memory: 11236

HDD: 2257

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm=1652280
---------------

3DMark03 Score:

6696

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1763393
---------------------

3DMark01SE score:

19281

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7354922


What do you think of that? Good scores?

I'm pretty pleased so far.

 

[Linux23]

good god man. it almost took you a month to put this system together?:Q

glad to see, from your benches, that it was worth it.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Linux23
good god man. it almost took you a month to put this system together?:Q

glad to see, from your benches, that it was worth it.

Yep, first I got faulty RAM and a faulty mobo and had to wait out RMAs on them. Then I ordered some RAM from Monarch. They led me on for over a a week before telling me it wasn't in stock and they were canceling my order :| After I finally got some RAM from Newegg, I got the machine up and running at stock speeds and did a bunch of stability testing and playing with RAM timings. After I was sure that there was no hardware malfunctions I started OCing. I just stopped when I could declare 3.6 and 2-2-3-7 timings completely 100% stable.

Whew!!!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Looks nice, I'll probably be getting the P4C800-E when I finally upgrade, and it's what I recommended to my brother for his upgrade a month ago.

Please post on whether you like the Zalman once you've installed it, I'm still trying to decide between it and being lazy and using a retail HSF.

Hey Dave,

The Zalman was a breeze to install. It works like a charm and is a hell of a lot quieter than the stock HSF. It is huge, but designed well. The great thing is it's going to be a hell of a lot easier to remove than a stock HSF.

My 3.2 at 3.6 idles at 30c and gets to 46c under full load. This is with the vcore voltage bumped up a few notches, too.

 

[arcenite]

I am always upgrading, slowly but surely.. and I wonder why I never have money... Next thing inline... my 1700@2.3ghz is going to be replaced by a Barton 2500, be prepared to see a DLT3C on the FS/FT soon

Bill