Author Topic: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions  (Read 46704 times)

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1480 on: July 22, 2014, 05:29:07 PM »
It's closer to 400$ for a 1tb ssd, not 600$...

Also I don't know wtf happened with the formatting in my previous post...  Fixed it now.

Cute, huh?

Online halfelite

  • Member
  • Posts: 1153
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1481 on: July 22, 2014, 06:11:59 PM »
I dont think SSD will ever be cheap enough to make it a big storage solution.

Offline Honemi

  • Member
  • Posts: 478
  • Shit, I don't know.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1482 on: July 22, 2014, 06:28:55 PM »
In my earlier post this page, I linked to an OC3D "review". It isn't indepth or anything, but it is a second opinion on the monitor. If you want more information about GSYNC and ULMB, Blur Busters has a couple of posts dedicated to it. [1], [2]

As far as gaming monitors goes, this look like the one to get if you have a NVIDIA card. The Eizo Foris FG2421 could be a contender if you don't mind playing the panel lottery when buying one (or mind a 1920x1080 display resolution on a 27" screen). Oddly enough, TFT Central's reviewer didn't check the input lag with the Swift's blur reduction like they did with Eizo Foris. Granted, with such a low overall lag input, I couldn't imagine it doing much harm either way.



NVIDIA has announced two new addition to the NVIDIA Shield family, the NVIDIA tablet and NVIDIA controller. The tablet comes equipped with the Tegra K1. TPU, PCPer.

The Tegra K1 is a bit more faster than even Apple's A7 in the CPU department, but the graphics processing trashes the competition. Bit power hungry though.

So perfect for a Shield tablet.

Offline Tiffanys

  • Member
  • Posts: 7719
  • real female girl ojō-sama
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1483 on: July 22, 2014, 07:45:30 PM »
It's closer to 400$ for a 1tb ssd, not 600$...

Also I don't know wtf happened with the formatting in my previous post...  Fixed it now.
1 x ($599.00) SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE1T0BW 2.5" 1TB SATA III TLC, that was on 11/1/2013 here which is currently $469. Looks like the price has went down quite a bit.

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1484 on: July 23, 2014, 11:30:47 AM »
It was actually 400$ on a sale that was posted onto Hardforums very recently.

http://camelcamelcamel.com/Samsung-Electronics-EVO-Series-2-5-Inch-MZ-7TE1T0BW/product/B00E3W16OU?active=price_amazon

Has happened before as well.

Crucial has comparable options, though for some reason CamelCamelCamel is showing them as never having dropped below about 440$. I got my 960 for 380 on Ebay a while ago (sealed, had no writes at all when it got here). I'm pretty sure I could get it for the same price again. So if you're willing to look around, you can get these a lot cheaper than they used to be.

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1485 on: July 24, 2014, 03:46:29 AM »
tbh i don't think SSDs would ever compete against HDDs in terms of cost efficiency, i'd rather do RAID1 with two 4TB HDDs with a small 64GB~128GB SSD cache, pretty sure the overall cost would be essentially the same as a 2TB SSD.

the only problem with this is that its not space efficient, and its pretty much more power hungry, but much of desktops doesn't really bother with those issues.
which means the only place where humongous SSDs would have any practical benefit would be in laptops, disregarding cost that is.

edit: as for the difference in speed, theres pretty much no point in having an ultra-fast archive drives is there? unless your net speed is way over 120MB/s (roughly 1gbps) that is.

edit2: ohh look, speaking of archive drives.
http://www.cnet.com/news/western-digital-ships-6tb-wd-red-nas-hard-drive-and-all-new-wd-red-pro-lineup/
« Last Edit: July 24, 2014, 10:41:49 AM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Online halfelite

  • Member
  • Posts: 1153
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1486 on: July 25, 2014, 03:02:23 AM »
^^ in terms of power hungry. mechanical drives are not that power hungry depending on how you use them. I run 20 drives in my big raid array and spin them down when not in use. So they spin down and park 80% of the time. But for the price of me to switch to SSD I would be looking at a 10+ year turn around from cost vs electric cost saving. not worth it.

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1487 on: July 25, 2014, 08:11:52 AM »
^^ in terms of power hungry. mechanical drives are not that power hungry depending on how you use them. I run 20 drives in my big raid array and spin them down when not in use. So they spin down and park 80% of the time. But for the price of me to switch to SSD I would be looking at a 10+ year turn around from cost vs electric cost saving. not worth it.
i was saying that an HDD with an SSD cache would consume much more than a single large SSD.
this isn't accounting RAID setups yet, 2HDD RAID1 + SSD cache would consume dramatically more than a single large SSD for example.
on the other hand SSDs could "park" faster where their idle states are in the milliwatt range, though i doubt thats the correct term to use.

anyway as i've mentioned before, the only advantages of going with a large SSD is pretty much these:
notes: sorted by what i think as most useful advantage.
  • simplicity in setting up (single drive or 2SSD RAID1)
  • compactness or space efficiency
  • very fast drives
  • lower power consumption

in any case the only down side to it is, well, sheer cost.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 08:20:14 AM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1488 on: July 25, 2014, 09:31:28 AM »
The thing is, sheer cost/gb is generally always lower for larger drives (whether that's SSD or HDD), though. So it's not like you're saving anything by going with 2 smaller drives. You're just spreading out your spending and you end up spending more in the long run. 500GB's occasionally have sales where their prices are comparable per GB to 1TB drives, but that's the lowest it goes.

Another benefit is that: You only use 1 SATA plug. This is actually kinda big when your MB is somewhat limited. I have 8 plugs, but not everyone does. And then of course there's the expected benefit of having a hell of a lot more freedom on your boot drive. I have a VERY large amount of my steam library installed straight onto C right now and I don't have to worry about it. I still have 200GB left. Whatever benefits they get from loading from an SSD (if any), it's there.

And anyway, after you get one big SSD like this, you don't have to mess with them again for a long time. You're done. You got as big as they get.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 09:34:11 AM by xShadow »

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1489 on: July 25, 2014, 10:40:18 AM »
but from that point of view, you could compromise some slight speeds for a far better cost efficiency, from reviews of intel SRT the performance of an SSD cache is close to what a direct SSD would muster.
i've yet seen a study or review of using ZFS as a cache handler yet so i can't comment much on it but it should be far more reliable than NTFS as an archive drive.

4TB HDD + 128GB SSD cache is still the most practical means of storage in terms of speed:price:capacity.
at best even if 2TB SSDs were to have twice as much GB per dollar than the cheapest SSDs of today, the cost wouldn't still hit parity against an HDD+SSD combo.
$300 for a 500GB SSD is just far from ideal, neither is $600~$800 for a 2TB SSD.

PS: DDR4 and skylake's onboard L4 cache would eliminate most of drive-system bottleneck, large amounts of data can be cached to ram using window's superfetch.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 11:15:28 AM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1490 on: July 25, 2014, 10:58:59 AM »
The fuck are we discussing here? I thought we were comparing large SSD vs 2+ smaller SSD's. If we're talking about HDD $/GB yeah no shit it beats SSD drives (I could go buy 12TB of HDD space for a 1TB SSD drive...). That's why most of my gaming build suggestions include one small SSD and one big HDD: it's the most economical given budget constraints. But we're talking about advantages of large SSD's to multiple little SSD's is what I thought...

As for SSD cache, I won't comment. I haven't done any program startup and loading time comparisons between things installed on my SSD and on my HDD. The point is that if you get a large SSD you don't have to worry about it (things will start up and load as fast as possible), and you won't be hurting for space in the future. Any time you need to move things off of it, it's not like you're scrambling to make space and desperately trying to find things that you can get off of it. You can do it calmly because you have so much leeway. When you're at 960GB, even if you have multiple Titanfalls installed, you can spare to move one off at no convenience cost to yourself.

My main point is that when you can afford to spend for a larger drive, you should. $/GB and convenience is better for large SSD's vs small SSD's. As it is for HDD's....

Edit:Furthermore note that you're gonna end up with shit on C whether you like it or not. And you have to actively manage and clean it off on smaller drives. Depending on how much you make, it may not be worth your time to have to do that shit as opposed to just getting a large drive and not worrying about it, or worrying about it much less often (which is the conclusion I came to...).
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 11:01:52 AM by xShadow »

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1491 on: July 25, 2014, 11:16:34 AM »
not quite, even if you have shit-tons of $$$ its far more effective to invest on other things. 64GB of ram, RAID10 HDD arrays with SSD and ram caches, faster processors so that software raid isn't crap or maybe a genuine raid-card for the giggles of it.
the last thing you'd wanna spend stuff on is dumping $600 for a 1TB~2TB SSD. well maybe not the last, more like 3rd or 4th last thing since accessories like some really expensive speakers or maybe some ridiculously expensive keyboard/mouse that i doubt you'd even have the benefit of using it fully are at the bottom of the priority list.


The fuck are we discussing here? I thought we were comparing large SSD vs 2+ smaller SSD's. If we're talking about HDD $/GB yeah no shit it beats SSD drives (I could go buy 12TB of HDD space for a 1TB SSD drive...).

what?

tbh i don't think SSDs would ever compete against HDDs in terms of cost efficiency, i'd rather do RAID1 with two 4TB HDDs with a small 64GB~128GB SSD cache, pretty sure the overall cost would be essentially the same as a 2TB SSD.
i was saying that an HDD with an SSD cache would consume much more than a single large SSD.
this isn't accounting RAID setups yet, 2HDD RAID1 + SSD cache would consume dramatically more than a single large SSD for example.
on the other hand SSDs could "park" faster where their idle states are in the milliwatt range, though i doubt thats the correct term to use.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 11:25:47 AM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1492 on: July 25, 2014, 11:20:10 AM »
anyway as i've mentioned before, the only advantages of going with a large SSD is pretty much these:
notes: sorted by what i think as most useful advantage.
  • simplicity in setting up (single drive or 2SSD RAID1)
  • compactness or space efficiency
  • very fast drives
  • lower power consumption

in any case the only down side to it is, well, sheer cost.

Probably missed the RAID1 part I thought you were saying 2 SSD's in general.

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1493 on: July 25, 2014, 11:27:09 AM »
yeah, well its an option, since i was comparing it against an 2HDD RAID1 it wasn't a fair one, so its either a single SSD or 2SSD RAID1 and its still as simple as it can get, slap two SSDs set it up during installation and you're good to go.

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1494 on: July 25, 2014, 11:44:48 AM »
I just noticed how you edited this.

not quite, even if you have shit-tons of $$$ its far more effective to invest on other things. 64GB of ram, RAID10 HDD arrays with SSD and ram caches, faster processors so that software raid isn't crap or maybe a genuine raid-card for the giggles of it.
the last thing you'd wanna spend stuff on is dumping $600 for a 1TB~2TB SSD. well maybe not the last, more like 3rd or 4th last thing since accessories like some really expensive speakers or maybe some ridiculously expensive keyboard/mouse that i doubt you'd even have the benefit of using it fully are at the bottom of the priority list.

Whoa buddy hold the phone. Expensive speakers are not a fucking waste, especially for a gaming computer. Gaming is not just a visual experience. Even if you don't listen to music while gaming, you won't understand its soundtrack with two pieces of shit on either side of your monitor. They should NOT be at the bottom of the list. People just don't fucking understand how big a difference having a good audio setup makes. That being said you don't have to get super expensive speakers or amp to realize it. My initial speaker setup cost ~130-150 total thanks to Ebay. And it's far from the bottom of the list. If I built even a budget computer back in college knowing then what I do now, it would have been priority number 1 or 2... well granted I would have went for better earphones because it's in dorms. Tied between graphics card. Number 3 is processor.

As for SSD's, I wouldn't put them that low, again, notice my note:
Edit:Furthermore note that you're gonna end up with shit on C whether you like it or not. And you have to actively manage and clean it off on smaller drives. Depending on how much you make, it may not be worth your time to have to do that shit as opposed to just getting a large drive and not worrying about it, or worrying about it much less often (which is the conclusion I came to...).

I guess it's not for people that are living paycheck to paycheck or worrying about their CPU/GPU being sufficient for this or that, but the conveniences of having a large SSD are pretty real. The reason I say to get the biggest one you can afford while keeping the rest of your parts up to snuff is because it's like an investment. You get one that good now, you don't have to mess with it for a long time. This is true for HDD's as well.

The thing is, I notice people skimp out on things that make their gaming experience more convenient for more power. That's not always optimal, actually. There are some quality of life improvements you can make to builds...
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 11:46:23 AM by xShadow »

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1495 on: July 25, 2014, 12:18:58 PM »
not when your speakers are getting costly at over $1000 just for the speakers alone, not accounting the amps, cables, soundcard and such.
you could get good speakers for like $50 and up to $200 it stays pretty cost efficient.
though some really really good speakers do justify it's $500 price but is too much of a stretch, more than that and it becomes pointless.

what was the point of getting a 1TB SSD that costs too much? a 2TB black with an SSD cache in SRT would perform 60%~80% of an SSD's full performance.
imho thats good enough for most practical means and its close to 1/3 the cost per GB.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4329/intel-z68-chipset-smart-response-technology-ssd-caching-review/4
note: the review is pretty old and intel had gone through a series of improvements to SRT, Z87 and Z97 chipsets should have the latest improvements.

PS: if you go through the priorities you'd end up with a $7000 rig before you even get to the 3rd or 4th bottom priority (1TB~2TB SSD?).
i mean something like:
(click to show/hide)

*for archival storage and some low-priority apps.
note: i'm not even stretching for a $1000 octa-processor (haswell-E?)
so even if you do like ditch the 2nd titanB, 2x8GB ram, only one 6TB HDD and no SSD cache nor raid card, a much simpler but good mice/keyboard, cheaper headphones and speakers, etc. you'd still end up at $4000 or so.
and so as i've said, its one of the least prioritized item, you could go by with a slower HDD just fine and a 256GB SSD can fit almost anything but your entire steam library in it just fine too.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 01:02:23 PM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1496 on: July 25, 2014, 01:15:50 PM »
not when your speakers are getting costly at over $1000 just for the speakers alone, not accounting the amps, cables, soundcard and such.
you could get good speakers for like $50 and up to $200 it stays pretty cost efficient.
though some really really good speakers do justify it's $500 price but is too much of a stretch, more than that and it becomes pointless.

Hell no. If you haven't heard really high end stuff, don't make that statement. There is definitely reason to spend more and more on audio gear. DIY would get you even further. That being said the first big upgrade you make will be the most significant. For me that was my pair of Ebay Paradigm Atom V3's with the Topping TP20 amp. Note that those speakers normally sell for around 200$ per pair though. Now, there are diminishing returns but since when did diminishing returns matter? If we're talking diminishing returns, there are diminishing returns in everything, including eyecandy. Mathematically, you should know how this works:

1->2, 2=2x1, 200% increase.
1->3=300% increase.
1->4=400% increase.
3->4=133% increase.

That's how all things are. That includes eyecandy. Graphics cards are the same way. I know because I'm fielding 780 SLI's. Yeah they have twice the performance but in terms of game eyecandy, how big a difference is it? As big as you can justify with your pocket, that's what. Your fallacy is that you think that one type of incremental improvement ultimately trumps another type universally for each person. That is, GPU>>>CPU>>>sound. For me it ain't. I can tell you that 1400$ earphones >>> 200$ earphones (granted I got mine for 600$). If you have any kind of decent pair of ears hanging off that head, the difference should be as easy as night and day. I know because I've heard my friend's DT990's. The difference is massive. I suppose you want to bring the DT880's as a closer competitor, that's fine. I haven't heard those.

Quote
what was the point of getting a 1TB SSD that costs too much?

Convenience and reliability. Furthermore you mentioning "costs too much" suggests you can't even begin to understand where I'm coming from. It's gonna be my boot drive, and for optimal performance it should be an SSD. All my files should be going fast. Let's add to that reliability. I want my entire boot drive to be very reliable. So tell me how does a mechanical compare to an SSD in both of those departments? It may be nearly as fast. It's probably never going to be nearly as reliable as any SSD worth it's salt. Those are also two things I would pay a premium for.

Quote
PS: if you go through the priorities you'd end up with a $7000 rig before you even get to the 3rd or 4th bottom priority (1TB~2TB SSD?).
i mean something like:
(click to show/hide)

That build makes it apparent you don't have the perspective on what I'm talking about. You would never actually lay down that much money on a build, so you don't understand the value of small quality of life improvements. =_=; I could go through that and point out what I don't like if you want.

Quote
*for archival storage and some low-priority apps.
note: i'm not even stretching for a $1000 octa-processor (haswell-E?)
so even if you do like ditch the 2nd titanB, 2x8GB ram, only one 6TB HDD and no SSD cache nor raid card, a much simpler but good mice/keyboard, cheaper headphones and speakers, etc. you'd still end up at $4000 or so.
and so as i've said, its one of the least prioritized item, you could go by with a slower HDD just fine and a 256GB SSD can fit almost anything but your entire steam library in it just fine too.

Again read my third paragraph. How much actual value are you going to get from each of your "prioritized" steps up? And how much value will you get out of having to not mess or worry about this or that? That seems to be the point you're missing.



Edit: I also wish to note something: Unlike GPU/CPU/RAM/ETC... components like speakers do not drop in perceived value over time. The sound is always going to be just as good as when you got them, and everything will always sound just as good through them. Compare this to eyecandy and processing power.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 01:52:32 PM by xShadow »

Cute, huh?

Offline kitamesume

  • Member
  • Posts: 7216
  • Death is pleasure, Living is torment.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1497 on: July 25, 2014, 02:09:35 PM »
no, simply based on how far you'd go for quality and how much money you're willing to spend just heightens your bracket.
speakers of over $1000 (yes i'm saying just the speakers no amps, just those bookshelf speakers that doesn't even have their own pair of cables) wouldn't be cost effective once you weight everything else, you balance your whole build and lay out your priorities.

convenience is an acceptable reason, but how far would you favor it is one of the reasons why some doesn't even look at SSDs as an entirety.
from which point did you get that SSDs are leagues more reliable than HDDs? even if you aren't implying it as such an exaggeration, how do you even compare it?
though as a note to that, i haven't seen a 1TB SSD with 5years of warranty, some blacks and red pro has a 5year warranty at least.

you aren't even explaining yourself, how am i suppose to wild-guess your perspective?
that would actually be a good start, those stuffs i went through are just a part of builds that would make things more interesting.
ohh and i heard RAID5 with a good raid controller could sustain up to 300MB/s on a bunch of 7200RPM HDDs, its pretty cool.



now onto your last paragraph, i'd rather layout my priorities.
(click to show/hide)



Edit: I also wish to note something: Unlike GPU/CPU/RAM/ETC... components like speakers do not drop in perceived value over time. The sound is always going to be just as good as when you got them, and everything will always sound just as good through them. Compare this to eyecandy and processing power.
true for the most of it, but theres one thing to take note, those speakers do deteriorate albeit slow, even the soundcards wears down over time.
and so does their resell value, certain new models makes the old ones seem undesirable for one, although the rate of this isn't as fast as processors or GPUs.
just look at how you managed to get your $1200 headphone for $600, i find that oddly sweet myself.

in any case i think i've got the idea of your perspective, you view these things as those 1time purchases that'll last you decades before you even think of upgrading them again.
though indeed investing in such, once you see their long-term worth, makes for a valid reason.
but it still depends on how much you could shell out, even if the priority means it's at the bottom of your list doesn't mean you wouldn't spend a lot on it.
it just means you'd put it off until you've bought everything else.

PS: a good tactic for speakers is buying a reasonably good $200 speakers as an initial investment, later on once you've got everything else you can shell out as much as you want for a better front speaker, now move the old $200 speaker to rear channel.

note: this perspective wouldn't apply to SSDs, they deteriorate really fast, well 1PB write isn't quite easy to wear down, it still wouldn't last you a couple of years if you use it as an all-purpose drive.
this is also the reason why a lot of people doesn't want to buy refurb or 2nd-hand SSDs, NAND wear level is unknown and manufacturer could just reset SMART making it seem new(resold as refurb).
and its also why splitting loads across multiple SSDs would prolong each SSD's write-wear life and would save you from catastrophic failure taking all the files at once.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 02:59:11 PM by kitamesume »

Haruhi Dance | EMO | OLD SETs | ^ I know how u feel | Click sig to Enlarge

Offline Honemi

  • Member
  • Posts: 478
  • Shit, I don't know.
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1498 on: July 25, 2014, 07:35:51 PM »
no, simply based on how far you'd go for quality and how much money you're willing to spend just heightens your bracket.
speakers of over $1000 (yes i'm saying just the speakers no amps, just those bookshelf speakers that doesn't even have their own pair of cables) wouldn't be cost effective once you weight everything else, you balance your whole build and lay out your priorities.

Quote from: kitamesume
convenience is an acceptable reason, but how far would you favor it is one of the reasons why some doesn't even look at SSDs as an entirety.
from which point did you get that SSDs are leagues more reliable than HDDs? even if you aren't implying it as such an exaggeration, how do you even compare it?
though as a note to that, i haven't seen a 1TB SSD with 5years of warranty, some blacks and red pro has a 5year warranty at least.
Samsung has a 5 and 10 year warranty on their SSDs; however, they do come with a TBW limit. Likewise, SanDisk's top drive has a 10 year warranty. Intel has 5 years or more warranties on some of their SSDs. PNY's XLR8 Pro and Prevail. Typically, if the company is not just a piece of shit, they throw in a 5 year warranty (with a caveat like online registration or total write limit) for their top drives. Even OCZ can muster that. Enterprise drives default at 5 year warranties.

SSDs have no moving components, so the conventional wisdom is that they have less of a chance of failure. Of course, SSDs can still fall victim to cheap NAND and unreliable controllers.

About the only comparison to be had is Hardware.fr's RMA reports. No other large hardware vendor release such reports. HDD and SSD. Not completely reliable source since they don't include why those people RMA'd.

Anyway, from what I can understand, high performance and green drives are more likely to fail than their NAS and normal performance counterparts. On the SSD side, you can track high fail rates on certain companies and SSDs known to use cheap NAND. If you ignore OCZ and Crucial's older stuff, SSDs would, overall, seem more reliable. But as is, there doesn't seem to be a significant gap between the two types of storage.

Looks like Samsung is trying to get to processor levels of reliability with their SSDs.

Quote from: kitamesume
you aren't even explaining yourself, how am i suppose to wild-guess your perspective?
that would actually be a good start, those stuffs i went through are just a part of builds that would make things more interesting.
ohh and i heard RAID5 with a good raid controller could sustain up to 300MB/s on a bunch of 7200RPM HDDs, its pretty cool.

From a performance and cost perspective, you're probably not going to drop all that cash on a bunch of 6TB drives. First of all, if you're going to cache, the performance of RAID5 would be irrelevant. Second of all, you always buy backup storage. That'd mean buying twice as many 6TB drives if not more. Quite frankly, for a desktop, few people, including those with the money, would want or need 24TB of data on their desktop. Moreover, you'd need five 3.5" drive bays. That limits your choice of cases.

Quote from: kitamesume
now onto your last paragraph, i'd rather layout my priorities.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)


Quote from: kitamesume
Edit: I also wish to note something: Unlike GPU/CPU/RAM/ETC... components like speakers do not drop in perceived value over time. The sound is always going to be just as good as when you got them, and everything will always sound just as good through them. Compare this to eyecandy and processing power.
true for the most of it, but theres one thing to take note, those speakers do deteriorate albeit slow, even the soundcards wears down over time.
and so does their resell value, certain new models makes the old ones seem undesirable for one, although the rate of this isn't as fast as processors or GPUs.
just look at how you managed to get your $1200 headphone for $600, i find that oddly sweet myself.
If you're spending a lot on your setup, you may forgo a soundcard period and just a full-on, seperate DAC. Something like the Benchmark if you're overcompensating for something or just like overkill. Shit, their yet to be released DAC2 AHB2 can double as a power amplifier and headphone amp/dac.

Though, stuff like that (and a lot of more cheaper stuff) is useful for more than just your computer. Especially speakers and headphones. You still people using headphones, speakers, and other audio shit from the late 80s now. I don't think people are still using too many electronics from back then if they can help it. Just my opinion.

Quote from: kitamesume
in any case i think i've got the idea of your perspective, you view these things as those 1time purchases that'll last you decades before you even think of upgrading them again.
though indeed investing in such, once you see their long-term worth, makes for a valid reason.
but it still depends on how much you could shell out, even if the priority means it's at the bottom of your list doesn't mean you wouldn't spend a lot on it.
it just means you'd put it off until you've bought everything else.

PS: a good tactic for speakers is buying a reasonably good $200 speakers as an initial investment, later on once you've got everything else you can shell out as much as you want for a better front speaker, now move the old $200 speaker to rear channel.

Not an unreasonable thing to say. But not everyone is a performance junkie. There are a lot of people who would spend twice as much on their audio equipment than on their computer even if they're just planning to just game with it. Audio is fairly important to immersion, moreso than eye-candy. Just like a bit more performance can make a huge difference in the eye-candy/graphics department, a smallish upgrade to your headphones can open you up to a whole new experience.

I've never used one of those expensive $1k USD headphones, but I switched from retail quality trash to some decent cheap headphones. If the difference between the audio quality of $600 headphones and $1500 headphones is even half as much, I can see why some people would think it was worth it. Just my opinion, of course.

Computer hardware is obsoleted so quickly, and your audio equipment and display is so important to immersion and shit, I can definitely appreciate and understand someone who says, "Fuck this, I'm just going to buy a 'just good enough' PC and splurge on everything else". Of course, that isn't what xShadow and you were talking about.

I went on a bit of a tangent, haven't I?

Quote from: kitamesume
note: this perspective wouldn't apply to SSDs, they deteriorate really fast, well 1PB write isn't quite easy to wear down, it still wouldn't last you a couple of years if you use it as an all-purpose drive.
this is also the reason why a lot of people doesn't want to buy refurb or 2nd-hand SSDs, NAND wear level is unknown and manufacturer could just reset SMART making it seem new(resold as refurb).
and its also why splitting loads across multiple SSDs would prolong each SSD's write-wear life and would save you from catastrophic failure taking all the files at once.

You'd be hard pressed to fill 1PB of writes even in a workstation environment. Outside of TLC and shitastic quality NAND, you would experience firmware bugs and controller issues (among other things) before you use up even half the write capacity of a SSD. Endurance isn't simply an issue in modern SSDs. Even 100 GiB (unrealistic for all but the most heaviest workstation workloads) of writes a day to a ~256GB TLC SSD won't kill for until nearly 8 years. More over, SSDs' endurance scale linearly when increasing capacity. A ~512GB TLC SSD will last nearly 16 years under those conditions, and a ~1TB TLC SSD will last for 32 years. In all those cases, you'd be replacing because it would be obsolete compared to the current offerings.


As for the build you mentioned earlier, it is way exaggerated.

(click to show/hide)

Of course, a build like that assumes you're doing only small overclocks. You could swap out the HSF for a liquid cooling kit. You'll probably exceed the $4000, though. Watercooling can be expensive especially if you're getting good GPU waterblocks for your computer. Of course, a mATX build would look a little different, and a mini-ITX build will look nothing like it.

Since you already spending ~$4k USD on the computer, might as well also buy an expensive sound system for it. And fuck, look for a Steelcase on Craigslist or whatever.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 08:48:48 PM by Honemi »

Offline xShadow

  • Member
  • Posts: 1502
  • No
Re: Future Computer Parts / General Computer Discussions
« Reply #1499 on: July 25, 2014, 11:03:52 PM »
(click to show/hide)

I couldn't really respond because I was at work and typing up shit on a mobile phone sucks. Anyway, I'll try to make this... eh... uh... somewhat concise. It's gonna have to be since my drive home, while short, pisses me off and I tend to forget the points I thought up. Anyway:

While that last tidbit is an interesting point, and is in line with what I think... there's another, larger underlying point. I'll start out with some questions.

What makes up the PC gaming (or hell just PC in general) experience? What makes up any experience? Why are those tidbits important? And finally, which of them are important to you?

I think the viewpoints you and most people adopt towards performance is... what's the word? Naive? Lacking perspective? Short-sighted? And I know how you think because that's how I used to think the same until recently. Hell I squeezed this budget down to afford the biggest baddest graphics cards I could at the time. The best CPU possible. I didn't give a shit about anything else... but then you know I noticed how I liked silence after seeing how silent it was in that case and invested in Noctuas. Do you know what prompted that? Me experiencing a very quiet computer for the first time! It's not like I saw the point of quiet computers, or quiet components, or any of this, until I got a taste of it for myself, and then I placed value upon it.

Everything you interact with, everything you experience while gaming, while using this computer... that's the experience. It doesn't end at that FPS number you have in the upper right. I sure as fucking hell know GPU manufacturers would like you to think that, but it doesn't! It doesn't end at how much processing power your CPU is cranking out while you're trying to do mundane tasks. It doesn't end at any of these things, it ends at your perception of how much value each of these things are bringing to you. The experience includes how comfy the chair you're sitting in is. How spacious and roomy the desk is. How good this keyboard feels. How suited this mouse is for the task. And so on and so forth.

That's why it begs the question: perceptually, how much is that FPS number worth, and how much is that AA slider being a bit further to the right worth? You have to realize that in any experience, all things of increasing cost have diminishing returns, but at the same time they're all part of the experience. How much value you place on them should be determined by you after weighing and considering the benefits properly, not simply going "LOL MY FPS IS HIGHER NOW THAT MUST MEAN I AM HAPPIER WITH MY NEW COMPUTER!" It doesn't fucking work like that. Or rather, it shouldn't. But people these days are so goddamn locked into the FPS and graphics quality and all this other shit (which again I'm sure GPU vendors love) that they just forsake other components, or rather don't give them proper consideration. So no, just telling me that "better speakers aren't worth it because they aren't worth it past a point" doesn't tell me shit, because you can apply that logic to anything. GPU, CPU, RAM, storage, comfy chairs, nice desks (for the record mine is a large one made of solid wood with a nice finish that was 400$ used).... they all have diminishing returns, and again they're all part of you using this computer.

So that extra 20 fps at maxed settings (as opposed to turning down the AA 2 notches)... that's great, mate. But what about sound that helps immerse you in the experience and also blows you away? Keyboard? Mouse? Blur-free monitor (if we're considering the gaming monitors)? Many of these things don't have value until you invest in them and understand them. You can't just walk away saying "there's no way that would make my build any better" until you properly experience said things. Or for instance the 1080p 51 inch plasma that I use for gaming on my recliner with an Xbox 360 controller going to my PC.... and also for watching anime. I mean I already have 1440p, so I totally should never need such a thing right? I have Graphicus Maximus Prime on a 1440p display, so what the hell's the point of gaming on a lower res? Well let's see. More comfy chair, bigger screen (3d capable technically), very relaxed controller gaming. It's fucking awesome.

Long story short, I think people are to obsessed with synthetic, quantitative measurements of build performance. It's plebeian (hahaha... hey I had to put a derogatory term somewhere right). It's taking someone else's word for what really matters to your experience. But like I said part of the issue is lack of ability to actually try out alternatives. That is, a modicum of play money. You already know that a better GPU can help you because you have numbers and tests everywhere showing it to you. You've got results shoved in your face. You can see screenshots. Youtube videos. Whatever. You can understand very easily that this GPU will bring you this much value, and it's the only surefire measuring stick you have. You can't play around with essentially risky investments because humans are risk averse creatures. So you've got this much money to spend, you're naturally going to prioritize things that you can give tangible value for certain. This isn't what you think though. This is what everyone is telling you. But you don't know what you truly think because you don't have enough experience with other components.

That's what I think the issue is on a larger scale in the PC world, and I don't think it's going to be solved. You can let people see GPU and CPU benefits over the internet. You can't make them understand these 600$ earphones. You can't make them understand this chair. You can't make them understand this keyboard. You can't make them understand this monitor. Only people that have experienced multiple leaps of faith in these categories can understand what value these objects bring to them, and then use that knowledge to truly bring their budgets and CPU builds into their own perspective. That doesn't mean they're going to automatically think these other investments are important. No, you may experience this or that and think that the upgrade was useless. That's fine, too. The important thing is making certain of it with yourself.


So no, my budget priorities are going to likely be different from yours. Because I understand about where I stop giving a shit about eyecandy. I know how much I enjoy good quality sound. Etc.

Well not that sound matters because these earphones are going to last me probably a decade anyway (and once I get that ASUS monitor, so will it), so the only thing that matters is when I get the itch for more eyecandy and processing power, since those two things drop in comparative value so quickly, despite us being so quick to prioritize them. A thing that I am sure Intel, MB manufacturers, GPU vendors, RAM manufacturers, etc... love.

EDIT NOPE SORRY SEVERAL PARAGRAPH ESSAY I TYPE TOO FAST LOL

Oh and as for my earphones, the drop in price for Beyerdynamic T1's is rather bizarre. Many people prefer them to HD800's so it's bizarre that these would be half the price right now considering they at one point competed with said earphones (and the HD800's are STILL 1400$ btw). Plus, I didn't go 1->3 and then 3->4 with earphones. The only pair of earphones that I had was a pair of HD280Pro's which I hated wearing. So I investigated and went for the sound signature and best value. And these were the most detailed earphones I could find south of... oh... 1400$ I guess (HD800's). So it's pretty much like I went 1->4 with my earphones. I just went straight to the end point instead of bothering with the intermediate incremental upgrades.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 11:08:05 PM by xShadow »

Cute, huh?