• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About player-x

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
  1. Yeah if you do heavy I/O applications like a database, that gets tons of request and hit a plus 16 Queue Depth, then yes this SSD dose wonders. But, in real word desktop usage, with a QD1 ~ QD2, the Intel SSD 750, preforms marginal better then a good SATA SSD, the reason is that NVMe dose not, and can not change anything about the access time of NAND, tho it dose reduce interface latency. Me, for now, i keep my money in my pocket, till NVMe drives hit 850 Pro prizes, as you can see, the 750 is only 1% faster in the PCMark 8 benchmark, that benchmark simulates imho the best realworld desktop gaming we use.
  2. The WD RED has a mini version of this system build in the drive, that should eliminate almost all vibrations.
  3. The source is in Dutch, but i also red it on a German site, but cant find that one back that quick. -- Translation -- to increase lifespan in NAS systems Western Digital reportedly developed a technology that enables multiple Red discs work at a different speed, so they are not affected by each other's resonance. -- Translation -- Every ware i read about, its little more then hints on the function, so i dont know what to think of it
  4. I think it will not be that hard to ship HHDs uselessly they come 20 in a box, and have all of those use different speeds, lets say in 5rpm steps. And for now i think thats the most likely scenario they ship with different speeds. Actually i think that would be not that hard, because tripping max resonances setting would happen on different moments depending ware the HDD is sitting in the array, the one's closer to the middle would be tripping the max resonances setting sooner then the one's closer to the more sturdy frame/case connection points. Or use a scheme that would randomly pick rpm setting from the table at a given (sorta random) interval as long as the resonances setting is triggered. And thus you would end up with different rpm settings for every drive, till you end the resonances problem. /ontopic Still wonder if SR could confirm it with WD? Or dose the reviewers dont have that type of connections whit the hardware manufacturer's?
  5. No, because i dont know, and was i wonder if what they ware saying in some of the reviews is true. What i also are saying is that i dont think it would be that hard to make a table whit different speeds and different timings settings for those speeds. Those different speeds could be set in the factory, but could also be set on the fly if triggered by the sensor. Tho i believe its the first, if its used is more likely. And wonder if SR could confirm it with WD?
  6. No what i understand from it, is that the REDs are programed from factory whit slightly different different RPM settings. Something not that hard to do, as modern hard drives have similair PWM steering as case fans have, and they only have to program them to differ lets say in 5 rpm steps, then to stay between 5200 and 5300 rpm, you can have 20 different speed settings. Chances to get lets say 8 with the same RPM settings is 20^8, even more then 2 with the same settings is gone be rare. It would be a easy way to cancel out harmonic vibration. And to program to dynamic change speeds would also not be that hard, as modern hard drives have motion sensors, if they can detect earthquakes that we cant detect our self's, they properly can also detect harmonic vibration in a array or assume there is harmonic vibration, and change speeds the moment the hard drive go's over a set vibration limit setting. I read it in different reviews the mention of the option, i am just wondering if they using WD as there source or one and other. As you people of SR are closer to WD then i am, i was wondering if you could ask them.
  7. Is it (in)correct that all the WD REDs are spinning at different speeds, from the factory or dynamic, to cancel out harmonic vibration. I ask it because i read different information about it.
  8. Still have not dig your self out of that mountain of other gear, to do a test?
  9. Kevin/Brian, is there a ETA for the 64GB review, or did i somehow missed it.
  10. You forgetting one important detail, the RAMdisk is part of your main memory, but its not part of your work memory. So if you read out of memory you have some steps before you can actually use the data. Very simplistic. 1 read data from RAMdisk 2 copy temporary the data to L3 of the CPU. 3 Write from L3 to work memory space. 4 Repeat step 1 to 3 if needed. 5 Data ready for use And with ever read and write step you have latency, in theory you should get about half the memory bandwidth, in practice there is a bit of a overhead. Still, its still a lot quicker then what any SSD can do when it come to bandwidth. ps. Kevin is there a ETA for the review, just wondering when it will be up.
  11. I am looking forward to that. Its gone be a hell of a labor intensive review then. But properly really worth it
  12. Great, cant wait to see the test I know, i use a 58GB ramdrive my self. But how will people understand how fast a RAMdrive is without comparison. That not really the point, i think. Your not comparing size to size. But speed against speed. And if you compare, price versus price, a set of 8x 8GB is more in the price range of a 240GB OCZ RevoDrive 3 X2 And the raid set review. You tested those all ready, would be nice to have the test data of those as a comparison.
  13. Why, sure a big ramdisk cost more. But you get what you pay for, and €500 or $600 for 8x 8GB is certainly not out of reach of a lot of enthusiast, they even sell sets of 8x8 for enthusiast, i clearly remember paying something like around $600 for a UW SCSI card and one 4.5GB 7200rpm Quantum Atlas, and that was when money was still worth something! So i think that's imho sort of a non argument, as anyone willing to build a real high end system can afford to get 32 or 64 GB of memory. Sure it cost about 3x per GB as my 240GB RevoDrive 3 X2, but then its also way over 3x as fast. And i not sure (dont know how hard it is to get review samples), but i think that there is a good chance that companies like Corsair or G.Skill cant waiting to send you a set for testing, as i think that they cant wait to sell these big kit's to enthusiast for RAMdisk use. Because they are the only one's greasy enough to buy sets like these. And a good review from SR will certainly help them to consider it more. I just got my self a 3930K system with 64GB of memory. Now with 58GB of ram, of the 64GB, for use as a ramdisk, ware also a portion is used for the swapfile (usually around 2~5GB), i still have to often swap directories from HDD to RAM to HDD, even now with 64GB. (from the 48GB in a i7 970 system) But even do its not perfect, its still a lot faster then any SSD, it just takes a bit of work making batch files for the programs you wane run on the RAMDisk. But once you make a proper batch file, you can use it as a template for other programs. I now have Fire Fox and Anti virus(200MB) always on and WoW (31GB) semi-permanently on the ramdisk, and i still have 27GB free for swapfile and other programs. And Robocopy is really your friend if you want to make batch files, to swap files between RAM and storage and visa versa. Why do i hope more users are getting ramdisk? As with the more users, the better the ramdisk software becomes, and hope one day i dont hav eto make my own batch files anymore, And that there comes a ramdisk catch software solution, as i see that as the next step in faster storage systems. like you now have with SSDs for hot data and HDD for cold data, as in the OCZ Hybrid and the LSI MegaRAID CacheCade Are there disadvantages for using a RAMdisk, sure, you really like a UPS, if you live somewhere ware whit so so stable electricity like me, and also, you real don't like to turn off your PC anymore, but then, mine looks great, and has pretty lights in him.
  14. Even do interesting results, i was missing a lot of data/test i was bin interested in. Mainly a comparison to a SSD. And if possible more memory 32GB or 64GB.