leokor

Member
  • Content Count

    457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About leokor

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0
  1. leokor

    64bit Computing?

    Speaking of the 32-bit versus 64-bit comparison, here's an interesting evaluation from Sun: http://www.sun.com/amd/30579_AMD_Processor...on_Guide3.1.pdf Take a look at the table on page 36. Leo
  2. leokor

    64bit Computing?

    No, it is not a joke. It' sjust that you're talking about different things. You mean Windows XP as released. Unregistered means the 64-bit Windows XP that currently exists in the beta form. Leo
  3. leokor

    Quiet Summer?

    Thanks for the pointer. It's the same third generation 15K drives, though. I was kinda wondering about the fourth generation. Was it not supposed to be a new generation each summer? Looks like the pace slowed down. Leo
  4. leokor

    Quiet Summer?

    Hello, folks! Usually, Seagate and the others have a new generation of SCSI drives announced every summer. What, no 15K.4 this year, then? Any rumors? Leo
  5. leokor

    Western Digital Raptor WD360GD

    However, Raptor beats 15K SCSI drives in such benchmarks as High-End and Bootup, while staying behind in Office and Gaming. How come? Leo
  6. leokor

    Western Digital Raptor WD360GD

    Well, it performs better than 15K drives in two out of four SR benchmarks (High-End and Bootup). I'm especially curious about Bootup, because it features much deeper command queues than any other benchmark (save the server ones), and this is where SCSI is supposed to excel. So, this might not be so simple as a wave in the desktop/server general direction. Leo
  7. leokor

    Western Digital Raptor WD360GD

    Something is fishy here. How can a 10K drive with the same areal density perform better than the best 15K drives such as 15K.3 and Atlas 15K? And it does perform better, according to the SR database, in case you missed it (the review only compares it against the other 10K drives). I'm curious about the reasons. I highly doubt the interface would have anything to do with that. Leo
  8. leokor

    Post edit feature, please!

    Well said. I'd like to add that, even though phpBB does not have the "Edited by" feature as shipped, it is very easy to enable it by a minor change in the php code. I did that for my own board. The mod is publicly available at phpbb.com. Leo
  9. leokor

    AMD Slopteron...err Opteron?

    Firstly, the link provided only points to some SIS chipset's benchmarks. I don't see any Opteron ones. Secondly, who cares about Athlon64? Thirdly, Opteron competes mainly against Xeon (which it beats rather handily). The fact that it can even keep up with Itanium 2 (which is seen as "big iron") is nothing short of impressive. Lastly, take a look here. http://www.aceshardware.com/read_news.jsp?id=60000485 Leo
  10. leokor

    Dual Hammers orders being taken

    Opterons all have 1 MB cache. It is Athlon 64 that has only 256 KB. Leo
  11. Have you bought them already? If not, I'd suggest two 73GB drives instead of four 36GB drives. Having more drives yields better performance only if you're using RAID, and besides you'd be constrained with the 32-bit PCI anyway. Having fewer drives is marginally cheaper and, more importantly, less noisy. As far as 64-bit mobos go, I'd wait for Opteron. Leo
  12. You say you're running a database? If you care at all for your data, don't even consider RAID 0. Performance be damned. With databases, it is far more important to think about potential data loss. Leo
  13. leokor

    To 15k.3 or not?

    Screw the rumors of PCI bandwidth problems. There were some in the past, but they apply only to specific chipsets, and from what I understand, nForce2 does not have them. I own an nForce1 system, and the PCI bandwidth is cool. Besides, you'd never actually see any real world difference with a single drive, anyway. Speaking of the price, hypermicro.com has the 73GB version for $698, and shipping is free for storagereview.com members. Leo
  14. leokor

    SCSI increases boot time?

    I don't think it depends on the drivers at all. The increase in boot time is entirely due to the necessity to load the SCSI BIOS in addition to the motherboard BIOS. Once the OS starts up, the faster drive will always load faster. Leo
  15. This is a well-known hotfix that is related to an entirely different problem. It keeps being mentioned many times, though, so don't worry, you're not the first one. Leo