geekhack

geekhack Community => Other Geeky Stuff => Topic started by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 31 August 2010, 04:28:44

Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 31 August 2010, 04:28:44: I just had an evil idea... using an IDE SDD on some of my older computers. So, I wanted to bring the idea to the table with the excellent folks on here.

Reasons for doing this:
#1 older computers don't need as much space... perfect since SSDs are too expensive to buy high-capacity.
#2 faster transfer... I guess that's a bonus for when you have thousands of MIDIs and files for DOS games. To those who know, transferring many (I mean many) files takes longer than one huge file: I've always found this fairly annoying with older stuff.
#3 NO NOISE! I do have quiet IDE HDDs, but sometimes they can get noisy as they age. SSDs won't have that issue and will remain quiet as ever. A definite bonus would be no noise from vibration or anything like that.
#4 less power, I guess with PSUs under 200 watts, this is a very big advantage.
#5 less space... but this isn't too much of a concern.

So with that in mind, here's some options:
#1 DOM 8GB -- hong kong ebay special (http://cgi.ebay.ca/Disk-module-8GB-Industry-Dom-IDE-40pin-HI-Speed-SSD-/180553795567?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0)
#2 transcend 8 GB IDE SSD ($140) (http://www.memorydepot.com/details.asp?id=TS8GIFD25) <-- what a ripoff
#3 transcend 32 GB IDE SSD ($114) (http://www.amazon.com/Transcend-32GB-SSD-2-5-Inch/dp/B000T9QRKE)

I think I'd go with the hong kong special if I ever plan to execute this lunacy in the future. 8GB is kind of small (32 would be much nicer), If I could get an 8GB for less, then I would be more eager to jump upon it.

But anyways,
/end of insanity
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 05:50:54: Average Read Speed 45MB/Sec
Average Write Speed 13MB/Sec

That's no better than a normal ide drive is it? The only real advantage would be really that you wouldn't have to defrag, but you're paying like 100 times what an old ide drive would cost.

The review on the third one says that it's slower than an ide drive, it took 4 hours to install windows xp on it.

Early ssd drives are horrid. The technology wasn't perfected till like last year really.

Just get like old 10000 or 15000 rpm scsi drives, and a pci scsi controller.. That's what a friend of mine does. You should be able to get around 100 mb/s that way.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: J888www on Tue, 31 August 2010, 05:57:25: Maybe using an IDE to SATA adapter converter would offer more options of manufacturers and better SSD Drive/pricing.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 06:01:37: A lot of the IDE SSDs out there are made specifically for the task described by EIBM. But they're not particularly good SSDs, and represent the state of the art of about 3 years ago... You're going to run into issues with long term longevity and performance. Even out of the box, they may not be much faster than a good platter drive, and may consume as much power and generate as much heat. Make sure you read up reviews on any model you consider buying, and if you can't find one, don't bother buying it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: bhtooefr on Tue, 31 August 2010, 08:21:07: Better to take advantage of economies of scale, and get a good CF card, and a CF to IDE converter.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Zen on Tue, 31 August 2010, 09:05:32: Quote from: chimera15;218464
Average Read Speed 45MB/Sec
Average Write Speed 13MB/Sec

That's no better than a normal ide drive is it?

There is a lot more to HDD than just average read-write speeds,
SSD has less than 1ms access-time, better IOPS numbers
(a LOT better for the new Indilinx-based drives) and also better random write performance,
but you are right,some of the "old" SSD perform horrible, especially in the random write department,
so do read some tests before buying .
If you can find an "old" Mtron IDE SSD with Single Level Cell flash you
wont be disappointed ..
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Megaweapon on Tue, 31 August 2010, 10:13:21: I too have thought about this topic as my MAME cabinet runs DOS. Unfortunately I have yet to find any good options. The IDE SSD's are ridiculously expensive, the PCI SATA adapters require drivers which don't exist, the IDE -> SATA adapters are unreliable in scary ways (not just failing but writing garbage to your drive while doing so).

The only option I haven't totally discounted:

Quote from: bhtooefr;218490
Better to take advantage of economies of scale, and get a good CF card, and a CF to IDE converter.

What is a good CF card to get? The only person I've talked to who has done this admitted that it wasn't even as fast as a normal hard drive. I'm wondering if he was just buying the wrong gear...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: bhtooefr on Tue, 31 August 2010, 10:43:15: Look at the specs, see what they are.

The ones that are good for sticking in a DSLR and shooting a crapton of RAWs at once, those are the ones that are the best.

That said, also look at the specs on your machine's IDE controller - many IDE controllers can't even take advantage of a fast CF card, so the only gain you get is from the lower latency, and you can get that on any cheap crappy card.

I use CF in a (1989) Apple IIGS ROM 3 with a Parsons Engineering Focus Hard Card (now the 16 Sector Focus IDE Controller, the difference being that the Parsons one is green, the newer versions are all red. Actually, I bought it from 16 Sector, even) which is attached to an 8-bit 1 MHz bus - so that's 1 MiB/s THEORETICAL max - and in an Acorn RiscPC with a Yellowstone Educational Solutions RapIDE32, which has a theoretical 16.67 MiB/s bandwidth.

Neither of those will be affected by slow CF. Like I said, look at what your IDE controller can do - if your IDE controller is slow, CF performance won't matter, and you'll still notice an improvement due to the lack of latency.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ricercar on Tue, 31 August 2010, 11:49:35: I'm using a 32G Ridata 233x CF (w/IDE Adapter) in an UMPC. It's somewhat faster than the rotational drive, and doubles battery life.

Informal experiments suggest you need 300x or 600x CF to really scream compared to a rotational drive.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Parak on Tue, 31 August 2010, 12:11:41: IDE SSDs you say? For old computers? Less space is not a concern? Why I just happen to have one of those lying right next to me!

(http://imgur.com/7p5jZ.jpg)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: chimera15 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 13:19:21: heh 192 mb. I guess it'd be fine for windows 95 or 98. I'd fill it up with 4 psd graphics files. lol
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: JBert on Tue, 31 August 2010, 14:28:39: Good-old hard-disks have taken years to mature and are actually astonishing pieces of hardware today: just imagine the drive head floating just 0.08 mm above the platters, which pass it 7500 per minute or 125 times per second.

SSDs on the other hand might have improved read speeds a lot but write speeds are a lot less once the disk has been used.
Therefore I would refrain from using SSDs, unless you are really have money to burn, or you can guarantee that you won't write to disk very often.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 14:39:28: I think a lot of the longevity issues are being resolved, but don't expect to see the fruits of the progress is some El Cheapo IDE SSD.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: mike on Tue, 31 August 2010, 15:00:53: Quote from: JBert;218608
SSDs on the other hand might have improved read speeds a lot but write speeds are a lot less once the disk has been used.

I've recently spent a fair amount of time recently investigating SSDs; turns out the big culprit for significant write slowdowns was down to a firmware bug. Most consumer-grade SSDs are not subject to significant write slowdowns (enterprise-grade SSDs are a whole different ball-game of course).

Similarly the limited amount of writes that an SSD can cope with has been misunderstood. I took the specification of a recent consumer grade SSD and calculated it would last about 350-years in a certain database server - not an especially write-heavy one, but even so!
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 31 August 2010, 15:46:42: Quote from: chimera15;218578
heh 192 mb. I guess it'd be fine for windows 95 or 98. I'd fill it up with 4 psd graphics files. lol

192 MB is certainly not enough for what I'm doing with it: I think my windows 98SE install was 200 MB in itself. Billy G. needs lots of space for windows.

Quote from: ch_123;218467
A lot of the IDE SSDs out there are made specifically for the task described by EIBM. But they're not particularly good SSDs, and represent the state of the art of about 3 years ago... You're going to run into issues with long term longevity and performance. Even out of the box, they may not be much faster than a good platter drive, and may consume as much power and generate as much heat. Make sure you read up reviews on any model you consider buying, and if you can't find one, don't bother buying it.

I thought perhaps they made newer SSDs with IDE. Guess they're not honouring legacy users!

I think an adapter as jw8888 said may be a good option if nothing good comes up. Otherwise, back to samsung HDDs with their quieting.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 16:46:21: I think you might want a PCI SATA card. You'd be limited to the original SATA because SATA II and SATA III need PCI-E cards to support the necessary bandwidth.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: microsoft windows on Tue, 31 August 2010, 17:57:05: I'd recommend just sticking with a hard disk. They might be a little noisy, but if well-cared for, they'll last forever.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 18:01:35: An SSD is a hard disk, dawg.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 31 August 2010, 18:12:51: Quote from: microsoft windows;218665
I'd recommend just sticking with a hard disk. They might be a little noisy, but if well-cared for, they'll last forever.

I have more than enough IDE HHDs to last me for a lifetime. But it's always fun to experiment.

Quote from: ch_123;218645
I think you might want a PCI SATA card. You'd be limited to the original SATA because SATA II and SATA III need PCI-E cards to support the necessary bandwidth.

That's actually a good alternative.

I don't care about the SATA II/III stuff.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: mr_a500 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 18:17:34: Quote from: microsoft windows;218665
I'd recommend just sticking with a hard disk. They might be a little noisy, but if well-cared for, they'll last forever.

That's totally wrong. Hard drives are the #1 cause of failure. One year, I had 5 hard drives fail. Most of them only last 5 months before clonking and hissing - and 1 year to complete failure. They're utter crap! I've got an old 1992 hard drive that was pretty reliable, but the modern stuff is garbage.

I'd recommend CF card. I went from 5400 RPM 2.5" IDE drive to CF on my Amiga 500. It's only marginally faster, but WAY more reliable. The best is that it stays cool and is totally silent.

I did also use SD card (with SD to IDE adapter), but write speed on the SD is slower than CF for some reason.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 31 August 2010, 18:19:01: Last I checked, an SSD is a type of hard drive.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Oqsy on Tue, 31 August 2010, 20:35:48: Quote from: mike
I've recently spent a fair amount of time recently investigating SSDs

But my question is what have you been doing recently?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 31 August 2010, 22:04:09: My intention was not to start a debate over which type of hard drive is the best. The issue was an alternative to something faster/quieter. I thought SSDs would be great for older computers, and I think I'll try it out later. They're not economical in terms of pricing for a large one: therefore, getting a smaller reasonably priced one for *old software* seems like the most logical route.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN I'm going to switch all of my HDDs to SSD. Like everything else, I like to have both. I wish people would stop being so bent towards one extreme or the other.

With that said, I've never had a single hard drive fail on me: I did notice constant file transfers can agitate them to be noisier.

Since SSD is more mature now (but still expensive), I think it will make an interesting experiment later on, depending if I ever get to it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: NamelessPFG on Wed, 01 September 2010, 10:32:04: I've thought about dropping a dual CF adapter in that old PowerBook G3 and installing two 32 GB or 64 GB cards in it. One for OS 9.2.2, one for OS X 10.4.11. Since the hard drive is the only component in the whole thing that makes noise aside from the crappy DVD-ROM drive (I don't even know if the cooling fan works!), it would also have the interesting side effect of making the system completely silent.

But I can't be bothered to spend so much on such an old computer I'm thinking of selling already, since I don't use it. (Note that the battery is just about shot and useless for anything beyond a short-term UPS, the CCFL's starting to pink out, and the DVD drive only reads data discs somewhat reliably when UPSIDE-DOWN, among other things...and the whole thing struggles to do so much as play low-quality YouTube videos. Even your garden variety Atom netbook is more powerful than that thing.)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: NamelessPFG on Wed, 01 September 2010, 10:33:33: I've thought about dropping a dual CF adapter in that old PowerBook G3 and installing two 32 GB or 64 GB cards in it. One for OS 9.2.2, one for OS X 10.4.11. Since the hard drive is the only component in the whole thing that makes noise aside from the crappy DVD-ROM drive (I don't even know if the cooling fan works!), it would also have the interesting side effect of making the system completely silent.

But I can't be bothered to spend so much on such an old computer I'm thinking of selling already, since I don't use it. (Note that the battery is just about shot and useless for anything beyond a short-term UPS with new ones providing a touted 8 hours at $150 each, the CCFL's starting to pink out, and the DVD drive only reads data discs somewhat reliably when UPSIDE-DOWN, among other things...and the whole thing struggles to do so much as play low-quality YouTube videos. Even your garden variety Atom netbook is more powerful than that thing.)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: JBert on Wed, 01 September 2010, 14:01:30: Quote from: ch_123;218645
I think you might want a PCI SATA card. You'd be limited to the original SATA because SATA II and SATA III need PCI-E cards to support the necessary bandwidth.
Won't that cause some trouble for the BIOS to boot from it?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 14:20:22: AFAIK, if it can boot from a SCSI card, it can boot from a SATA card. I could be horribly mistaken, so if any knows for a fact that this is wrong, do point out.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 15:01:55: "Add in PCI card" or whatever.

*nix systems usually treat a SATA controller as a SCSI controller. Early SATA motherboards treated the chipset as an external add-in card.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: chimera15 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 15:48:42: Quote from: kishy;218699
They're ALL going to fail; it's only a question of WHEN they will fail.

IMO, rotational mechanical hard drives are a better option because they often show signs of impending failure before actually dropping dead. This allows you to make provisions for replacement - get new drive, back up data, whatever. If the drive totally fails before you can do this, you can usually mix and match parts from other drives of the same model to get a working (if not for long, at least long enough to recover the most important data) frankendrive.

If flash memory chips fail, that's it, your data is GONE.

What would you rather have? Longer time before failure with a more severe and unpredictable failure, or shorter time before failure but a more recoverable situation?

I've often wondered about how the write limit and failures on ssd drives actually occur. Do you notice the size of your hd suddenly is less, like part of the flash sectors no longer work, and so your drive starts shrinking, or you notice write error failures in windows, or do they suddenly just die? Anyone had an ssd just die on them?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Wed, 01 September 2010, 15:58:00: Quote from: chimera15;218938
I've often wondered about how the write limit and failures on ssd drives actually occur. Do you notice the size of your hd suddenly is less, like part of the flash sectors no longer work, and so your drive starts shrinking, or you notice write error failures in windows, or do they suddenly just die? Anyone had an ssd just die on them?

I don't think they would "die", perhaps just become unusable after awhile.

I've had a verbatim 128 MB jump drive for years now, and it's still working fine. I transferred countless files with it -- even civilization 3 once 128 MB at a time lol.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: microsoft windows on Wed, 01 September 2010, 16:38:54: I set my standards low for computers. My computers are ugly and look like crap, and their hard disks are noisy and sound like crap. And I don't give a crap about it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 16:59:59: And neither do we.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: chimera15 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 17:21:08: Quote from: ch_123;218955
And neither do we.

Yer so mean. Not all of us are rich. I care about his take to see what you can do with as little as possible. People are always complaining and think computers cost so much, but in reality the level of technology that we're at, and the amount of stupidity in the Western culture, people throw away stuff that's 10 times better than they actually need to do the job, just so they can have tech support and crap.
Trying to do the job with the least has merit, and is actually part of what hacking/being a geek is really about.

Anyone can build the most awesome machine if they have 10 grand. The point as a geek is to build the awesomest thing you can with the least amount of money.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: microsoft windows on Wed, 01 September 2010, 17:21:22: Good one...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 17:24:55: My PC is actually quite modest by most standards. I just throw in new stuff now and then whenever the old stuff isn't up to scratch. I'd say the sum total of the parts in my machine wouldn't reach 1 grand if I bought them all today, let alone ten.

You're also missing the point I was making...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: microsoft windows on Wed, 01 September 2010, 17:32:49: I just enjoy tinkering around with my creaky old computers on rainy days. The Gateway2000 ain't all I got. I've got 11 desktops and 2 laptops. And 8 of those desktops got monitors and are on the Internet. But I get enjoyment out of going on the Internet and being the only Windows 3.1 user to visit certain web sites.

I'm my own tech support here. The warrantees for my stuff expired long ago. But the old computers just keep on chuggin along.

I actually built a "good" machine by my standards earlier this summer--A 3.2Ghz Prescott P4 with 3.5GB of RAM (That's how much 32-bit Windows 7 can recognize-I've been considering putting a 32-bit server version of 2000 that can handle more RAM). I stuck in an old 128MB video card, and it handles Windows 7 great. All the parts to do it came out of $40 worth of computers from tag sales.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 18:14:51: Seems like current SSDs are going to be obsolete sooner than expected... (http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=26234)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Megaweapon on Wed, 01 September 2010, 19:01:51: Quote from: ripster;218558
My Camcorder has 64GB and runs at Class 10 (66x).
Show Image
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4911724634_9859b9065f_z.jpg)

What IDE adapter would you use for a CF card like this? Does it need to list compatibility with SDHC or is that assumed?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 01 September 2010, 19:05:02: That's an SD card as opposed to CF. I'm not aware of any IDE adapters for SD. CF basically uses the IDE protocol anyway, thus how you can convert them so easily.

EDIT: Seems I'm wrong -

(http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j00LBTazZgqsfrd/SD-to-IDE-Adapter-MM-IDE2SD-.jpg)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Lanx on Thu, 02 September 2010, 07:22:43: i'm pretty sure all those ide ssds are pretty junkie, as in they're just made to take advantage of the pcie or 1.8 formfactor for laptops/netbooks but you aren't going to come anywhere near, modern(or even 1 year ago) ssd speeds. All these ide/ tiny ssd's are basically harddrives w/o moving parts so they save on noise and weight (and arguably power but not really).

really if you want a good small cheap blazing fast drive, get one of kingston 32g drives for 60bucks that i saw on special.
i have 2 (old by todays standards) ocz vertex in raid0 and i get 320read speeds, at the time i bought them for 100ish each, they prolly go for 80 now (and maybe less soon) but i don't think there are any good (small, cheap) ssds beyond this ocz vertex 30g(the first of the indilix firmware and what started the super great speed that lead to intel like performace on a budget and these new amazing sandforce drives)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Thu, 02 September 2010, 07:40:54: Some of those low end SSDs actually use more electricity and generate more heat than a decent platter drive. Again, it pays to examine items on a case-by-case basis rather than assume they are good because they fit into a particular category. The same is true for mechanical keyboards...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: nraymond on Thu, 02 September 2010, 16:23:49: Quote from: chimera15;218938
I've often wondered about how the write limit and failures on ssd drives actually occur. Do you notice the size of your hd suddenly is less, like part of the flash sectors no longer work, and so your drive starts shrinking, or you notice write error failures in windows, or do they suddenly just die? Anyone had an ssd just die on them?

Current flash/SSD technology involves write currents which result in a slow deterioration of cells over time. MLC (multi-level cell) wears down quicker than SLC (single-level cell). All solid state storage works around failed cells by having hidden, spare capacity (between 10-30% of apparent capacity, higher levels reserved for 'enterprise' models). Wear leveling to maintain performance as cells are re-written is proprietary and takes place behind the scenes. Only with SATA and it's new TRIM command have we seen some recent interaction between operating systems and solid state storage wear-leveling, so that performance can be maintained as storage is filled up and re-written.

It will take a major shift in technology to something like a memristor to make a type of solid state storage that doesn't wear out (on paper, memristors look like they could usher in a revolution in computing, especially if it allows us to construct computers for which there is no need for differentiation between 'memory' and 'mass storage' because both could have the same capacity, throughput, and latency at a reasonable price point).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Sat, 04 September 2010, 23:01:57: What slots would these computers have?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 04:00:43: I've learned that it doesn't really pay to upgrade old technology to old technology.

But having said that, you can probably pick up used SSDs at reasonable prices.

Newer systems (especially at the high end) are often bottlenecked by disk transfer rates; they can benefit immensely from a decent HDD-to-SSD upgrade. Older system bottlenecks are typically caused by other hardware (bandwidth of bus, processor, RAM) and upgrading a fast drive to a faster drive won't have much overall impact. Sure, isolated benchmark scores for drive specific components will increase but real computer performance won't.

Most low-spec or older (say, pre-i3) computers would be better served by a far more economical fast HDD; ATA6 or better, 7200rpm or faster, 16MB or greater cache, 80-pin cabling. Real performance is nowhere near theoretical performance, best to research reported bench scores (SiSoft or other). RAID striping can trade capacity for significantly increased performance.

Using PCI drive controllers is not desirable on most newer mobos because integrated IDE/SATA/SCSI controllers tend to be much faster. Additionally, PCI bandwidth must be shared with all other devices on the PCI bus (not always just the PCI cards; many cheap mobo implementations logically connect USB, LAN, ICH or Winbond-style "Super I/O" LPC, integrated audio, and integrated display or even 1x/2x AGP to the PCI bus).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 04:30:41: Lolwut? I thought AGP was on its own bus, hooked up to the CPU? Any examples of this happening?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Mon, 06 September 2010, 05:37:42: Quote from: Konrad;220289

Most low-spec or older (say, pre-i3) computers would be better served by a far more economical fast HDD; ATA6 or better, 7200rpm or faster, 16MB or greater cache, 80-pin cabling. Real performance is nowhere near theoretical performance, best to research reported bench scores (SiSoft or other). RAID striping can trade capacity for significantly increased performance.

Using PCI drive controllers is not desirable on most newer mobos because integrated IDE/SATA/SCSI controllers tend to be much faster. Additionally, PCI bandwidth must be shared with all other devices on the PCI bus (not always just the PCI cards; many cheap mobo implementations logically connect USB, LAN, ICH or Winbond-style "Super I/O" LPC, integrated audio, and integrated display or even 1x/2x AGP to the PCI bus).

Instead of all of that theoretical talk, you can simplify it to this: get the best HDD for the fastest connection supported on the computer. Done.
On that note, the computer's FSB itself is 66 Mhz, so I doubt IDE or a PCI to SATA would even differ...

If AGP is attached to the PCI bus -- then it's not AGP anymore. The point of AGP was to be directly connected with the CPU instead of the PCI bus. I'm not even sure AGP would work properly if annexed to the PCI bus; would GART work?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 06:03:33: Examples I'm familiar with:

Intel 865Gx boards. If AGP graphics are used (a GPU adapter card plugged into the AGP slot) then it works on the discrete AGP 8x bus exactly as expected. But, if Intel Extreme integrated graphics are used, then the chipset logically implements a "virtual" AGP device which directs the internal IHA bus to connect the GMCH video memory to the ICH5 (PCI hub) to allow software to "see" a display device, end result = an "AGP 8x" display which occupies (and is limited to) the bandwidth on the PCI bus.

The same workaround is done on many older Intel boards (810, 815/815E/815EG/815G, 845Gx; I don't know about 820x boards because I entirely avoided RDRAM), all using Intel AHA, virtual AGP devices identified as AGP 1x/2x/4x (and still limited by PCI bus bandwidth, regardless of label).

Others chipsets I know suck this way (but never owned): VIA (Apollo PME133, Apollo ProSavage PM133, Apollo Savage PL133T, ProSavage8 P4M266, PM800x; using VIA V-Link architecture equivalent to Intel AHA), ALi/ULi (Aladdin Pro 4 TNT2; no advanced architecture = default slow mobo bus), SiS (620, 630x, 650, 651, 661GX, 730S; sometimes using SiS MuTIOL architecture, faster than AHA when implemented but mobo default otherwise, many inefficiencies severely bottleneck practical mobo bus).

Worth noting are all VIA K-chipsets (for AMD), ATI Radeon IGP chipsets (330, 340, PRO 9000/9100, Xpress 200 RS400/410, 320; using ATI A-Link architecture equivalent to Intel AHA), and nVidia IGP/SPP chipsets (nForce 420, nForce2 IGP; using nVidia HyperTransport architecture, much faster than Intel AHA). These all implement discrete AGP logic and entirely avoid crossbussing; unsurprising, since they were all designed for maximum graphics performance.

There are many Celeron-mobile, Xeon, Sempron, and Opteron chipsets that I'm not familiar with. Truth be known, I tend to focus on Intel chipsets (on Intel CPUs), I select VIA chipsets carefully (on AMD CPUs, usually with ATI GPUs) because their products cover the entire quality spectrum from very-top to mid-bottom (and are typically inferior to their Intel counterparts for Intel processors), and I absolutely never buy the half-obsolete cheap bull**** ALi/ULi and SiS make (under a variety of misleading/temporary brands, so they don't tarnish their "real" brand names as much). Astonishingly, after being purchased by Gateway, SiS has attempted to emerge as a leader and their 740 and 741x chipsets were actually better than the Intel and VIA counterparts of the time they competed against (they correct MuTIOL flaws and avoid crossbussing, although they address less maximum physical memory).

PCIe-AGP hybrid boards (those using Intel 9xx or later chipsets, though I think AGP was fully abandoned before the PQ960-series) use a similar approach to logically link AGP into the PCIe bus, consuming PCIe bandwidth. It's possible that some continued to link AGP to the PCI bus instead but I've never seen one ("AGP" bandwidth would continue to be bottlenecked by PCI bus bandwidth; I've never actually had a PCIe-AGP hybrid board, just went straight to pure PCIe).

More modern chipsets (basically anything post Intel LGA775 or AMD AM2) don't suffer from these bus crossing issues because all the bus logic (with the exception of after-chipset PCIe lanes or USB hubs) are handled discretely by the chipset. AGP is nearly extinct. PCI is now considered a "legacy" bus.

Of course if your mobo isn't made by a top-tier manufacturer then all bets are off because they don't always implement all the hardware the chipset is designed to support. Alternatively, "super" mobos often pack extra onboard logic which exceeds the base chipset specifications (rarely in ways that increase maximum performance; but in ways that reduce/eliminate existing hardware performance bottlenecks or simply allow more hardware to be supported; ASUS P7P55 WS Supercomputer mobo is one recent example). Not all implementations are equal, especially at the highest and lowest ends of the mobo market.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 07:22:15: Quote from: EverythingIBM;220297
Instead of all of that theoretical talk, you can simplify it to this: get the best HDD for the fastest connection supported on the computer. Done.
On that note, the computer's FSB itself is 66 Mhz, so I doubt IDE or a PCI to SATA would even differ...
The theoretical talk is necessary because there aren't any HDDs which can actually sustain data transfers at their maximum PATA/SATA rates.

For example the best 15000rpm ATA-133 drives can sustain perhaps ~90MB/s and most will actually be closer to ~40-60MB/s or less. Most HDD manufacturers advertise somewhat misleading information based on more idealized peak performances that aren't seen in real-world use; real numbers can be seen on benchmark databases. And while the mobo IDE controller part might technically be rated at 133MB/s the chipset itself can only achieve maybe ~110-120MB/s real-world sustained transfer across the mobo (yes, even factoring in fancy internal bus architectures), assuming the mobo implementation is optimal (short traces, quality controller chips, fast glue logic, etc), and assuming the main chipset itself isn't also busy processing other high-bandwidth things (like large RAM transfers and running integrated graphics/audio/LAN and/or managing a crowded PCIe/AGP/PCI/USB bus and any number of little peripheral things).

An imperfect world where computing standards and specifications are always loftier than real technology can expect. (Until thresholds get bumped and new standards need to evolve.) Thus the need for more detailed analysis - especially when mixing older tech with newer tech (like fast SSD parts) - if you really want best performance for the buck.

The simplest approach is really to set your maximum price (allow a little wiggle room and don't forget about taxes and other bull****), see what all the shops you can visit (or craigslist or whatever) offers at that price, check benchmarks/reviews for all their available products, pick the product you like best, go get it. You can always play the waiting game, hoping for a better deal when technology improves, but that doesn't do anything for you now, and while next year's technology will vastly improve today's top-end machinery it won't make much difference on yesterday's old PC compared to what's already available.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 07:34:10: Nonsense, we don't need any real understanding of this stuff. Just but **** with lavender on it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 07:53:25: ?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 07:55:41: Oh wait, you're new here... See EIBM's post backlog.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Mon, 06 September 2010, 08:01:19: Quote from: ch_123;220318
Nonsense, we don't need any real understanding of this stuff. Just but **** with lavender on it.

Quote from: Konrad;220321
?

allow me to clarify:

(http://maaadddog.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/****.jpg)

+

(http://www.flowersgallery.net/gallery/lavender/lavender-1.jpg)

+

(http://ceoworld.biz/ceo/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ibm-logo.jpg)

=

All EIBM cares about.

like so:

(http://www.laboskenya.com/images/IBM%20300PL%20Desktop.jpg)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 08:06:09: To paraphrase something I recently read:

Only IBM would release a 300 page document to explain how a 150 page document works.

One way to avoid all the little bull**** is to go big (http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/33451-tilera-announces-64-core-processor).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 10:48:28: I said the SiS 741 is better than it's Intel/VIA counterparts (back in the P4/AthlonXP era).

It is a piece of **** compared to Intel/VIA's current offerings. X58 with i7-980X (i7-990X in Q3-4/2010) is teh pwnage right now, and the X68 (PCIe 3.0!) with P65 is scheduled for Q2/2011.

I see now that my wording could've been a little less ambiguous. Corrected.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:00:23: I'm sure if Intel made a chipset for the Athlon XP, it would be pretty bad...

Quote
Decent, sure, but your wording suggests it's competitive today.

AFAIK, the market for Athlon XP mobos is a bit stagnant right now. All the cool kids are sticking to the proven classics =P
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:18:55: lmao
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:23:54: Quote from: ch_123;220406

AFAIK, the market for Athlon XP mobos is a bit stagnant right now. All the cool kids are sticking to the proven classics =P

such as IBM-era Cyrix 6x86 procs?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/KL_IBM_6x86MX.jpg)
talk about ****, and no lavender to make it smell nice.

edit:

I guess the ceramic is kinda lavender. Still **** though.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:32:45: Oh my. I didn't know they'd actually made any of those, I thought AMD absorbed Cyrix before anything hit the market.

My best junk CPUs are an AMD 486DX4/120 and Intel Pentium-MMX/233. Your Cyrix part is da bomb, though.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:39:32: Only IBM chip I have is an older version of one of these -

(http://www.ps2project.org/images/9/9c/486slc3_upgrade_3.jpg)

I have a SLC2, that is the SLC3. The one I have doesn't have a heatsink on the CPU, and runs at 20MHz vs 60.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 12:47:45: Anybody got one of those soviet IBM-clone CPUs with metric pin spacing and gold-plated legs? (Before you ask, no I don't have one, my oldest CPUs are a dead 4004 and a pile of 65xxs and Z80s)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Mon, 06 September 2010, 13:11:26: Quote from: Konrad;220429
Oh my. I didn't know they'd actually made any of those, I thought AMD absorbed Cyrix before anything hit the market.

My best junk CPUs are an AMD 486DX4/120 and Intel Pentium-MMX/233. Your Cyrix part is da bomb, though.

I don't actually own one, I was just saying that seems like the kinda **** some other forum troll(s) might collect. These would be the very same "cool kids" who ch_123 was referring to, They have made their desire to run old hardware known, as running new hardware generally means learning something new.

AMD did not acquire Cyrix, by the way. That was ultimately VIA (oddly enough "VIA" National Semiconductor)

VIA had the obvious intention of creating the complete technological antithesis to a musical "supergroup" by combining the aforementioned crappy processor manufacturer, themselves, and S3 GRAPHICS into one giant ****ty company. I believe they are publicly traded under stock exchange symbol 'FAIL'.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Mon, 06 September 2010, 13:50:47: Aha, I've just done a lot of reading about Cyrix, VIA, and National.

I wouldn't go so far as to declare VIA = FAIL. They still make $billions.

Of course VIA doesn't actually do any foundry, just fabless design work, but it's pretty obvious that VIA is Intel's main competitor in the mobo chipset market. (Admittedly, their #2 position is peanuts but it's still there.)

Since Intel does not ever design AMD-compatible chipsets (for rather obvious reasons, I think), VIA clearly dominates the entire AMD-processor chipset market on all platforms. VIA's offerings for Intel-processor chipsets tend to generally be inferior to Intel chipsets (which are designed in tandem with Intel processors), but every now and then VIA designs a chipset which takes first place. Every now and then.

Of course Intel's iCore processors, especially their i7 architecture, has taken such a mighty lead in the race that AMD and VIA are so far behind they might never catch up. Of course AMD is a hugely recognized brand but the numbers show that AMD (like VIA) only commands peanuts when compared to Intel's manly dominance.

VIA's S3 products (including all their graphic technology acquisitions) do indeed suck when compared to ATI and nVidia, but are still better than Intel's graphics. AMD owns ATI (actually they've recently discontinued the ATI brand entirely so [strike]ATI Radeon CrossFireX[/strike] AMD Radeon HavoX cards are arguably positioned as the leader, ahead of Intel (and nVidia) in the high-end GPU market. (nVidia, like Intel and VIA, makes most of it's GPU income on ****ty mobo-integrated graphics.) If VIA works closely with AMD (as they always have in the past) then future AMD/AMD/VIA machines have a lot of potential. Assuming they can catch up before Intel makes too many more innovative leaps.

And yeah, there's all the little silicon losers in the computer industry, too - Gateway/SiS, Acer (ALi, ULi), Matrox, etc - but they're not really innovators, their best stuff is usually older-generation stuff licensed from one of the big boys. Intel is just now becoming wary of emerging silicon threats who are starting to muscle into the desktop and server markets, companies like Tilera*, Cray**, SGI***, Sun, and (believe it or not) IBM, among others.

* Tilera has a 100-core 750GFLOP processor (http://www.tilera.com/products/processors/TILE-Gx_Family) and even though it doesn't sell as well as their 64-core and 32-core processors they're already working on a newer 200-core version.
** Cray currently sells a nice little 64-core/4TB desktop (http://gizmodo.com/5050527/crays-first-windows+based-supercomputer-puts-a-64+core-datacenter-on-your-desk)
*** SGI makes disgustingly awesome powerful graphic workstations and servers for serious high-end users
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Mon, 06 September 2010, 14:16:13: Quote from: Konrad;220466
Aha, I've just done a lot of reading about Cyrix, VIA, and National.

I wouldn't go so far as to declare VIA = FAIL. They still make $billions.

So do Microsoft and BP. Still tons of fail there.

Quote from: Konrad;220466

VIA is Intel's main competitor in the mobo chipset market. (Admittedly, their #2 position is peanuts but it's still there.)

Since Intel does not ever design AMD-compatible chipsets (for rather obvious reasons, I think) VIA clearly dominates the AMD-processor chipset market.

What year are you from?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Mon, 06 September 2010, 14:31:22: I haven't seen a VIA chipset since the Pentium 4 days. Intel and AMD both make their own chipsets, Nvidia left the chipset business after nForce 7, and Via just kinda... exists? That's about all you can say for their market presence, that they're there. Kinda sad. Reminds me of S3 and Matrox.

This thread is now about graphics.

Did you know that Matrox is still alive and kicking? They've got two main lineups that actually move product right now, their big multi-output M lineup, and some low power stuff for servers or I guess HTPCs. I kind of want one of their 8-output M9188 cards, except I don't have that many monitors, or $500. Plus they're **** for gaming, no Direct3D support, just OpenGL, and not much horsepower either. Still pretty neat though.
(http://www.unitedgadget.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Matrox-M9188-PCIe-x16-for-multi-monitor.jpg)

Last I heard S3 was only providing a couple of integrated server chips, and most of those were 2D only. A shame, they had potential. Not much potential, but hey even the special kids can make a pretty macaroni painting sometimes.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: bhtooefr on Mon, 06 September 2010, 18:27:24: S3's stuff is in VIA's chipsets, which are now pretty much exclusively used with VIA's CPUs, which are designed by their Centaur team, previously owned by IDT, and they designed the WinChip line (and later the C3, C7, and Nano.)

VIA got the Cyrix design team, NatSemi (and later AMD) got the actual Cyrix designs. VIA ended up firing the Cyrix design team after Centaur finished the design that ultimately became the C3 ahead of schedule, performing better than expected, and the Cyrix team was years behind on the Cyrix III and they were performing far worse than even a 266 Celeron (which was what Centaur's chips were supposed to compete with, the Cyrix III was intended to go up against the P3.)

Anyway, in 2010, Intel makes chipsets for Intel CPUs (nobody else is allowed to any more,) AMD('s ATI division) makes chipsets for AMD CPUs, nVidia got banned from making Intel chipsets and the market chose ATI chipsets for AMD, and VIA makes chipsets for VIA CPUs. SiS makes chipsets for the poor suckers that still put Geode NXs into designs, when there's far better CPUs (like the Atom) available. Oh, and they licensed the Rise mP6 to the company making the Vortex86.

And, finally, as for putting an SSD of some kind in an old computer... there are benefits other than performance. A 10 year old spinning platter drive isn't the most trustworthy of things. Given a choice between, say, a 4 gig 3.5" HDD and a 4 gig CF card, I'll take the CF card any day - it'll be more reliable, far lower power, no noise, etc., etc.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 03:33:15: Quote from: instantkamera
What year are you from?
circa-2005, it looks like :pout:

Awful and embarassing :eek: ... I searched for what I "know" so I found sites and studied information that confirmed exactly what I expected to find in great detail.

As you can guess, I'm an Intel fanboy; the last AMD I ever owned was an Athlon (Barton). I've hardly bothered to follow up on AMD mobos much since then because every time I became interested in buying more computer I saw that the AMD product was somehow inferior. I thought that AMD had abandoned that market (after making their gutless 750, 760 chipsets) ... You really have no idea how ****ing surprised I was to discover (yesterday) that AMD's been making all their own chipsets for half a decade. Wow. Didn't see that coming. Total fail.

Aha ... well my mistake. ****, sorry, I couldn't be much wronger. A little (more careful) digging affirms VIA=FAIL. All the market share summaries I was reading were for around about 2003-2004. VIA was indeed well positioned to become Number Two ... and they somehow lost it all and became another high tech loser without any products. Epic fail.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Lanx on Tue, 07 September 2010, 07:06:20: Quote from: instantkamera;220453
I don't actually own one, I was just saying that seems like the kinda **** some other forum troll(s) might collect. These would be the very same "cool kids" who ch_123 was referring to, They have made their desire to run old hardware known, as running new hardware generally means learning something new.

AMD did not acquire Cyrix, by the way. That was ultimately VIA (oddly enough "VIA" National Semiconductor)

VIA had the obvious intention of creating the complete technological antithesis to a musical "supergroup" by combining the aforementioned crappy processor manufacturer, themselves, and S3 GRAPHICS into one giant ****ty company. I believe they are publicly traded under stock exchange symbol 'FAIL'.

I'd take that back, from what i heard via is set to produce the first quad core atom chips, which won't be as useful for netbook/light laptop use but rather would go in these new servers that use dual core atom chips (where 12 atom chips = 1 regular quad core in terms of power).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Tue, 07 September 2010, 07:53:01: Quote from: Phaedrus2129;220480

Did you know that Matrox is still alive and kicking? They've got two main lineups that actually move product right now, their big multi-output M lineup, and some low power stuff for servers or I guess HTPCs. I kind of want one of their 8-output M9188 cards, except I don't have that many monitors, or $500. Plus they're **** for gaming, no Direct3D support, just OpenGL, and not much horsepower either. Still pretty neat though.
Show Image
(http://www.unitedgadget.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Matrox-M9188-PCIe-x16-for-multi-monitor.jpg)

I did, I used to drive by there all the time (they are based in MTL).

They are used quite a bit in the medical field(s).

Quote from: Konrad;220657
circa-2005, it looks like :pout:

Awful and embarassing :eek: ... I searched for what I "know" so I found sites and studied information that confirmed exactly what I expected to find in great detail.

As you can guess, I'm an Intel fanboy; the last AMD I ever owned was an Athlon (Barton). I've hardly bothered to follow up on AMD mobos much since then because every time I became interested in buying more computer I saw that the AMD product was somehow inferior. I thought that AMD had abandoned that market (after making their gutless 750, 760 chipsets) ... You really have no idea how ****ing surprised I was to discover (yesterday) that AMD's been making all their own chipsets for half a decade. Wow. Didn't see that coming. Total fail.

Aha ... well my mistake. ****, sorry, I couldn't be much wronger. A little (more careful) digging affirms VIA=FAIL. All the market share summaries I was reading were for around about 2003-2004. VIA was indeed well positioned to become Number Two ... and they somehow lost it all and became another high tech loser without any products. Epic fail.

It's ok, you almost had me thinking I was crazy though ...

Quote from: Lanx;220672
I'd take that back, from what i heard via is set to produce the first quad core atom chips, which won't be as useful for netbook/light laptop use but rather would go in these new servers that use dual core atom chips (where 12 atom chips = 1 regular quad core in terms of power).

Atom is an intel product line, I doubt VIA will be producing them. I think you mean to Nano. Since the original Nano and the "even better nano" (that supposedly outperforms the atom) has been out for a bit and still no one is buying them... I'm going to have to stick with my original assessment. I would love to be wrong though, as I do like competition...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 09:08:16: Atom is an Intel product, no? I'd be surprised if anybody else fabs them. These (http://www.atomchip.com/) bull****ters notwithstanding.

They say the VIA Nano outperforms the Atom, but also is not as power efficient. The classic tradeoff for mobile electronics.

The Atom was originally designed for "MIDs" (Mobile Internet Devices), back before iPhones when everybody thought PDAs and pdf/internet tablets had a real future. I suppose Atoms could be used in UMPCs, minibooks (whatever the official term for puny laptop is these days). Dunno personally ... it's just not a "real" computer unless it's built into a rack or tower.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Tue, 07 September 2010, 09:13:33: Quote from: Konrad;220693
Atom is an Intel product, no? I'd be surprised if anybody else fabs them. These (http://www.atomchip.com/) bull****ters notwithstanding.

exactly.

Quote from: Konrad;220693
minibooks (whatever the official term for puny laptop is these days). Dunno personally ... it's just not a "real" computer unless it's built into a rack or tower.

Netbooks? They pretty much exclusively are...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 09:45:16: Dell has been screwing a lot of schools over by selling them Atom-based machines on claims of better power efficiency. That's as may be, but I've heard of at least one case where one year old E6300 systems were replaced with Atoms that my Athlon XP can outperform, let alone the 2.0-3.2GHz Pentium 4s most schools use. Atoms belong in netbooks, not school desktops.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:03:02: I'd guess that desktop Atoms were designed to run the crippled Windows Starter Editions ... cheapest **** possible, meant for loser third world countries and such.

That doesn't include Canada. We have P4s. :canada::second:
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:21:37: Windows Starter Edition is sadistic. The only reason not to sell Home Premium in those areas for cheaper is because they don't want people buying cheap HP copies from India and selling them in the US. So they deliberately cripple their operating system and sell it at the price point the people can afford, which inherently limits the capabilities of computers in those regions.

adglahdgoirhjf;flkdxd
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:37:03: Quote from: Konrad;220657
As you can guess, I'm an Intel fanboy

(http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Everyone%20Else/images-3/you-gonna-get-raped.jpg)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: itlnstln on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:41:35: Quote from: Phaedrus2129;220723

adglahdgoirhjf;flkdxd

Keyboard malfunction?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:43:20: No argument. Intel costs $$$.

But there aren't any alternatives worth buying.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:43:30: Quote from: itlnstln;220732
Keyboard malfunction?

My Windows starter edition. It only allows 500 keypresses per minute, then it scrambles the message and kicks you in the nuts.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:45:42: Quote from: Konrad;220733
No argument. Intel costs $$$.

But there aren't any alternatives worth buying.

So you'd pass up on Athlon II quad cores for $120? 10% slower than an i5 750 and 60% of the price?

Or you'd go for the $1000 980X vs. a $300 1090T? 10% slower for 30% of the price?

Fanboys are both amusing and frustrating.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:48:37: Quote from: Phaedrus2129
Windows Starter Edition is sadistic ... So they deliberately cripple their operating system and sell it at the price point the people can afford, which inherently limits the capabilities of computers...
I feel the same way about the Ultimate Edition. It's criminal to release a half dozen crippled versions of the product just so you can inflate the price of the complete package. Bastards.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: itlnstln on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:50:06: Fortunately, I still qualify for Student prices on MS products ($30 for Win 7 Pro, $80 for Office 2010). I would go broke otherwise; I have 5 Windows 7 licenses and only one computer.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:53:58: Quote from: itlnstln;220737
Fortunately, I still qualify for Student prices on MS products ($30 for Win 7 Pro, $80 for Office 2010). I would go broke otherwise; I have 5 Windows 7 licenses and only one computer.

Yeah I probably qualify too, where do you go to pay that price?

EDIT: Nevermind, googled it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 11:59:11: Quote from: Phaedrus2129
Fanboys are both amusing and frustrating.
lol, show me the benchmark numbers.

Yeah, I'd pay Intel's fixed price of $1000 for their latest/greatest proc and I'd drop a few hundred more on the matching mobo (Intel chipset, almost any top-tier brand).

If I were interested in anything less than best then I'd be looking at the midrange performers and weighing against maximum bang for the buck.

Probably same logic of people who buy Porsche instead of the far more economical bang-for-buck return of a Honda (or even five Hondas). It's because they don't want to waste time with anything that's not the best.

Once another brand (be it AMD or not) manages to consistently take 1st place (and 2nd, 3rd, etc) year after year then I'll shift allegiance.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Tue, 07 September 2010, 12:21:56: Quote from: Konrad;220740

If I were interested in anything less than best then I'd be looking at the midrange performers and weighing against maximum bang for the buck.

then you would be looking at a lot of AMD offerings.

Quote from: Konrad;220740

Once another brand (be it AMD or not) manages to consistently take 1st place (and 2nd, 3rd, etc) year after year then I'll shift allegiance.

Well 1st place, as already mentioned, is Intel's ONLY 6core offering. It is prohibitively expensive (1000 bucks). Even if you can afford it (I could), it doesnt make ANY sense from a value (price v. performance) standpoint.

The car analogy my be right in some ways, but not in others. Even if you need the fastest machine evar, there are so many other variables (disk, mem, graphics) that will make a system with a "lesser" CPU perform on par or better than a system with just the best CPU. Spending wisely means getting a solid performing CPU and coupling it with good I/O, mem, etc.

So, in that category of 2nd - Nth place, AMD easily wins, especially when you compare price to performance (that too has already been basically pointed out).

It's not really rocket science, AMD is a strong performer and helps you keep your cash where it should be (either in your pocket, or upgrading sub-systems that will show better real-world performace boost).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: EverythingIBM on Tue, 07 September 2010, 14:00:51: Quote from: instantkamera;220324
allow me to clarify:

Show Image
(http://maaadddog.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/****.jpg)

+

Show Image
(http://www.flowersgallery.net/gallery/lavender/lavender-1.jpg)

+

Show Image
(http://ceoworld.biz/ceo/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ibm-logo.jpg)

=

All EIBM cares about.

like so:

Show Image
(http://www.laboskenya.com/images/IBM%20300PL%20Desktop.jpg)

Actually those are the wrong cases, I don't like those models.

I only like model 6562:
(http://www.pcmedixwebs.com/images/used-systems/IBM300PL-1.jpg)
It's characterized by the stripes going all the way to the back, the front media panel on the lavender strip (which was what it was originally for), EDO DIMMs, pentium 1, crystal audio, & MGA Matrox.
No other "300PLs" have that (except crystal audio on some, most of them moved to ESS Allegro or whatever it's called).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 14:39:57: Quote from: Konrad;220740
lol, show me the benchmark numbers.

Yeah, I'd pay Intel's fixed price of $1000 for their latest/greatest proc and I'd drop a few hundred more on the matching mobo (Intel chipset, almost any top-tier brand).

If I were interested in anything less than best then I'd be looking at the midrange performers and weighing against maximum bang for the buck.

You spend a grand on the latest Intel "Extreme" chip, and suddenly its performance is matched by mainstream chips within 12-18 months, and then its performance is effectively obsolete and matched by low end chips within about three years. Car analogies don't really apply here because good cars are good cars for a long long time, and definitely longer than lesser cars. With CPUs, the timeline by which the CPU is a good CPU is about equal to that of midrange chips. Next generations of CPUs introduce (well, usually) either brand new features, or dramatic performance increases. Having a chip that's a little bit faster than chips that were about 1/5 its price doesn't count for much.

I have an AMD Phenom II in my system, which I picked because it offered the best value for money at the time I purchased it. If money was not an object, I still would have bought it. Well, maybe I might have got some high end chip like one of those 12-core Opterons, but definitely not a slightly faster i7 with an "Extreme" name stuck on to it.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 14:49:19: The 980X at least makes a shred of sense, since it's Intel's only 6-core chip. But the i7 975 which was $1000 for a long time, that was just stupid. It was just a higher-binned i7 920. You could get an i7 920, good overclocking board, and high-end cooling for half the price of the 975, and get an even higher clock speed.
EDIT: It still costs over $1000 on Newegg. Stupid.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 15:04:35: Isn't there some Intel 6-core part in the $700-800 region?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 17:29:51: Nope. There was rumored to be like a 970X or 990X, but they haven't surfaced yet and it's unlikely with Sandy Bridge so close to release.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 17:45:41: Ok, a bit more than $800, but here you go -Link (http://www.dabs.ie/products/intel-core-i7-970-3-2ghz-12mb-1366-7342.html)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 17:56:53: Yeah. It's just the lower binned version of the same chip.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 18:04:18: Quote from: instantkamera
... Intel's ONLY 6core offering. It is prohibitively expensive (1000 bucks). Even if you can afford it (I could), it doesnt make ANY sense from a value (price v. performance) standpoint.
Intel's (Core i7, Gulftown) hex-cores:
i7-960, i7-965X, i7-970, i7-980X; samples of i7-990X are already distributed and will market Q1/2011.

AMD's (Phenom II X6, Thuban) hex-cores:
X6-1055T (2 versions), X6-1075T, X6-1090T; possibly also X6-1035T, X6-1045T, X6-1065T, and X6-1080T (but I can't confirm). AMD has not announced any future X6's (their focus is on the next gen "Fusion" APUs expected to market Q3/2011; these will require a new socket, sometimes called "AM3+").

(Bold indicates Extreme Edition or Black Edition parts with unlocked multipliers.)

Due to Intel's regulated price structures, I'll pay ~CDN$1275-$1350 for an Extreme i7 (whichever version).
AMD's prices seem to be looser and vary largely among vendors. I'll pay ~CDN$400-$550 for a Black X6 (when available, which they currently aren't).
The price gap widens when mobos are also considered; 1st-tier X58 boards would cost me ~CDN$400-$600 while 1st-tier 890FX boards cost ~CDN$200-$350.

"Prohibitively expensive" is a personal decision. :wof:
i7's are disgustingly expensive, and the Extreme i7's are blatant ass-raping robbery. But if you *absolutely must have* the ultimate computer then you'll pay the premium.

Quote from: instantkamera
then you would be looking at a lot of AMD offerings ...
... there are so many other variables (disk, mem, graphics) that will make a system with a "lesser" CPU perform on par or better than a system with just the best CPU.
This thread has brought my (unthinkingly dismissive i7-onwards) fanboy dedication into question. My next major processor upgrade (Q3-4/2010, lol) might just be an AMD. Even having to suddenly also buy a new mobo and cooling block might still cost less overall. AMD might even turn out to be the best possible upgrade, not just the most cost-effective one. I might still choose pure Intel, but at least it'd be an informed choice instead of a religious one.

My comparison of performance-critical specs:

i7-X and X58
QPI (@6.4GT/s), 16GB triple-channel DDR3-1066 (@25.6GB/s) with Turbo Cache, PCIe 2.0 (16/16/4 lanes as dual-16 or quad-8 @32GB/s), NB-SB bus shares QPI, SATA2 (3Gb/s).
X58 supports eSATA and FireWire (lacking on some 890FX boards).

Most i7 overclocks exceed 4GHz and a few achieve 5Ghz.

X6 and 890FX
HT3.0 (@2x2.0GT/s), 16GB/24GB dual-channel DDR3-1333 (@21GB/s), PCIe 2.0 (16/16/4/1 lanes as dual-16 or quad-8 @32GB/s, plus 5 more single lanes @4GB/s), NB-SB bus across AL3X (@4GB/s), SATA3 (6Gb/s), hardware virtualization IOMMU.
890FX supports IDE, USB1 ports, and legacy peripherals (X58 doesn't); great for compatibility with old devices. Also supports more USB2 ports, extra GbLAN, added PCI slots, and better audio.
Almost every 890FX board adds USB3 controllers. I don't know why the hell people need 14 or more USB2 ports, but having even a few that can operate as USB3 is essential.

The i7/X6 processors support basically equivalent special instruction capabilities: 64-bit, NX bit, Virtualization, power saving, and multimedia SIMDs (SSE4.2 vs SSE4a+3DNow! ... six of one, half-dozen of the other).

Momentary off-topic retrogression to OP - a performance SSD or two would certainly be required equipment to get the most out of SATA3 6Gb/s, with or without RAID stripes. :nod:

There's a huge number of AM3/890FX mobos which collectively offer a ****load more features and variety than X58 boards. It appears that AMD isn't very heavy-handed about controlling their standards so the mobo makers have generous leeway in their designs and all try to stuff in all the extra features they can to compete in the "PC enthusiast" market. Sophisticated overclock-friendly options are the norm instead of the exception.

I just can't quite make sense of the (to me) confusing PCIe configuration. I doubt it'd be an issue for me since I rarely plug in more than a PCIe-16+16 SLI or CFX combo. Sometimes a PCIe-4 drive controller or sound or Gb card (already integrated and therefore not necessary on these boards).

Of course direct comparisons are sort of impossible because of some major differences in architecture and design philosophy. I know X58 well, I can hardly make sense of the way AMD does things (it's just a lot of information all at once for a guy who's a decade outdated). Still reading benchmarks and reviews. I've got a lot of catching up to do (and system build pricing to figure out) before I can decide whether Intel is worth the extra $$$. Thanks for the reminder of how rapidly the value of PC tech gets obsoleted (the accountants at work say computers depreciate -25% annually, ie after 4 years they're essentially worthless).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Tue, 07 September 2010, 19:24:11: Quote from: Konrad;220789
Intel's (Core i7, Gulftown) hex-cores:
i7-960, i7-965X, i7-970, i7-980X; samples of i7-990X are already distributed and will market Q1/2011.

Im (hypothetically) building now. Where do I buy these magical processors?

Quote from: Konrad;220789

AMD's (Phenom II X6, Thuban) hex-cores:
X6-1055T (2 versions), X6-1075T, X6-1090T; possibly also X6-1035T, X6-1045T, X6-1065T, and X6-1080T (but I can't confirm). AMD has not announced any future X6's (their focus is on the next gen "Fusion" APUs expected to market Q3/2011; these will require a new socket, sometimes called "AM3+").

Some of those are not out yet, but the 1055T and 1090T are and have been available at ROCK bottom prices for ages.

Quote from: Konrad;220789

Due to Intel's regulated price structures, I'll pay ~CDN$1275-$1350 for an Extreme i7 (whichever version).

ridiculous. <- that's a period

Quote from: Konrad;220789

AMD's prices seem to be looser and vary largely among vendors. I'll pay ~CDN$400-$550 for a Black X6 (when available, which they currently aren't).

Bull poo. I live in canada dude, I know what is available.

1090T (black edish) - 334.99CAD
http://ncix.com/products/?sku=52067&vpn=HDT90ZFBGRBOX&manufacture=AMD

and this has been on-sale at 300 bucks so many times I can't even count. In stock. There are cheaper places too.

Likewise for the 1055T, it's like 200 bucks man.

Quote from: Konrad;220789

"Prohibitively expensive" is a personal decision. :wof:

i7's are disgustingly expensive, and the Extreme i7's are blatant ass-raping robbery. But if you *absolutely must have* the ultimate computer then you'll pay the premium.

I don't buy it. It will be the "ultimate" computer for all of 3 months. And most guys who buy that, probably pair it with 4-8 gigs of ram and a 7200rpm HDD. Hardly "ultimate". I wont argue that SOME can use the proc(s) to it's full potential, but even still those people still might be better served by tailoring their stuff to AMDs offerings. Squeeze extra performance out for a specific application.

Quote from: Konrad;220789

This thread has brought my (unthinkingly dismissive i7-onwards) fanboy dedication into question. My next major processor upgrade (Q3-4/2010, lol) might just be an AMD. Even having to suddenly also buy a new mobo and cooling block might still cost less overall. AMD might even turn out to be the best possible upgrade, not just the most cost-effective one. I might still choose pure Intel, but at least it'd be an informed choice instead of a religious one.

Good to hear. use what you want, but even intel has better offerings than their "extreme" highest priced items. With the realistic pricing on AVAILABLE AMD procs I have given you, maybe you are even closer...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 19:43:14: Quote from: instantkamera
Im (hypothetically) building now. Where do I buy these magical [i7] processors?
Wherever you normally buy processors. Some have been discontinued as Intel replaced them with newer/faster versions, just as they will do with the i7-980X once their 990X is in production.
You might be able to find them used if you look around, though I think it seems unlikely simply because (in their time) they cost nearly $1K each and not too many sane people would pop out another $1K for such a miniscule upgrade on a newer part, even if they could resell their old part for "only" ~$600-$800. Besides, people never sell i7's alone unless they're unloading OC lemons that Intel won't RMA.

Quote from: instantkamera
Bull poo. I live in canada dude, I know what is available.

1090T (black edish) - 334.99CAD
Likewise for the 1055T, it's like 200 bucks man.
Holy crap NCIX rocks!

I was (wasting my time) looking at local shops, eBay, etc.

A small (but not exaggerated) part of the inflation in my prices is due to unavoidable shipping costs (most of the vendors I've wasted my time looking at are USA). Those the best prices I could find ... until NCIX. :hail:

Quote from: instantkamera
... even intel has better offerings than their "extreme" highest priced items.
wtf?

You're not talking about Xeons are you? (Technically better, I suppose, with a terrifyingly expensive multiprocessor server board bulging with RAM ... except that Xeons don't use QMI, just slow old DMI.)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Tue, 07 September 2010, 20:47:08: Quote from: Konrad;220796

Holy crap NCIX rocks!

I was (wasting my time) looking at local shops, eBay, etc.

A small (but not exaggerated) part of the inflation in my prices is due to unavoidable shipping costs (most of the vendors I've wasted my time looking at are USA). Those the best prices I could find ... until NCIX. :hail:

wtf?

You're not talking about Xeons are you? (Technically better, I suppose, with a terrifyingly expensive multiprocessor server board bulging with RAM ... except that Xeons don't use QMI, just slow old DMI.)

NCIX does, for the most part rock. There's also tigerDirect.ca (not as cool, but they do have a store near me). CanadaComputers has low prices too, and bewawa.com is dope if you live in the GTA, they hand deliver with debit at the door (like pizza) for free.

RE Intels better offerings, Im just referring to value. If I was going to buy intel, it still wouldn't be a hexa-core as they are just insanely priced for the performance.

the i7-930 is well priced right now, for example. It provides good performance at a good price.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: HaaTa on Tue, 07 September 2010, 21:17:40: When I lived in Ottawa PC Cyber was good, as well as RB Computing. Compunation had lots of POS and wierd stuff though. Bought stuff from all of them.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 21:31:02: 990X is in production. It's the same thing as the 980X, just priced higher. Intel just figures they can get more sales of a lower priced X6, and more money off a higher priced X6, so instead of binning all their Gulftowns as either 980X desktop chips or Xeons, they'll bin two different desktop versions, one priced at $800 (970X), the other at $1200 (990X), and leave the current 980X labeled ones until they've all been sold. They're all the same, the future 990X chips would have been labeled 980X, only this way Intel gets more money off them.

AMD's kind of neat in that many of their Athlon II/Phenom II processors came off the same die. See, all processor fabs have a certain failure rate of chips that don't make the cut or don't function at all. Intel has dozens of fabs and one or two dedicated to each given line of processors. Going back to LGA775 days, there's a fab for Q9000/Q8000 series chips, one for E8000/E7000/E6000 chips, one for E6000/E4000/E2000 chips, etc. If a chip comes off the line with some of the L2 cache faulty they just disable the faulty cache and sell it as a lower tier CPU, and if it isn't stable at higher clock speeds they label it as a lower clock speed. If a core is busted they send it back for repair, or just recycle it.

AMD, however, doesn't have the cash and facilities Intel has. They're forced to be more economical. Many (not all, but many) of their Athlon II/Phenom II X4/X3/X2 CPUs all came off the same die. The Athlon II X2 240 came off the same fab as the Phenom II X4 965. See, AMD has their fab and it makes chips laid out for the 965 chip. However, say it comes out and it's faulty. A core not working right? Label it an X3. Some of the L3 cache not working? Disable some of that and call it an Athlon. Not stable at 3.4GHz? Mark it for 2.8GHz. And so on.

However, there's more demand for low-end chips than there is for high-end chips. And AMD's fab process is good enough that the vast majority of their chips come out good enough to be mid-range or higher. So AMD has to deliberately take good chips and mark them as lower-end chips, just disabling cores and cache and lowering the clock speed. There have been "golden batches" where they've had such a good haul they had to label chips that could have been Phenom II x4 chips as Athlon II X2 chips. But when the extra parts on these chips are deactivated they aren't laser cut, they're just deactivated through some voltage sensor thing. Certain motherboards have an adjustment that lets you change voltage settings to the CPU that reactivate disabled parts. There have been cases where someone buys an Athlon II X2 240 and "unlocks" it to the equivalent of a Phenom II x4 955 and still has room to overclock.

Only downside is that sometimes the cores are disabled because they really are faulty, or the chip really can't run at a given clock speed. Also the voltage thing messes up the per-core temperature monitoring, so you have to go by total chip temperature. Still, it can be a great way to get "free" performance out of a cheap CPU.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Tue, 07 September 2010, 23:27:49: I was going to ask about that above, but forgot.

AMD appears to have low yields, judging by the large variety of flawed X6 chips which are de-rated as lower-priced X4. I'd be surprised if they deliberately rebin any full-spec X6 chips because there's (apparently) an abundant supply of X4 but an intermittent shortage of X6. Vendors just can't restock as fast as they sell.

(Even mighty NCIX - Vancouver, Richmond, Burnaby, and Langley stores all within 20 minutes drive! How could I not know? - is currently completely out of stock.)

I would expect Intel, having larger resources and run volumes, might have slightly better yields (though they might not). Hex i7's get binned down to lesser hex i7's when necessary ... but then what? No doubt many parts have bad cores or bad cache, and they can't be turned into i5's. Are they just discarded?

It seems evident that Intel is greedy. Likely they don't mind having a carefully strangled supply because their profits are still floated by *coughfanboyscough* who are willing to pay the premium for i7-X parts. Higher demand just makes the commodity more desirable. And yet AMD can still afford to sell their X6's for ~$300 ...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 23:37:48: Thuban X6 chips aren't rebinned often. There's one quad core model that's a disabled X6, all other quad cores and lower come off two different fab sets, one for AM3 CPUs (PII 965 derivatives) and the other for AM2+ (PII 940 derivatives) (being phased out). I haven't noticed any major shortage of X6 chips; if there is one it's probably more due to demand exceeding expectations, or they only have one fab, than to lower-than-average yields. I could be wrong though.

When Intel has a chip with a bad core they either try to repair it, or salvage the usable bits and melt down or pitch the rest. Repair costs significant money, which Intel can afford but AMD can't. Salvaging can help recover some cost from a borked chip, but compare $20 saved by salvaging cache and such, to $60 from selling it as a lower-binned chip. And melting it down saves pennies, so the former applies as well. Salvage and melting down are common practice for Intel since they have deep coffers and can eat the loss for higher yields, while AMD needs *any* cashflow more than it needs the couple extra high-end parts sold by repairing bad chips.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Tue, 07 September 2010, 23:58:56: I hope I'm not coming off as an AMD fanboy or anything. My last two CPUs have been a Core 2 Duo E2200 and Core 2 Quad Q9550. Last AMD CPU was an Athlon64 something or other. Well, latest in terms of acquisition would be my AthlonXP Barton, or the Neo X2 in my netbook. But I don't count those.

However, though I have no loyalty to any one brand, I am currently rooting for AMD. I believe that the best thing for the market, and for the consumer, at the moment would be for AMD to stomp Intel in the next generation and grow market share by 5-15%, get a billion or so in revenue, and invest that in R&D. This would allow them to continue putting out improved Bulldozer products and force Intel to innovate more beyond adding more cores, and if Bulldozer is good enough it might force Intel to lower prices on its CPUs, even sell at cost for a time (as AMD is currently forcing Nvidia to do).

I think AMD even has a chance to accomplish this, assuming Bulldozer performs at or above the level of current-gen Intel chips. One of the big things going for AMD is their socket strategy. Intel's Sandy Bridge chips will come in two socket flavors, LGA1155 and LGA2011. This will bite them in two ways. First this will piss in the face of the enthusiast, enterprise, and OEM markets in that these companies were given the impression that they'd get several years of use out of their LGA1366 and LGA1156 platforms, which have been around for 2 and 1 years respectively. They're already being replaced. This is going to alienate many users. Second it will split their market, forcing enthusiasts to pay more in two ways: 1.) LGA1155 will be incapable of overclocking due to it being a single clock system, so enthusiasts who want to OC on LGA1155 will have to buy expensive K series CPUs; and 2.) LGA2011 will be hellishly expensive, requiring an even larger socket than the already large LGA1366.

If AMD's Bulldozer presents anything like a decent bang for the buck the enthusiast market will come running rather than go with a K series CPU, or pay for an LGA2011 motherboard and CPU. It'll be a case of 90% of the performance for 50% of the price. And while the enthusiast market may only make up 1% of the total sales in the industry, it makes up as much as 5% of the revenue since enthusiasts buy more expensive parts, more often than the average consumer or OEM. Add that to people who go with AMD to avoid having to change sockets again in one or two years and you have a not-insignificant chunk of the market migrating to AMD.

Assuming performance lives up to expectations.

So I'm rooting for AMD for the moment. Them doing better will be good for everyone.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Wed, 08 September 2010, 00:15:45: Raw dies can be repaired? I don't doubt it's possible but it amazes me. It must be a (close to) fully automated process. Sounds ****ing awesome, I'll look it up, wanna learn more. Salvaging working large cache modules especially (for reuse on cheapy MCUs or even DRAM maybe?) does seem quite reasonable. I'm unsure if they can "Cut&Paste" lithographed modules between dies.

And silicon dies are remelted? Wouldn't the silicon be contaminated with all (carefully added) semiconductor and metal traces?

I do understand the manufacturing process (well, I did 5 years ago anyhow). Bad dies (and wafer bits) would have to be thrown into arc-furnace with the (<0.1% impure) "metallurgical-grade" silicon prior to crucible distilling/deposition onto (<10ppb impure) "semiconductor-grade" seed rods, then into the electric crystal pulling ovens, etc etc ... unless Intel's yield is really low or waste is really high, I just can't see it being worth more than pennies. Silicon (artificial/mined quartz crystals) is - literally - dirt cheap. They'd make more money grinding this uber-refined silicon waste into dust and selling to other industries for making alloys or something, I'd think.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 00:24:20: I don't think the silicon is melted down, but I'm pretty sure they recover the metals when possible.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Wed, 08 September 2010, 00:33:28: From what I've been reading up, AMD's "Fusion" ("Bulldozer", "Llano", "Bobcat") APUs will integrate K10 CPU and ATI DX11 GPU cores in a single package. Sounds like a recipe for utter pwnage to me, especially if
1) these systems can still accept "traditional" GPU cards
2) AMD begins making the cards themselves with these monster CPU/GPU multicores
3) their sockets are (at least partially) compatible with existing AM3 sockets

I currently use three X58 mobos (Intel DX58SO, Asus P6T, MSI X58P) with three quad i7's (920 and two OC'd 930s) ... I was planning on upgrading them all, now I'm considering selling all three (well, maybe just the ****tier two) boards/processors/coolers before their resale value drops too much and just going *gasp* all AMD, the way it looks I can go all Black Edition and break about even on cashflow, maybe get one i7-X upgrade.

[Edit]
(add to above)
4) thermal management isn't impossible
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 00:38:20: AM3 CPUs will run in AM3+ sockets, but AM3+ CPUs will not run in AM3 sockets.

This unfortunately means that you need a mobo upgrade to use Bulldozer, but it also means that the Fusion platform will support mainstream CPUs from the very start.

A bit more on repair/recycling of chips. I don't know a lot about this, a lot of it is hearsay. You're right that repairing a raw die is an astounding technical feat, and it would be impossible to repair a damaged core. However, I do believe that Intel will fix minor or easily fixable problems. Again, bad cache is a good example. If a Gulftown has a bad L3 cache chip, it could easily be worth replacing. Even if it costs the equivalent of $500 to repair, that's still a $200-300 profit off that chip, versus zero if they just trashed it, or less than $50 salvaging and recycling.

EDIT: There's no reason for Fusion not to have PCIe slots/links for discrete GPUs. The onboard GPU of Fusion is supposed to be something like a 5450, or its Radeon 6000 counterpart. Entry level obviously, but far better than anything Intel has shown. The high-end AMD Fusion gaming system of 2011 will be a 4/8 core Bulldozer CPU in an AMD 990FX chipset motherboard with a Radeon 6800 or 6900 series graphics card.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Konrad on Wed, 08 September 2010, 01:07:33: I think the CPU+GPU multicore idea is more useful than that.

I think CPU (that is, APU+FPU+pipeline+codeset) functions have been overkill for years. How many GHz do you really need to run a word processor, even with Windows bloat? Trading some on-die real estate away from "unused" CPU power to GPU power will go far beyond simple fps considerations ... applications for streaming processors, physics, GPGPU and all that are exploding. GUIs would benefit from immense performance increases. Well, some GUIs would.

But of course it's all still sci-fi.
AMD says Q3/2011, so probably really Q2/2012 lol. That's a long wait either way, longer still because all the OS and software stuff will have to mature into it.

Don't let my newfound AMD enthusiasm fool you just yet. I'm not in any rush to wildly throw years of fanboyism away on a first impression, especially since I've planned (saved for) my upgrade so long ... I bought good mobos and the cheapest processors I could use, from craigslist in two cases, with the plan of ultimately upgrading to i7-X later on ... we all have dreams. Mine are just nerdy.

[Edit]

What's this you say about sockets? As I (now) understand it, Phenom IIs are AM3 and some can work in AM2+ or even AM2 with limited capabilities. There is no official AM3+ socket (yet), it's just what people seem to be calling it. Is this wrong? Buying into AM3 might be as dead-end as LGA1366 within a year or two?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Wed, 08 September 2010, 07:28:50: Quote from: Konrad;220818
I was going to ask about that above, but forgot.

AMD appears to have low yields, judging by the large variety of flawed X6 chips which are de-rated as lower-priced X4. I'd be surprised if they deliberately rebin any full-spec X6 chips because there's (apparently) an abundant supply of X4 but an intermittent shortage of X6. Vendors just can't restock as fast as they sell.

(Even mighty NCIX - Vancouver, Richmond, Burnaby, and Langley stores all within 20 minutes drive! How could I not know? - is currently completely out of stock.)

whacho talkin' 'bout?

http://ajax.ncix.com/checkinventory.php?sku=52067

they have this proc.

DRIVE??!? who does that any more? Order that **** online. Don't have a CC you say? No worries, NCIX takes PP and INTERAC ONLINE. How convenient!

Plus Im sure there is a "pick up in store option" where you still don't pay shipping (there is here when I order, as the just opened a store in Markham (which is nowhere near me)).

FYI, I am in no way affiliated with NCIX, but they have always treated me right. A fellow GHer ordered a Steelseries with cherry blacks and had issues with a stuck switch. They took it back and paid the shipping both ways (not even customary if you didn't purchase "expressRMA" coverage.

anywho...

Quote from: Konrad;220829

What's this you say about sockets? As I (now) understand it, Phenom IIs are AM3 and some can work in AM2+ or even AM2 with limited capabilities. There is no official AM3+ socket (yet), it's just what people seem to be calling it. Is this wrong? Buying into AM3 might be as dead-end as LGA1366 within a year or two?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_AM2#Successors

AMD has tried to not burn people on successive AMx releases.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 08:26:29: AM2 CPU - Compatible with AM2 and AM2+ sockets
AM2+ CPU - Compatible with AM2+, and partially compatible with AM2
AM3 CPU - Compatible with AM2+, AM3, and AM3+ sockets, partially compatible with AM2
AM3+ CPU - Compatible with AM3+ sockets
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 08:30:55: Quote from: Phaedrus2129;220855
AM3+ CPU - Compatible with AM3+ sockets

Ah, great job AMD. Make a completely new socket, but give it a name that implies backwards compatibility when it does not...
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: instantkamera on Wed, 08 September 2010, 08:36:17: Quote from: ch_123;220856
Ah, great job AMD. Make a completely new socket, but give it a name that implies backwards compatibility when it does not...

Well since neither socket nor cpu is out right now ... so ...

but note that he is talking about the compatibility of CPUs in new/old sockets. OLDER AM3 CPUs (say you buy the current hex) should be compatible going forward (like I could buy a new mobo and keep my old proc for a bit). I know this was NOT the case when they changed the memory controller from AM2-3, but there is no proof that is going to be the case again.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 08:56:41: Quote from: instantkamera;220858
Well since neither socket nor cpu is out right now ... so ...

but note that he is talking about the compatibility of CPUs in new/old sockets. OLDER AM3 CPUs (say you buy the current hex) should be compatible going forward (like I could buy a new mobo and keep my old proc for a bit). I know this was NOT the case when they changed the memory controller from AM2-3, but there is no proof that is going to be the case again.

AMD confirmed it in a press release. AM3+ CPUs will only work in AM3+ sockets, but AM3 CPUs will still work in them as well.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Wed, 08 September 2010, 09:11:43: Quote from: instantkamera;220858
Well since neither socket nor cpu is out right now ... so ...

but note that he is talking about the compatibility of CPUs in new/old sockets. OLDER AM3 CPUs (say you buy the current hex) should be compatible going forward (like I could buy a new mobo and keep my old proc for a bit). I know this was NOT the case when they changed the memory controller from AM2-3, but there is no proof that is going to be the case again.

Didn't see that AM3s will work in AM3+, thus why the post was subsequently deleted.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: BigBrother on Sat, 16 October 2010, 06:22:53: Quote from: ch_123;218675
Last I checked, an SSD is a type of hard drive.
lolz. SSDs are a type of flash drive. Hard Disk Drives (aka HDDs) use platters (they spin, usually make noise, runs kinda warm to touch) while SSDs use flash chips (non-mechanical, don't make noise, usually lower heat) (?).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Rajagra on Sat, 16 October 2010, 06:29:01: Well if you think about it, SSD is a misnomer whichever way you say it. They are neither a disk, nor a drive.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Sat, 16 October 2010, 08:25:57: Quote from: BigBrother;234616
lolz. SSDs are a type of flash drive. Hard Disk Drives (aka HDDs) use platters (they spin, usually make noise, runs kinda warm to touch) while SSDs use flash chips (non-mechanical, don't make noise, usually lower heat) (?).

The last I checked, they were called hard drives because they weren't tape-based. I'd make the distinction between SSDs and platter or mechanical drives.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: BigBrother on Sat, 16 October 2010, 08:46:54: Quote from: ch_123;234648
The last I checked, they were called hard drives because they weren't tape-based. I'd make the distinction between SSDs and platter or mechanical drives.
they're actually called hard disk drives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk_drive) by the industry- although, much like SATA among other things, the name has been shortened or modified to accommodate the stupider people and have thus become the 'new name'. ->SSD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive)
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: kip69 on Sat, 16 October 2010, 09:47:35: From what I remember at computex, there are several cards that take CF or SD and turn them into hard drives. Some were like small raid controllers that used 2 or 4 cards in a faster array. The pci cards that I seen, with both memory or flash type cards were all non bootable. This made me sad and I killed many Boffins.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Ekaros on Sat, 16 October 2010, 10:30:18: Didn't read the thread, but what about CFs and IDE adapters?
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: BigBrother on Sat, 16 October 2010, 17:53:59: Quote from: Ekaros;234724
Didn't read the thread, but what about CFs and IDE adapters?
you noob, don't "tl;dr" and suggest something that has been suggested. >_>
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Parak on Sat, 16 October 2010, 18:14:19: Quote from: kishy;234708
Funny, this topic, because when I received my Pentium MMX tablet it had an "SSD".

Ha! The 3.5" is exactly the same, except... largelier.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Ekaros on Sat, 16 October 2010, 18:42:23: Quote from: BigBrother;234896
you noob, don't "tl;dr" and suggest something that has been suggested. >_>

Geekhack, just have such tendency to be fully off-topic lot of time... ;D
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: zefrer on Sun, 17 October 2010, 23:53:18: Quote from: Rajagra;234618
Well if you think about it, SSD is a misnomer whichever way you say it. They are neither a disk, nor a drive.

That's sort of true, yes. They are just bunches of memory attached via a serial drive interface. They could be attached via any other interface and work the same way, say pci-e, or external pcie, or fiber etc.

But, it is the limitations of bios that requires they be attached as disk drives. Bios requires a disk drive type device to be able to boot from it, so other interfaces are not possible just yet. I'm still waiting for EFI to become the standard so we can get rid of bios.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: Phaedrus2129 on Mon, 18 October 2010, 00:58:29: There are PCIe SSDs.
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: zefrer on Mon, 18 October 2010, 10:47:09: Quote from: Phaedrus2129
There are PCIe SSDs.

Yes and almost all of them have a pcie->sata conversion in order to show up as disk drives and be bootable (the point of my post..). Some notable exceptions like the Ocz enterprise lines (which are of course not bootable).
Title: IDE SSDs for old computers
Post by: ch_123 on Mon, 18 October 2010, 15:24:26: On a somewhat unrelated note, I was surprised to discover that the four primary partitions per disk rule with the x86 BIOS is enforced even on Itanium machines with EFI...