|
+1 on the SSD and using Aomei for the transfer. Done this to two older laptops and the difference is amazing. The swap was simple using Aomei. Definitely try this before getting a new computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely. (As long as "old" doesn't mean pre-SATA with the hard drive controller). I have taken a number of older machines (laptops, mostly, but a few desktops too) and upgraded their hard drives to SSDs. The devices really give new life to hardware that might otherwise be retired. Rather than spend $600+ on a new machine a $100 SSD turns an older machine into a "screamer".
My primary development machine is a six-year-old Dell XPS 8300 with an i7-2600 in it. I replaced the hard drive with a 1TB SSD and beefed up the system RAM to 16GB and the performance is just excellent. I see no reason, even now, to consider upgrading the machine. All of my machines have been similarly upgraded, no more rotating storage at all (except a couple of backup drives).
If you think hiring a professional is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur! - Red Adair
|
|
|
|
|
No doubt whatsoever. Sure, like the others say, make sure you have plenty of RAM but changing to an SSD made a HUGE difference!
It's the only reason that I have delayed getting a new computer. Currently using a (purchased in 2008!) Dell Precision T5500 with Dual Xeon W5580 @ 3.2 GHz (8M L2, 6.4 GT/s), 16GB RAM DDR3, ICH10 chipset and originally equipped with a PERC6 RAID and 3GB/s SAS hard drives; dumped that in favor of a Samsung EVO 850, installed the management software and still boots crazy fast. I back up every day with Veeam Desktop (fantastic freeware!) and I don't worry at all about running without RAID.
Come to dark side, Luke! LOL
|
|
|
|
|
YMMV but YES!
It brought new life back to every 2007 or newer PC desktop, laptop, iMac, and MacBook I've put one in.
|
|
|
|
|
If you don't want to spend a full 100€ on a large SSD, you use a small SSD (60-120GB) for the operating system only. If you have at least 50% free on the existing HD, you could do this as follows:-
1) Shrink the existing partition (C to the smallest feasible size.
2) Create a new partition in the free space (D
3) Move the user folders to the D: drive. There are instructions on the internet for moving "My DOcuments", "Desktop" etc to a new location.
4) Clone C: (and small boot partition if any) onto the new SSD. Make sure the SSD partition is marked as active.
5) Boot via the SSD and remove the old C: form the HD.
6) Expand the D: partition to the full size of the HD.
This should give you decent boot times while storing documents on the slower, cheaper HD. I have a Windows 10 PC configured this way on a (now aging) 60Gb SSD. I previously used the same SSD in a Pentium 4 based Dell running Windows XP.
One consideration is that larger SSDs are typically faster.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been a member here for who knows how long, but, I am about to take the plunge, and publish my first article ever. Please be kind. It was a lot of fun putting it together. 
|
|
|
|
|
Member since Mon 23 Jan 2012
(5 years, 7 months)
|
|
|
|
|
Well done! It's always good to get new authors in moderation.
If you are using the online editor, you may find this useful: Using the Article Editor (without losing your hair in handfuls)[^]
Please do remember that all articles need to go to moderation, and that can be a little slow at the weekend because the number of moderators around is lower; and that moderation is there to help you, as well as protect the site. To be a moderator you have to write articles, so we all know the pain of writing it, and the worse pain of some idiot misreading it and downvoting it straight away... 
So we try to help you produce an article that will not attract the morons! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
We are curiously awaiting your article, as already mentioned by Griff, don't be disappointed if some 'drive by downvoters' downvote your article, that happens sometimes.
Good luck 
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: It was a lot of fun putting it together.
We're going to have more fun breaking it apart!
(kidding, just kidding)
|
|
|
|
|
I you think you can 
|
|
|
|
|
|
That does not look very inviting to me, is that cat on it still alive 
|
|
|
|
|
Sweet, would love to see one of these in the park I'm at.
Someone's therapist knows all about you!
|
|
|
|
|
For those who are interested, you can download a Windows 10 Creator's Update media tool, that you can use to create a Windows 10 CU installation ISO, or a DVD, or a flash drive. The tool is available here:
Download Windows 10[^]
Apparently you will need a valid Win 10 license on the machine where you run the tool.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Is that general availability, or only for those in the fast ring?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: Is that general availability, or only for those in the fast ring?
Aka the windows 10 ring of fire
signature upgrading ... please wait.
|
|
|
|
|
I am in the Windows Ring of Fire? Nice! I like that!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I believe anyone can get it, but you need a machine with a licensed copy of Windows 10 to run it. Try to download and run it to verify. 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This can't be real, there is a well known linear-time algorithm. It's even on wikipedia!
E: in the actual paper it is clear that what they did here is prove that a specific variant (where some queens are pre-placed) is NP-complete, so you get the prize by solving the P?=NP question.
modified 1-Sep-17 17:48pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Well,
It would take thousands of years to solve the problem on really huge grids... say 2500x2500 The whole point of the challenge is to come up with a new faster method for solving the problem.
It also takes a lot of RAM... my depth-first implementation runs out of memory on really huge grids somewhere above 900x900. I didn't spend any time optimizing so I could probably fix this with file-backed memory.
Best Wishes,
-David Delaune
|
|
|
|
|
It's already linear time, what more do you want?
Wikipedia wrote: If the goal is to find a single solution then explicit solutions exist for all n ≥ 4, requiring no combinatorial search whatsoever.
.. some formulas to calculate the placement follow, all of them trivial arithmetic.
|
|
|
|
|
Mine doesn't chew up memory as it works; it allocates all it needs at the beginning and then just uses it. As n increases, it doesn't complete in a usable amount of time of course. I don't know whether or not I let it run to completion on a large n.
Re: nQueens algorithm - Algorithms Discussion Boards[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
