|
I've had an Intel SSD for a couple of years now as my C:\ drive with no problems - actually, it's fantanstic 
I bought an OCZ Vertex 3 MI a couple of months ago to use as my dev drive. Again no problems, but it's not noticibly faster than my VelociRaptor.
So my experience is that the price premium is warrented when you are reading lots of small files spread out randomly on the disc ( i.e. your C:\ drive ), but there's not much to be gained when the files are larger and accessed in order.
So, I wouldn't buy a large SSD at the moment - what are you going to put on it? I'm actually considering using the OCZ as a mirror ( RAID 1 ) for my C:\ drive. I'm not that impressed with it in its present role.
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to use it as my main C:\ drive. I would then use the current 2TB Constellation HDD as just a general drive. I also already have a 5x1.5TB Raid 5 QNAP NAS for storage and back.
So it would be used mainly for, Office and Visual Studio.
Looking at the SSD Raid charts on Toms Hardware there is a noticeable difference going from 1 disk to a Raid Stripe. http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/ssd-raid-0-charts-2011/benchmarks,120.html[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Putting your C:\ drive on any SSD will make your machine a lot quicker. I have no tolerance for machines that make me wait, but app load times are quick enough on a single SSD that I don't even notice. I don't think even halving the load times would be good bang-for-buck - they're quick enough already.
Also, my 120GB C:\ drive still has 40GB free even after a couple of years - why do you want 480GB? Continuous writes will degrade SSDs, so you want it to be mostly read-only. So you need to move your pagefile and hibernate file somewhere else, which is a big chunk of most C:\ drives.
I just mirrored my C:\ drive and thinking about it, not having to spend a week reinstalling everything if the old disk goes kaput is worth more than half a second off the VS load time.
Hope this helps,
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
So I guess I'll try Dell next, but unfortunately I still have to struggle with this hunk-o-junk I bought from HP for at least another year.
Model: HP Pavilion dv8
I've had so many issues, especially after 2 years, it's like HP designed the thing to start breaking after 2-years of 8hours/day usage.
Problems include:
Quick-Launch Keys that have a mind of their own (rendering my wifi & bluetooth useless, since the keys switch them on/off at random)
Charger issues - this is the one problem I've ALWAYS had with all my HP's, their chargers die after 2 years, like clockwork, like it was designed to do so, 4 co-workers/family got HP's more or less the same time as I did and we all started shopping for replacements chargers at the same time.
Endless other related power issues - The laptop would be charging but not know it, thinking it's running on battery, forcing me to change all my power schemes so that the system performance isn't affected. And when the laptop is charging, don't dare disconnect it, because it will not resume charging easily. (Note that this still happens at random even after replacing the battery and the charger)
Finger-print reader - Must be disabled else SSMS (SQL Server Management Studio) is unstable as hell and crashes for every second query you run. Too random? That's what I thought but Google it to check me up. Once I disabled the finger-print reader, SSMS worked like a charm.
*RANT *RANT *RANT ... etc
Don't ever buy HP Laptops!
|
|
|
|
|
Dell business class laptops are more than OK.
The home/personal models... a gamble from my experience.
I wasn't refering to AlinWare when I said home/personal.
That is a very nice beast in it's own class.
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
yes, HP's product is 99% design, 1% something. 
|
|
|
|
|
MDL=>Moshu wrote: The home/personal models... a gamble from my experience.
I'm on my third Dell home system, and my previous 6 year old laptop is still running perfectly well, having been upgraded from XP through Vista and now running Windows 7 Home.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
I said from my experience.
I may have been one of the unlucky ones.
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
I was not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that my experience was a much more pleasant one.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
I got that, but sometimes I tend to be get extra defensive.
All the best,
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Despite what other people have said, Dell isn't any better. I've had problems with every business laptop I've had from Dell, and I've had 4 different models. Thankfully, it wasn't MY money spent on them.
Hell, in one Dell laptop I had to replace the keyboard 3 times (about 5 months apart for each), for the same problem. The same block of keys on each stopped working.
|
|
|
|
|
In my experience, Dells Latitude series is working well, and the support really works, but you'll pay for it.
While their cheapo models sucks Elephant balls, and their support is on that level too.
On the other hand, my limited experience of HP is similar. It's the support level that makes the difference.
Also, always check the "keep the harddrive" option. Otherwise, if the harddrive crashes, they will keep it and replace it with a clean drive. And one thing I've learnt is that even people that claim that they take backups, don't.
|
|
|
|
|
hi, my notebook Toshiba Satellite L635 i5 Windows 7 64bit with 6GB RAM shows like this..
6.00 GB RAM (5.87 GB useable)
My friend said that Windows 7 64bit can read up to 8GB RAM..
is this normal?
thanks before..
|
|
|
|
|
It's normal, some of the RAM is used for BIOS functions.
On some computers the graphic card does not have its own RAM, then the 'useable' number would be even lower.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely normal... and Win7 64bit can support quite a bit of RAM depending on the version. See here.[^] Usually the big limiter nowadays is how much the motherboard can support (the home versions are artificially limited, once again, thanks M$).
|
|
|
|
|
Albert Holguin wrote: (the home versions are artificially limited, once again, thanks M$).
One can choose between Linux, cheap Windows, or Windows - and you get what you pay for
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if I agree... some of the most stable code exists in free linux distributions. I wouldn't say that Microsoft servers are better than Linux ones... as a matter of fact, look at the numbers, I'm sure there's a lot more servers running Linux than there is servers running MS Server.
|
|
|
|
|
Albert Holguin wrote: as a matter of fact, look at the numbers, I'm sure there's a lot more servers running Linux than there is servers running MS Server.
Aw, I deserved that one - and I'll also stop arguing right away, before we accidentally create an entire offtopic religious thread 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea. After all, everyone knows you have to get past the pearly Gates to enter Heaven. But no one knows what's in the EULA, or what happens if you don't pay your Millennial License Renewal Fee.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
wow thankyou very much guys, i saw Home Premium 64 bit max memory 16GB, so it means that if i use 16GB RAM, which one will my system show?
-> Installed Memory (RAM) : 16 GB (5.87 GB useable)
or
-> Installed Memory (RAM) : 16 GB (15.87 GB useable)
|
|
|
|
|
vkstarry wrote: -> Installed Memory (RAM) : 16 GB (15.87 GB useable)
This will be the closer one... although there's some degree of uncertainty as to the actual number since whatever allocated the memory in the first place may be allocating based on some algorithm (let's say a percentage of the total physical memory, or maybe a percentage up to a certain amount, or whatever).
Although remember what I said about the motherboard usually being the limiter nowadays, before you run out and get more RAM, make sure your motherboard will support it.
|
|
|
|
|
Im not an expert on it but as i have read and as i have experienced from other of my friends also.Yes! its normal.Maybe you have to visit this site here for more information about your question to be satisfied:
<a href="http://www.techyv.com/article/ram-random-access-memory-%E2%80%93-brief-overview">http://www.techyv.com/article/ram-random-access-memory-%E2%80%93-brief-overview</a>[<a href="http://www.techyv.com/article/ram-random-access-memory-%E2%80%93-brief-overview" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>]
|
|
|
|
|
I am playing with a networking setup on a Windows XP computer. It is setup like this:
1. The computer has an Ethernet NIC (PCI) with RJ45 (100Mbps) port.
2. The computer also has a USB modem from VirginMobile plugged in to get access through the 3G network to the Internet. (This part works fine.)
3. From Control Panel | Network Connections, I use the properties of the connection for the VirginMobile to set it to "Allow other network users to connect through this computer's Internet connection." The Home networking connection is set to the Ethernet NIC. (This is done from the "Advanced" tab.)
4. I connected the Ethernet NIC to a Wifi router's WAN port using an Ethernet cable. The Wifi router had been setup to work properly.
5. I fired up an Android tablet to connect to the hotspot offered by the Wifi router. The connection was nice and strong.
After all these, I expect to be able to get access to the web from the Android tablet. It did not work. To try to find what the problem was, I connected a laptop computer to the Wifi router using a physical connection (Ethernet cable). The computer also connected to the router with no problem. DHCP worked fine and it obtained the IP addresses. But Internet is not available. Somehow the above shared network did not work.
On the XP computer, the command ipconfig/all showed correctly assigned IP addresses (I believe.)
By the way, a different setup worked briefly, but quit working after a few days. The setting is like this: On the XP machine another PCI card (Wireless G) was installed. This card was setup to be in "AP" mode, and again the VirginMobile USB modem connection was set to be sharing Internet connection. The Android tablet could connect to the AP and then go to the Internet. However, after a few days, the tablet could not connect to the AP any more. It got stuck at the point saying "Obtaining IP addresses..."
What was wrong with my setups? Anybody had done similar things?
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, your setup is a bit of a cluster f***... I'm having a hard time understanding where this is breaking down since you have so many steps. To try to break down where you don't have internet access, try a few things:
0. Check to make sure you have an IP address.
1. Make sure your gateway is configured properly (will depend on your configuration).
2. Make sure you have name-resolution.
Usually you can use ipconfig/ping/tracert to figure out where your connection breaks down. If you don't have name resolution, you may have to explicitly state who your name server is.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
