Jump to content

Thasp

Members
  • Content Count

    1,240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Thasp

  1. xxxx all of the above mentioned coolers. They all either suck, perform well yet do not blow on the board, or start with Thermal and end with Take(as in mistake, which is what buying TT products usually is.) If it doesn't blow on the board, the memory, CPU mosfets, northbridge.. all sorts of . gets hot. For some reason this became a trend, it supposedly gets the hot air out of the case by blowing it up to the exhaust fan opposed to down on the board. But this is nonsense. Any halfway decent airflow setup will let the hot air out, and any board in a hot room without direct air on it is going to eventually classy lady. Exhaust fans are nice and dandy, but that one exhaust case fan is there to remove hot air from the case, not directly cool board components. memory doesn't run that nice(or overclock at higher voltages) when it's under a large hot piece of metal in a hot machine being overclocked, it'd much rather like a fan on it. I don't like the idea of my CPU mosfets burning my finger in under a second either, so I go the extra mile to put vga ramsinks on them and have a fan there. Then again I've rode my q6600 up to 1.7v, which is death valley for 65nm CPUs. Also if the heatsink is doing its job properly, the air coming off it isn't going to be very hot. It'll be dissipating the heat quickly, so instead of it getting burning then shooting burning air onto the board, it'll shoot off slightly warmed air on the board, since the heat will never have a chance to build up. This is far better than having no air at all blow down on the board and its components. With that spiel over, get the Enzotech Ultra-X. It is 1-2c better than the proven Tuniq Tower. It is smaller which makes it less of a classy lady to install. It's the same price. It blows down on the board. What more can you ask for?
  2. LOLZ @ AMD a 2.85 GHz opteron 165 with speedy memory can be up to 30-40% behind in video encoding from a 3.72 GHz e6400. With quads being cheap.. and overclockable, can you imagine how much a modern PC will kick the . out of that for those media related tasks? If you're a gamer or casual user, you're fine as it is. But for what you need, that speed bump isn't going to be worth the money at all. I would never ever pay for an upgrade that did so little. Either keep your current computer or toss it and buy something now. I'd probably keep that setup if it works for you.. but if you expect any, any speed boost from the socket 939 line, you're not going to find more than 5%(and with your decision against overclocking, it'll cost you a ridiculous amount of money).
  3. I once used the second two slots on the dagf instead of the first with the same settings and my memory bandwidth was cut in half. but the dagf was a real clusterxxxx for a motherboard, with lots of little quirks that could drive a man crazy if they had no lanparty/expert to mess around with as the "real" system after they were done playing with the dagf. In my experience it's either no difference, or ridiculously large difference.. but then again, huge memory bandwidth/timings differences barely effect real world performance by more than 5%, so why bother with it anyway?
  4. Rio Karma or bust xxxx cumbersome, slow players based on propriatery codecs that lack gapless playback or parametric EQs, or the ability for me to effortlessly browse through my music quick, and I do mean quick(anyone who thinks they can quick has not gone through a song in a rio karma.. it's almost like tape, but with the convenience of digital).
  5. Thasp

    Good PSU.

    if it can't run a 3.5-3.7 GHz quad, 5 HDs, and a ton of PCI cards with a ton of fans, I don't want it. I don't care about quiet. I don't want a PSU that's been jumpstarted with a paperclip since it'll mess up the teeth in the 24 pin connector to the board. Show me something nice and I'll send some paypal. Looking for $100 give or take $50
  6. All sold. One had some issues with IDE, the other the SB heatsink had come off during shipping, full refund given and buyer keeps the boards.
  7. asus p5k is the best there is, it'll clock and perform like a champ.
  8. I'm looking for an asus p5k that works with ddr2, a decent PSU, and some fans. The PSU has to be one that can take abuse and have an 8 pin power for another board... I only want a p5k, not any other board. Give me a price here or PM me. P.S. If you ever jumpstarted the PSU with a paperclip, don't bother. The things that connect the board to the ATX connector are not squares.. rather, brackets, like [] What happens when you use a paperclip is they get pushed on, so they're like [ ] which isn't an issue for all boards, but is for some.. and it'll randomly turn off unless the PSU cable is in a position where it's always touching the pins on the board. I don't want to spend an hour trying to get the brackets back together. Also interested in CPU waterblocks. 1/2" or nothin'
  9. Not only live music guys, but recording guys as well. Presonus is kickass.
  10. Redbook doesn't sound bad if the people know how to make a recording.. There was a comparison done between a ton of amps including a $300 panasonic 6 channel receiver, and no one could tell the difference between that or the NADs, Rotels, when they were working within their limits. I will find a link by later today, or I'll delete this part of the post if I can't. Try it yourself though, get an AB test setup going where you can switch instantly and have someone else do the switching, and you'll never ever hear a difference when the amp is working within its limits between a used Adcom GFA 555 and a krell. That was solid state, with tubes only one $6K amp matched the panasonic in blind testing, because it had neutral output without harmonic distortion. As far as the "SSSS", that has nothing to do with the solid state amp. It is recorded that way. There are many recording engineers who wish they had the technique to preserve the quality of the voice in a cheapo recording environment while not recording excessive SSSS. You say a word with an SSSSSSSSS right next to a mic, if you're recording digitally you'll even see it on screen. The tube amp may take it away, but the solid state amp is not adding it in.
  11. I disagree. It's rare, but some stuff works on a dual and then stops working faster on a quad. xvid, for example.. uses 90% on a dual, 100% on a single, and 47-55% on a quad for me... And it's multithreaded. and adding more threads makes it slower CCE takes 75% on a dual, 100% on a single, and is not even close to 100% CPU on a quad.
  12. It's possible. I didn't think the max overclock I got on an e6400 would encode video 40% faster than the max overclock I got on an opteron 165 I bought in the same year, but it did.
  13. Yes, because the 3 GHz AMD out now isn't blue in the face. I give that an L5. The AMD64 out now is like the P4 of yesteryear. Different core name, same nonsense architecture.
  14. WTF is this? One benchmark done by AMD showing an AMD CPU to be better. Wow, I'm sure impressed and convinced. Where's xtremesystems? Where's tomshardware, where's people on IRC doing benchmarks comparing in detail both CPUs in every way joe-nub and enthusiast are going to use them? There's a number averaging out biased performance tests, but why should I care about that? Does this number tell me how much faster it crunches dnetc, can encode xvid, or render a game? I'll believe this when I see it. Right now, all I see is the following. a) A company with a stock price in the toilet B) A company over 1 year behind the competition c) Nonsensical 'benchmarks' With AMD's delays for all I know Intel'll have an 8 core out.
  15. A lot of engineers are happy to ruin the music if that's what is asked of them. There's so much to keep track of in big sessions(and track must be kept quickly since when anyone questions their confidence in you, the session might as well be over), that the last thing he cares about is arguing with anyone about what sounds good. If the record label and producer don't care about the music, why should the guy recording it?
  16. Here's the catch. a) I don't know if I have all the accessories, so don't ask. I have some. B) One of the DS3s may or may not work with SATA dvd burners.. I never had an issue with the sata, but someone else did. c) You have to wait until I feel like posting pictures to see them because I am lazy. If this works for you, $40 + shipping and they're yours. I just want to get this . out of my house. I have 2 of them. Both brought my e6400 to 3.72 GHz. :]
  17. I like tube amps on guitars too. The whole point of guitar amps vs just plugging it in direct is all the distortion. I guess it depends what you're listening to in addition to preference. I can't listen to classical solo piano on vinyl because it's too noisy and has this little noise below the music that you can only hear when one instrument like piano or viola is playing, or the ringing out of a piano note. The song Lento from Shostakovich's first symphony conducted by Celibideche would have fell well below vinyl's dynamic range a lot.. it relies on the ability to peak at 0 and go down to -45 at times. -45 = noise is 20 dB louder, or 4x as loud as the music! CDs aren't cold/lifeless, they're just honest. Maybe honesty is bad.. I sure as hell don't like hearing the "honest" sound of an electric guitar plugged into a mixer, then a solid state amp, then a stereo. Because it sucks! And if something is recorded in a crappy room, I sure as hell don't like the idea of the air conditioner, rehearsals going on in the next room getting cut into the master recording. On the other hand, even rock/pop mastered competantly 20 years ago only had 18 dB dynamic range for the most part.. so vinyl would be fitting.
  18. There is a jumper on the board called config, I put it from 1-2 to 2-3 and when I start up I can now choose between 200-333 MHz. I don't know the exact MHz of the PIII but I know it's in the 400s.
  19. I disagree. This is my opinion and not fact, but analog, kicks butt. Vinyl, xxxx no. Master tapes or 24/192 digital recordings transferred to CD properly vs mastered for vinyl.. the CD almost always wins. I think what most people compare is the sound of the time, not the sound of vinyl as a technology. In the 80s people knew how to mix and master music. CDs are in the era of the anyone-can-be-a-recording-engineer-if-they-know-protools-or-logic production, so a lot will sound like crap. CDs are also done in the era of hot mastering, for which NO ONE but the record companies are to blame. but even Bruce Swedien prefers proper digital to crappy vinyl... vinyl just sucks for so many reasons. You have to compromise a lot of the music to fit it on the medium, and forget about listening to something like Shostakovich's first symphony or godowsky's piano on vinyl without the piano either a) being ridiculously compressed or B) covered in noise and bull crap. Each time you listen even with a good turntable, you lose more highs until you have a POS unlistenable record that sounds like a telephone. Tape is not realistic to the sound that comes in, but it does add distortions that a tube amp, or plugin, can't yet simulate. Analog tape is nice. Especially for drums... since you get natural tape compression, and I've yet to see someone record drums without recording ridiculously low where it didn't at least _once_ clip. But it's not honest. Look at the people who defended recording analog vs people who recorded digitally early on. Roger Nichols didn't need tape to 'tint' his sound - he was a good enough engineer to get good sound without the crutch of analog distortion. I think it's all about the person doing the recording, mixing, and mastering, not in the medium. Lastly, this may surprise you. While this kind of mastering is _hell_ for a lot of music, for the kind that it's done on, it works. It sounds better than it does before it's overcompressed. I'm no Roger Nichols, but I've gotten to work at a few real studios and I've been able to see what a lot of music sounds like before that happens.. it sounds slapped together, everything is scattered, and totally unprofessional. At least then it sounds professional, albeit like fatiguing .. Case in point.. if some garbage like Ashlee Simpson - La La, for even _one_second_ loses your attention, you'd throw it out the window. Also, compression is a quick way to pull a mix together, so to speak. This is the age of studios where you can record a 75% professional sounding track for $40/hr.. it's competitive. People want to record as much as possible as quick as possible. They don't even want you mixing as they go along, they expect it to just sound good off the bat. This is because since it's so cheap to record, a lot of people who weren't going through a record label can record. Unlike people who receive $300,000 advances, they care about the hourly rate. The band who has a contract with a nice advance could care less about an extra hour when he has a nice budget. So a lot of people who are watching the clock are recording instead of people like Michael Jackson who had an hour of vocal coaching before every session. This leaves the engineer with little time to do anything of quality. You don't have time to mess with mic positioning when people are racing through takes. If the artist cares, then so will the person recording. But if they're saying "I want to do 6 songs in 2 hours", do you think a good mix can be done? This is another reason I think music winds up getting L2'd to death instead of properly mixed. A lot of modern studios aren't really equipt to be "studios" either.. a lot are home studios in a business building. I watch people running around cursing about how . never works and is always a mess, and it is, unless you work for Avatar or Abbey Road. To stay in business, you have to lower prices. This is another disadvantage of digital that has nothing to do with the technology itself. It allows things to be done very cheaply. Back in the old day, if you could afford all the stuff needed to make a professional recording, you had so much money that you could afford a halfway decent staff to maintain things. Now just to avoid losing hundreds a week you have to charge close to nothing for everything, and run around like a chicken without a head. The average studio 25 years ago vs the average studio now is no comparison.. the one 25 years ago was tons better, whether you record to tape, digitally, or to wax. I put my foot down and tell the artist if you want it to not sound like ., then you can't race through it, but I'm risking my job everytime I tell the artist something they don't want to hear. They're going to go to someplace that can "mix" the song in 20 seconds and record as quick as they want, and it'll sound good temporarily, but after repeated listens, it'll be revealed for the limited . it is when you find yourself unable to continue listening. I ask people when they say "but it's not as loud", do they want to make music that people want to turn off or turn up?
  20. I use it as a router/ftpd/project machine. I needed a little boost.. my friend sent me a PII 300 and a P3 katmai, the cheapest slowest one(I think 400-450). After some messing around I got it to work, but I can only choose 200, 233, 266, 300, 333 MHz. Is there a way to go higher than that? This machine isn't a retail release. It's an engineering sample from Intel made in the mid 90s, that I now use as a junk machine. A lot of normal stuff(optical drive support, etc), isn't supported. I have no clue what kind of board is in it. I had to use my solder iron through some plastic screws just so they'd come off so I could remove the CPU. It's a slight boost, but the machine still sucks butt. I think if I could get 400 out of it, I could do what I want to do in realtime. Thanks.
  21. Get the quad core. Encoding music at 128x > encoding music at 60x. Encoding video at 17.5 FPS > encoding video at 8.5 FPS. Running dnetc at 50 mkeys/sec > running dnetc at 25.5 mkeys/sec. Quad core + p35 vs 965 + dual is no comparison.
  22. Don't bother with a P5B - P5K clocks quads better and has better performance per clock, and to my knowledge, costs about the same amount of money. I'm considering taking you up on this..
  23. I don't mean to sound like a total butthole when I say this Spell it dedicated both times, and say "and preparing for tests/exams." instead of "and preparing for test’s/exams." I worked for a temp agency a little over a year ago so I could upgrade from making $6.9050/hr being a retail slave to $12/hr-$15/hr for playing yahoo pool and other generic nonsense. After I lost my first job when I was sick(ate bad food when I already had a stomach virus) I had changed my email. Instead of a bunch of random characters followed by @verizon.net, I changed it to my initials and last name. I said I'd send a new resume with this email in it, but they said it's fine, they'll just swap it in. Well, they spelled it wrong.. very wrong. I can't blame them because this is the real world, and no one gives a flying xxxx who's to blame - it's your fault since you were responsible for it. I can't blame myself because it's something a professional agency said they'd be able to do easily, who am I to think they're that stupid at ctrl-c/ctrl-v? You can bet none of the places that got that resume emailed me back when I had my name spelled 2 very different ways on my own resume.. which I didn't notice until it was already sent to over 18 companies. I had to change agencies all over this stupid little fessup. Hopefully this helps you in some way. As far as working from home doing billing/data entry.. go to a temp agency, ace the interview. They're paid to get you work. The questions they ask you aren't to rule you out, they're to rule you in. If there's work at home to be found, they'll find it for you, and you'll be paid better than others in the field since you'll be doing it on short notice. I wish you the best of luck.
  24. I'd get a P35 board. Not only do they overclock quads better if you go that path but clock for clock the performance is better on them. I'd get rid of the AMD stuff. For games it doesn't make a difference, but for number crunching stuff like dnetc/folding, or for video encoding.. Intel blows AMD out of the water.
×
×
  • Create New...