Am Freitag, 2. November 2012 schrieb lee:
> > If the CPU isn´t too slow for it and most current CPUs aren´t, a SSD
> > will be highly beneficial for just about any workload that is using
> > random I/O. And most workloads are.
>
> Like? When you edit a text in an editor or a WYSIWYG word process
Am Samstag, 3. November 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 11/2/2012 7:16 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > And thus I say, that I better use a dual core CPU with higher peak
> > performance for typical desktop workloads, than a quad core CPU with
> > lower peak performance. A quad core CPU with as h
Am Freitag, 2. November 2012 schrieb lee:
> Martin Steigerwald writes:
> >> SSDs are a waste of money unless you do have the workload to benefit
> >> from them. And if you have that, where do you store your data?
> >
> > I disagree.
> >
> > Putting an SSD in this laptop has been the single most
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 23:11:44 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> If an ARM "desktop" is ever to emerge, it will happen after Android
> has sufficiently penetrated society via smart phones and tablets and
> people are familiar with the interface.
Just stumbled upon this:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2
On 11/3/2012 2:32 AM, Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Saturday, November 03, 2012 01:47:40 AM Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> Motorola 680x0, DEC Alpha, SGI MIPS, HP PA-RISC, Motorola/IBM PowerPC,
>> Sun SPARC, Cray Vector, Intel Itanium (irony here).
>
> You missed Moto's 88K
I didn't include the 88K because it
On 11/2/2012 9:56 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:30:02 +0100
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> Now if they'd just smarten up
>
> I've pondered this sort of thing my whole adult life. I don't understand
> everything
> you're saying here but it sounds pretty straight forward for so
On Saturday, November 03, 2012 02:50:00 PM Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> I do support AMD, and I never said they're
> on a collision course with bankruptcy. What I did say is competing head
> to head with Intel in the x86 CPU market is a tough game, and they have
> made many missteps along the way.
>
>
On 11/2/2012 7:44 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Well with ARM getting more performant the differences might blur.
Yes, which is the fact that started this discussion.
> What is a tablet? What is a desktop? If there are already attempts to make
> regular computer displays touchable for example
On Saturday, November 03, 2012 01:47:40 AM Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Motorola 680x0, DEC Alpha, SGI MIPS, HP PA-RISC, Motorola/IBM PowerPC,
> Sun SPARC, Cray Vector, Intel Itanium (irony here).
You missed Moto's 88K which vastly outperformed the 68K. The Moto/Freescale
embedded PPC (though clearly n
On 11/2/2012 7:27 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> But granted I find it a pity that soo much variety of CPU platforms has
> gone already.
Yes, a shame. A short list of some CPU archs that have been pushed out
of the market or severely marginalized by x86,
desktop/workstation/server/supercompute
On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:30:02 +0100
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Now if they'd just smarten up
I've pondered this sort of thing my whole adult life. I don't understand
everything
you're saying here but it sounds pretty straight forward for someone who does,
like
the 50 miles-to-the-gallon carburettor
On 11/2/2012 7:16 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> And thus I say, that I better use a dual core CPU with higher peak
> performance for typical desktop workloads, than a quad core CPU with lower
> peak performance. A quad core CPU with as high peak performance might be
> in order if something co
I hate waiting for my computer to do things. Swapping and paging at all? Add
more RAM. CPU-starved while running multiple processes? Add more CPUs.
By and large, for most desktop purchases, the most economical and reliable
system will have a Gigabyte 790 or 970 mboard (I've never had a Gigabyte
Martin Steigerwald writes:
>> SSDs are a waste of money unless you do have the workload to benefit
>> from them. And if you have that, where do you store your data?
>
> I disagree.
>
> Putting an SSD in this laptop has been the single most effective way to
> improve all my desktop workloads lik
On 2012-10-30 12:53:24 -0400, Worrier Poet wrote:
> The guys developing free drivers for the Nvidia graphics cards seem to
> have a lot harder job to do, but they also seem to be up to the task.
> It's coming along slowly, but the nouveau drivers are most certainly
> working well enough for me. I a
Am Dienstag, 30. Oktober 2012 schrieb lee:
> Stan Hoeppner writes:
> > most of the time, and a faster CPU doesn't make Thunderbird or
> > Firefox, IE or Outlook express, go any faster. Nor any of the
> > standard desktop apps.
>
> Sure it does.
>
> > 90% of users would benefit more from a low w
Am Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 10/30/2012 7:19 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Lu, 29 oct 12, 21:06:36, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >> The second big reason is that neither Microsoft nor ISVs will profit
> >> from a non x86 CPU architecture entering the desktop
> >> space. S
Am Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> > http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2411546,00.asp
> >
> >
> >
> > Although to be fair, Stan was talking about desktops, and this is
> > about servers.
>
> If it ever gets off the ground. The super high density application
> sever space w
Am Freitag, 2. November 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
> > > But I do believe that the kernel pings
> > > between 800 MHz and turbo mode not for nothing.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have no idea what point you're making here.
>
> "ondemand" scheduler tends to do it by give-me-everything-you-got or
> the-
Am Freitag, 2. November 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 11/1/2012 11:42 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> >>> For powerful laptops and power saving desktops I think Intel
> >>> Sandybridge/Ivybridge is best bet currently - except for the
> >>> p
On 11/1/2012 11:42 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
>>> For powerful laptops and power saving desktops I think Intel
>>> Sandybridge/Ivybridge is best bet currently - except for the
>>> political dimension.
>>
>> Sure, but 90% of users don't need
Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> > For powerful laptops and power saving desktops I think Intel
> > Sandybridge/Ivybridge is best bet currently - except for the
> > political dimension.
>
> Sure, but 90% of users don't need "powerful". All the cores sit idle
> most of the ti
On 10/31/2012 4:48 AM, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner:
>>
>> So again, ARM will never reach the desktop, nor succeed, without full
>> ISV support. Which, as I stated previously, is why ARM will only have a
>> chance on the desktop if the consumer conditions are right to launch an
>> Android
On 10/30/2012 10:44 PM, Charles Kroeger wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 23:50:02 +0100
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> If enough people buy AMD then Intel has a strong competitor. This keeps
>> the marketplace healthy and keeps Chipzilla from becoming a total
>> monopoly WRT x86.
>
> Thanks for your e
On 10/30/2012 11:58 AM, Celejar wrote:
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/30/amd_to_partner_with_arm_for_server_cpus/
>
> Just saw that, too:
Do note that the SeaMicro acquisition was announced in March. Before
the acquisition every SeaMicro product used Intel chips, from hot
running Xeons
Stan Hoeppner:
>
> So again, ARM will never reach the desktop, nor succeed, without full
> ISV support. Which, as I stated previously, is why ARM will only have a
> chance on the desktop if the consumer conditions are right to launch an
> Android based "PC appliance". This will provide the same
On 10/30/2012 12:02 PM, Celejar wrote:
> As I have said, I don't have a deep understanding of these issues, but
> one apparent flaw in your argument is that IBM, Motorola and DEC
> weren't moving billions of their chips independently of their push into
> the desktop market, as ARM is.
What's fund
On 10/30/2012 8:05 AM, John Hasler wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner writes:
>> At this point in time, and in the foreseeable, the only way to crack
>> into the desktop market is with a new x86 chip that has sufficiently
>> compelling advantages over both Intel and AMD. And since one must
>> have a license f
On 10/30/2012 8:01 AM, John Hasler wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner writes:
>> No, I mean millions [of ARM cpus]. One billion chips per year would
>> equal 1 for every 7 humans on the planet, and that's simply
>> impossible. Over 3 billion people have never used an electronic
>> device. That's almost half
On 10/30/2012 7:19 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Lu, 29 oct 12, 21:06:36, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>
>> The second big reason is that neither Microsoft nor ISVs will profit
>> from a non x86 CPU architecture entering the desktop space. Supporting
>> ARM would simply cost them money. So there's no i
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 23:50:02 +0100
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> If enough people buy AMD then Intel has a strong competitor. This keeps
> the marketplace healthy and keeps Chipzilla from becoming a total
> monopoly WRT x86.
Thanks for your ecologically sound hardware suggestions you generously share
On 10/30/2012 4:16 AM, Joe wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:02:58 -0500
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> No, I mean millions. One billion chips per year would equal 1 for
>> every 7 humans on the planet, and that's simply impossible. Over 3
>> billion people have never used an electronic device. That'
Stan Hoeppner writes:
> most of the time, and a faster CPU doesn't make Thunderbird or Firefox,
> IE or Outlook express, go any faster. Nor any of the standard desktop
> apps.
Sure it does.
> 90% of users would benefit more from a low wattage dual or even
> single core CPU, with an SSD instead
Worrier Poet writes:
> It seems that it is a good point that, computer power vs power
> consumption considerations aside, it's a good idea to at least consider
> AMD when choosing a new system.
For a graphics card? ATI cards have always been horribly troublesome.
I'd be willing to try an AMD gr
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:02:58 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 9:17 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
> > Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
> >>
> >>> Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
> >>> abou
On 10/30/2012 11:48 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 October 2012 15:38:07 Worrier Poet wrote:
>> I knew that AMD had bought one of the purveyors of expensive graphics
>> cards that I had terrible problems with. I took 1 plus 1 and came up
>> with Avagadro's number.
>
> They have surely been
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:56:25 +0100
Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 30/10/12 05:02, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
...
> > It's simple economics: If one could make a decent amount of profit
> > pushing an ARM based desktop CPU into the market, they'd do it. They
> > haven't done it, nor will do it, becaus
On Tuesday 30 October 2012 15:38:07 Worrier Poet wrote:
> I knew that AMD had bought one of the purveyors of expensive graphics
> cards that I had terrible problems with. I took 1 plus 1 and came up
> with Avagadro's number.
They have surely been improving since AMD bought them up?
Lisi
--
To
On 10/30/2012 11:25 AM, Mark Allums wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 1:43 PM, Worrier Poet wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 02:15 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>>> Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrot
On 10/29/2012 1:43 PM, Worrier Poet wrote:
On 10/29/2012 02:15 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given
Stan Hoeppner writes:
> At this point in time, and in the foreseeable, the only way to crack
> into the desktop market is with a new x86 chip that has sufficiently
> compelling advantages over both Intel and AMD. And since one must
> have a license from Intel to do so, that ain't gonna happen.
Th
Stan Hoeppner writes:
> No, I mean millions [of ARM cpus]. One billion chips per year would
> equal 1 for every 7 humans on the planet, and that's simply
> impossible. Over 3 billion people have never used an electronic
> device. That's almost half the Earth's population. Do the math.
>From <
On Lu, 29 oct 12, 21:06:36, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> The second big reason is that neither Microsoft nor ISVs will profit
> from a non x86 CPU architecture entering the desktop space. Supporting
> ARM would simply cost them money. So there's no incentive to support
> ARM, thus it's dead before i
On 30/10/12 05:02, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 9:17 PM, Celejar wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
>> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
>>>
Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
about the question of ARM on t
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:02:58 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 9:17 PM, Celejar wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
> > Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
> >>
> >>> Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
> >>> abou
On 10/29/2012 9:17 PM, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
>>> about the question of ARM on the desktop, but a quick skim shows no
>>> obviou
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
>
> > Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
> > about the question of ARM on the desktop, but a quick skim shows no
> > obviously compelling reason why it won't ever happe
On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
> Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
> about the question of ARM on the desktop, but a quick skim shows no
> obviously compelling reason why it won't ever happen. Thoughts?
There a dozens of reasons. First and foremost, ARM se
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:44:16 -0500
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 10/29/2012 1:15 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
...
> > I think that ARM will become interesting enough to have some competition
> > going on.
>
> ARM will never be a desktop CPU so is irrelevant to this discussion.
> AMD doesn't comp
On 10/29/2012 1:15 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
>> On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>>> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact
you'll never make use
Marc Shapiro writes:
> I don't know if this makes a difference, but... While this is a home
> machine there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and daughter. We
> are all logged in all the time and we are all running separate X
> sessions all the time.
Get an Intel 4 or 6 core that provides r
Marc Shapiro writes:
> if it will stay up without locking. The new desktop will be using a
> modern MB and DDR3 memory.
Given your budget constraints, you're looking at getting used hardware
off ebay (or maybe craigslist, depending on where you live ...). You're
also locking at getting at leas
On 10/29/2012 03:06 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Worrier Poet
> wrote:
>>
>> At the same time, I have reservations about supporting AMD -- or more to
>> the point their subsidiary, NVidia -- when purchasing hardware. It seems
>> to me that Intel has been a better f
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Worrier Poet wrote:
>
> At the same time, I have reservations about supporting AMD -- or more to
> the point their subsidiary, NVidia -- when purchasing hardware. It seems
> to me that Intel has been a better friend to FOSS than its competition.
> I run my systems
On 10/29/2012 02:15 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
>> On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>>> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact
you'll never make us
Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald:
> Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Marc Shapiro:
> > On 10/27/2012 08:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > > On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> > >> I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have
> > >> been looking
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Marc Shapiro:
> On 10/27/2012 08:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> >> I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have
> >> been looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> I s
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Stan Hoeppner:
> On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >> Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact
> >> you'll never make use of more than 2 of those 8 cores, I recommend
> >> a
Am Montag, 29. Oktober 2012 schrieb Mark Allums:
> On 10/29/2012 2:51 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Du, 28 oct 12, 22:09:01, Mark Allums wrote:
> >> Ah, I misunderstood your requirements quite a bit. i3 is adequate
> >> for media center work. Some Atoms are fine for decoding 1080p, but
> >> it
On 10/29/2012 06:54 AM, Celejar wrote:
Not sure this will be relevant to your situation, but be aware that
obtaining memory for obsolete architectures can sometimes cost *more*
than for current architectures. I have a ThinkPad T61, which I'm quite
happy with, but although I'd love to double its
--- On Sat, 10/27/12, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> From: Marc Shapiro
> Subject: Advice on system purchase
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Date: Saturday, October 27, 2012, 7:29 PM
>
Several replies have recommended Antec cases and I'd like to second that. I've
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:07:29 -0700
Marc Shapiro wrote:
...
> I tend to keep my systems going for a long time, as evidenced by the
> fact that I am looking to replace a single core Athlon 2800+ with 2GB
> max memory at this time (while possibly keeping it running as a server
> to supplement my
On 10/29/2012 2:51 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Du, 28 oct 12, 22:09:01, Mark Allums wrote:
Ah, I misunderstood your requirements quite a bit. i3 is adequate
for media center work. Some Atoms are fine for decoding 1080p, but
it's better to rely on dedicated hardware.
Do you know for sure (i
On Du, 28 oct 12, 22:09:01, Mark Allums wrote:
>
> Ah, I misunderstood your requirements quite a bit. i3 is adequate
> for media center work. Some Atoms are fine for decoding 1080p, but
> it's better to rely on dedicated hardware.
Do you know for sure (i.e. first hand experience) they can do
On 10/28/12 19:07, Marc Shapiro wrote:
I have run memtest86+ for over a day with no
errors, or lockups. I have asked questions here. I have done web
searches on various possibilities. The closest I could find to my
situation is the graphics driver problem referred to by Johan in the
thread "Debia
On 10/28/2012 3:14 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Du, 28 oct 12, 06:32:45, Mark Allums wrote:
My own opinion on i3 is that it;s a bit underpowered for a modern
system, even a Linux system. If i7 seems like overkill to you, then
the obvious compromise is i5, which is what i recommend to most
non-
On 10/28/2012 05:26 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 10/28/12 15:48, Marc Shapiro wrote:
If not, then I might have lockups anyway. If it continues to lockup
then I will retire the whole box.
It sounds like you need to figure out why it is locking up.
I have tried to do so. I have run memtest86
On 10/28/12 15:48, Marc Shapiro wrote:
The question is not whether or not it can be used as a server. The
question is whether the problem I have with lockups is caused by the
graphics card, drivers, some other user software that is running, etc,
or not. If so, then the system will run fine as a s
On 10/28/12 13:40, Doug wrote:
If you build a powerful machine with 8 cores, can't you make it a
server, with two more terminals, so the wife and daughter can
log in and work while you do? I don't know how to do that, but there
must be some Unix maven here who cah=n tell you.
http://www.ltsp.or
On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>
>> Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact you'll
>> never make use of more than 2 of those 8 cores, I recommend a dual core
>> AthlonII X2 @ 3.4GHz. I have the 3GHz model and
On 10/28/2012 03:12 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 10/28/12 11:46, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> Is there anything that speaks against keeping it?
What is the make and model number of the 1 TB HDD?
> ... there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and daughter.
... if the old box stays up as a server
On 10/28/12 11:46, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> Is there anything that speaks against keeping it?
What is the make and model number of the 1 TB HDD?
> ... there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and daughter.
... if the old box stays up as a server. If it does not, then the 1 TB drive
goes into
On 10/28/12 04:54, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
SSD might still be good bet. They are like switching from floppy disk to
harddisk for me.
+1
On 10/28/12 11:11, Mark Allums wrote:
> The principle is sound, but the prices are 10x too much.
Intel 520 series 60 GB SSD -- $91.93
http://www.amazon.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Mark Allums wrote:
>
> ext4 has been found to be dangerous right now in kernels 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6,
> due to a data loss bug. They are working on the patch as we speak, of
> course, but in the meantime, minimize the number of times you mount the ext4
> filesystem.
Marc Shapiro wrote:
On 10/28/2012 01:40 PM, Doug wrote:
On 10/28/2012 03:49 PM, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
/snip/
Marc Shapiro wrote:
OI don't know if this makes a difference, but... While this is a
home machine there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and
daughter. We are all logged in all th
On 10/28/2012 01:40 PM, Doug wrote:
On 10/28/2012 03:49 PM, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
/snip/
Marc Shapiro wrote:
OI don't know if this makes a difference, but... While this is a
home machine there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and
daughter. We are all logged in all the time and we are all
On 10/28/2012 12:49 PM, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
Marc Shapiro wrote:
On 10/27/2012 08:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
...
I saw a Fry's a
On 10/28/2012 03:49 PM, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
/snip/
Marc Shapiro wrote:
OI don't know if this makes a difference, but... While this is a home
machine there are three of us here. Myself, my wife and daughter. We
are all logged in all the time and we are all running separate X
sessions all the
On Du, 28 oct 12, 06:32:45, Mark Allums wrote:
>
> My own opinion on i3 is that it;s a bit underpowered for a modern
> system, even a Linux system. If i7 seems like overkill to you, then
> the obvious compromise is i5, which is what i recommend to most
> non-technical people. But yeah. Go Ivy b
Marc Shapiro wrote:
On 10/27/2012 08:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
...
I saw a Fry's add for a motherboard, an AMD 8 Core CPU and memo
On 10/27/2012 08:27 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
...
I saw a Fry's add for a motherboard, an AMD 8 Core CPU and memory for
That's a 125
On 10/28/2012 12:36 PM, David Christensen wrote:
On 10/27/12 23:10, David Christensen wrote:
> I finally settled on Wheezy OOTB as much as possible with LUKS, ext4,
> and VirtualBox,
Correction: And Intel HD 2000 graphics support, single head.
On 10/28/12 04:32, Mark Allums wrote:
I don't
On 10/27/12 23:10, David Christensen wrote:
> I finally settled on Wheezy OOTB as much as possible with LUKS, ext4,
> and VirtualBox,
Correction: And Intel HD 2000 graphics support, single head.
On 10/28/12 04:32, Mark Allums wrote:
I don't bother with SSDs on Linux machines for personal use.
On 28/10/12 11:39, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Sunday 28 October 2012 09:38:58 Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> [snip]
>> Andrei
>> P.S. your hardware prices make me drool. Here we have higher numbers and
>> in EUR for the same stuff :(
>
> You needn't rub it
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Marc Shapiro:
> My main worry is the hard drive. I currently have what I think is its
> older cousin, a 1 TB SATA II drive. It works perfectly and I have
> always liked Seagate drives. I know that there are people out there
> who have had trouble with Seag
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2012 schrieb Mark Allums:
> On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >> Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact
> >> you'll never make use of more than 2 of those 8 cores, I recommend
> >> a d
On 10/28/2012 4:38 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact you'll
never make use of more than 2 of those 8 cores, I recommend a dual core
AthlonII X2 @ 3.4GHz. I have the 3GHz model and the 2nd c
On Sunday 28 October 2012 09:38:58 Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
[snip]
> Andrei
> P.S. your hardware prices make me drool. Here we have higher numbers and
> in EUR for the same stuff :(
You needn't rub it in!! You at least still pay in Euros. We pay bi
On Sb, 27 oct 12, 22:27:30, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> Coming from a 2800+ which is a ~60 watt CPU, and given the fact you'll
> never make use of more than 2 of those 8 cores, I recommend a dual core
> AthlonII X2 @ 3.4GHz. I have the 3GHz model and the 2nd core is pretty
> much always idle, with p
On 10/27/12 17:29, Marc Shapiro wrote:
I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
My previous desktop machine was Squeeze i386 running on an Intel
D865GBFLK motherboard with an Intel Pentium 4 3.4E GHz HT socket 478
pr
Marc Shapiro writes:
> ). Has anyone used this system, or any of these components? Comments?
What kind of hardware you need depends on what the requirements are
which you have.
> My main worry is the hard drive. I currently have what I think is its
> older cousin, a 1 TB SATA II drive.
Is th
On 10/27/2012 7:29 PM, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
> looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
...
> I saw a Fry's add for a motherboard, an AMD 8 Core CPU and memory for
That's a 125 watt CPU (ouch!). That's two 60 watt incand
I'm really getting annoyed by my random system lockups, so I have been
looking at new motherboards, new systems, etc.
A whole new system would be simplest since my current box has an old 32
bit single core Athlon 2800+ and anything that I buy is going to be 64
bit. Simpler to install from scr
93 matches
Mail list logo
