Discussion
As a PC-tinkerer, I have this expensive urge to continually lavish myself with nice tech gear that has a lot of BHP (most of which I know I'll hardly use, but that's besides the point!). I have to exercise restraint though, because it's really hard to justify from an economical point of view.
That was then. Just a couple of days ago I upgraded my XP-based Q6600 to this:
- Core i7 930
- 6GB RAM
- Windows 7 Ultimate
- Intel X-25M SSD
- 2x 1TB Samsung F3
- Radeon HD4870
When I was building it, I felt that this was more an exercise in scratching an itch, and that I am hardly going to see any real performance benefit unless I rendered video or something all the time.
I was wrong. So, so wrong. This system is LIGHTNING quick. I've loaded it up with everything (Office, Creative Suite, Anti Virus), and start a boatload of apps upon boot up (web server, outlook, firefox, photoshop etc), and I go from the press of the power button to FULLY functional desktop in about 30 seconds.
It is INSANELY quick compared to my old system (which was no slouch).
Anything I launch, anything I click on, any submenus I run, just ANYTHING either happens instantly or takes a couple of seconds. This is the way computing is supposed to be.
I have a feeling the magic bullet in all of this is the SSD, but then it was the single most expensive item in my spec sheet.
And Windows 7 really is a great step up over Windows XP. It has a lot of very nice productivity features that add so much to the experience (and I am not a form-over-function kinda guy, either - I reckon myself as an uber-effecient power user).
I'm a happy bunny. Just wanted to share.
If any of you were considering a similar upgrade, don't hesitate.
PS - And yes, video encoding etc just FLIES, but that was to be expected.
That was then. Just a couple of days ago I upgraded my XP-based Q6600 to this:
- Core i7 930
- 6GB RAM
- Windows 7 Ultimate
- Intel X-25M SSD
- 2x 1TB Samsung F3
- Radeon HD4870
When I was building it, I felt that this was more an exercise in scratching an itch, and that I am hardly going to see any real performance benefit unless I rendered video or something all the time.
I was wrong. So, so wrong. This system is LIGHTNING quick. I've loaded it up with everything (Office, Creative Suite, Anti Virus), and start a boatload of apps upon boot up (web server, outlook, firefox, photoshop etc), and I go from the press of the power button to FULLY functional desktop in about 30 seconds.
It is INSANELY quick compared to my old system (which was no slouch).
Anything I launch, anything I click on, any submenus I run, just ANYTHING either happens instantly or takes a couple of seconds. This is the way computing is supposed to be.
I have a feeling the magic bullet in all of this is the SSD, but then it was the single most expensive item in my spec sheet.
And Windows 7 really is a great step up over Windows XP. It has a lot of very nice productivity features that add so much to the experience (and I am not a form-over-function kinda guy, either - I reckon myself as an uber-effecient power user).
I'm a happy bunny. Just wanted to share.
If any of you were considering a similar upgrade, don't hesitate.
PS - And yes, video encoding etc just FLIES, but that was to be expected.
Blue Meanie said:
Well, in a few years it will appear slow, in the same way 16mb was a 'lot' of memory! I bet the computer you did have felt quicker than the one before, and so on... It's progress. At some point we will get to the point where you won't have to open anything, it will just be all on.
i once paid 150 notes for 8mb of memory for my psion series 5. Christ i even remeber the sales guy telling me that was enough for a whole book!10JH said:
The speed you described is the kind I'd like!
If you don't mind me asking, roughly how much did all that cost?
All that came up to about £1k. Excludes stuff I already had, like a casing, PSU, screens, keyboard, optical drives etc.If you don't mind me asking, roughly how much did all that cost?
Money well spent.
The graphics card is a bit of an extravagance, and without it, or with something a more measured, the price will drop to £800 or so, with no drop at all in day-to-day non-gaming performance.
That SSD and the ample RAM are the two big performers in that nice setup you've got there 
If you decide to start swinging dicks with the PC equivalent of your local McDonald's car park lads with Z20LET motors in stripped out Novas, then you'll find that the *actual* benchmarked improvement in performance isn't as large as the *perceived* improvement in performance from actually *using* the machine.
That's the SSD. And the RAM. Raw optimised throughput will use code that fits into RAM, doesn't need to swap to disk, and if game-related will have optimised GPU routines to get the most out of the hardware.
But normal everyday 'general computing' tasks aren't optimised, neither are you often running every component flat out in an optimised fashion. Most of the time you're waiting for disc - either swapping back in due to insufficient RAM, or simply waiting for data, since today's CPUs are so many times more fast than any mechanical disc can supply data to work on. Or, at the last level, waiting on user input
The SSD and the extra RAM make a MASSIVE amount of difference to all of that last paragraph. On an optimised benchmark, you may gain 10%. In the real world, it'll feel like 100%.
And well done with the right choice of SSD. I know I've been evangelising these things for ages (and who would have thought it - an old diehard Apple chap praising Intel the corporate behemoth who crush their competitors in a similar way to Microsoft, hence the 'Wintel' epithet) but they really *are* that good.
Now all you need is Linux on there
to finally remove anti-virus and other apps that waste system resources (anti-virus constantly thrashes the disc. This isn't so bad with reads, but if it's one of those systems that constantly tags the files as accessed (i.e. a write) then it'll prematurely wear your SSD. It's a complete waste... this also applies to Linux, where setting the noatime flag is always useful for SSD systems, but that isn't anything to do with viruses).
Alternatively, if Windows 7 really *is* as good as it sounds, and is properly secure, then I'd be tempted to get VMware on the box, put known 'old' Windows apps that have been known to have vulnerabilities into their own sandpit VMs, and then run your main Windows 7 completely naked. Maybe a network alert app to give you prior warning if some process is talking to the internet (you can then decide whether it's suspicious or not), and maybe a switch of browser (I don't know how good Microsoft's browser is these days for security - Ordinary_Chap is the man for objective, extensive knowledge and reliable opinion in this space) to something like Safari or Chrome (Firefox is good, don't get me wrong, but it's a BIG player and hence a target for the malware writers. Security via obscurity is never to be relied upon, but too many people pooh-pooh it.... it's an extra layer of armour. Use it!). Put big, proper, industrial-strength passwords on Windows and all you need fear is zero-day. And that exists for Linux and OS X too. So get a decent backup system running and enjoy running your PC at its full power!
If Windows 7 is as good as OS X Leopard (as it should be, I'd be surprised if it's as good as Snow Leopard but that argument could, and will, go on for years) then hell, call Microsoft's bluff and turn OFF any *intrusive* anti-virus BS. Windows 7 should NOT be susceptible to old-school viruses that propagate by copying executable code from file to file on your own PC. Having a process that checks *every* file as it is opened, hooking deep into very complicated layers of the filesystem drivers, means you're swapping the security of Microsoft's own filesystem driver developers (I'd say they're amongst the best in the business, wouldn't you? With the Windows filesystem hosting the majority of corporate and enterprise *critical* data, filesystem corruption due to bugs would be *catastrophic* bad news), for the stability and security of 'Anti Virus Company X's filesystem hook and file scanner code developers.
I'd bet on MS doing a better job. By all means check files on the way in and out for malware... but old-school Norton / Symantec / etc. scanning *every* file as it is accessed? Firstly there's a chance that it will reduce the life of your SSD. Do the numbers, it may not be significant, I make no claims other than 'check'. But secondly, with Windows 7, which is a GOOD operating system, do you really *need* Windows 95-era 'virus' checking methodologies???
I say no, and you'll notice a nice improvement in performance by removing it
If you decide to start swinging dicks with the PC equivalent of your local McDonald's car park lads with Z20LET motors in stripped out Novas, then you'll find that the *actual* benchmarked improvement in performance isn't as large as the *perceived* improvement in performance from actually *using* the machine.
That's the SSD. And the RAM. Raw optimised throughput will use code that fits into RAM, doesn't need to swap to disk, and if game-related will have optimised GPU routines to get the most out of the hardware.
But normal everyday 'general computing' tasks aren't optimised, neither are you often running every component flat out in an optimised fashion. Most of the time you're waiting for disc - either swapping back in due to insufficient RAM, or simply waiting for data, since today's CPUs are so many times more fast than any mechanical disc can supply data to work on. Or, at the last level, waiting on user input
The SSD and the extra RAM make a MASSIVE amount of difference to all of that last paragraph. On an optimised benchmark, you may gain 10%. In the real world, it'll feel like 100%.
And well done with the right choice of SSD. I know I've been evangelising these things for ages (and who would have thought it - an old diehard Apple chap praising Intel the corporate behemoth who crush their competitors in a similar way to Microsoft, hence the 'Wintel' epithet) but they really *are* that good.
Now all you need is Linux on there
to finally remove anti-virus and other apps that waste system resources (anti-virus constantly thrashes the disc. This isn't so bad with reads, but if it's one of those systems that constantly tags the files as accessed (i.e. a write) then it'll prematurely wear your SSD. It's a complete waste... this also applies to Linux, where setting the noatime flag is always useful for SSD systems, but that isn't anything to do with viruses). Alternatively, if Windows 7 really *is* as good as it sounds, and is properly secure, then I'd be tempted to get VMware on the box, put known 'old' Windows apps that have been known to have vulnerabilities into their own sandpit VMs, and then run your main Windows 7 completely naked. Maybe a network alert app to give you prior warning if some process is talking to the internet (you can then decide whether it's suspicious or not), and maybe a switch of browser (I don't know how good Microsoft's browser is these days for security - Ordinary_Chap is the man for objective, extensive knowledge and reliable opinion in this space) to something like Safari or Chrome (Firefox is good, don't get me wrong, but it's a BIG player and hence a target for the malware writers. Security via obscurity is never to be relied upon, but too many people pooh-pooh it.... it's an extra layer of armour. Use it!). Put big, proper, industrial-strength passwords on Windows and all you need fear is zero-day. And that exists for Linux and OS X too. So get a decent backup system running and enjoy running your PC at its full power!
If Windows 7 is as good as OS X Leopard (as it should be, I'd be surprised if it's as good as Snow Leopard but that argument could, and will, go on for years) then hell, call Microsoft's bluff and turn OFF any *intrusive* anti-virus BS. Windows 7 should NOT be susceptible to old-school viruses that propagate by copying executable code from file to file on your own PC. Having a process that checks *every* file as it is opened, hooking deep into very complicated layers of the filesystem drivers, means you're swapping the security of Microsoft's own filesystem driver developers (I'd say they're amongst the best in the business, wouldn't you? With the Windows filesystem hosting the majority of corporate and enterprise *critical* data, filesystem corruption due to bugs would be *catastrophic* bad news), for the stability and security of 'Anti Virus Company X's filesystem hook and file scanner code developers.
I'd bet on MS doing a better job. By all means check files on the way in and out for malware... but old-school Norton / Symantec / etc. scanning *every* file as it is accessed? Firstly there's a chance that it will reduce the life of your SSD. Do the numbers, it may not be significant, I make no claims other than 'check'. But secondly, with Windows 7, which is a GOOD operating system, do you really *need* Windows 95-era 'virus' checking methodologies???
I say no, and you'll notice a nice improvement in performance by removing it
cyberface said:
That SSD and the ample RAM are the two big performers in that nice setup you've got there
If you decide to start swinging dicks with the PC equivalent of your local McDonald's car park lads with Z20LET motors in stripped out Novas, then you'll find that the *actual* benchmarked improvement in performance isn't as large as the *perceived* improvement in performance from actually *using* the machine.
That's the SSD. And the RAM. Raw optimised throughput will use code that fits into RAM, doesn't need to swap to disk, and if game-related will have optimised GPU routines to get the most out of the hardware.
But normal everyday 'general computing' tasks aren't optimised, neither are you often running every component flat out in an optimised fashion. Most of the time you're waiting for disc - either swapping back in due to insufficient RAM, or simply waiting for data, since today's CPUs are so many times more fast than any mechanical disc can supply data to work on. Or, at the last level, waiting on user input
The SSD and the extra RAM make a MASSIVE amount of difference to all of that last paragraph. On an optimised benchmark, you may gain 10%. In the real world, it'll feel like 100%.
And well done with the right choice of SSD. I know I've been evangelising these things for ages (and who would have thought it - an old diehard Apple chap praising Intel the corporate behemoth who crush their competitors in a similar way to Microsoft, hence the 'Wintel' epithet) but they really *are* that good.
Now all you need is Linux on there to finally remove anti-virus and other apps that waste system resources (anti-virus constantly thrashes the disc. This isn't so bad with reads, but if it's one of those systems that constantly tags the files as accessed (i.e. a write) then it'll prematurely wear your SSD. It's a complete waste... this also applies to Linux, where setting the noatime flag is always useful for SSD systems, but that isn't anything to do with viruses).
Alternatively, if Windows 7 really *is* as good as it sounds, and is properly secure, then I'd be tempted to get VMware on the box, put known 'old' Windows apps that have been known to have vulnerabilities into their own sandpit VMs, and then run your main Windows 7 completely naked. Maybe a network alert app to give you prior warning if some process is talking to the internet (you can then decide whether it's suspicious or not), and maybe a switch of browser (I don't know how good Microsoft's browser is these days for security - Ordinary_Chap is the man for objective, extensive knowledge and reliable opinion in this space) to something like Safari or Chrome (Firefox is good, don't get me wrong, but it's a BIG player and hence a target for the malware writers. Security via obscurity is never to be relied upon, but too many people pooh-pooh it.... it's an extra layer of armour. Use it!). Put big, proper, industrial-strength passwords on Windows and all you need fear is zero-day. And that exists for Linux and OS X too. So get a decent backup system running and enjoy running your PC at its full power!
If Windows 7 is as good as OS X Leopard (as it should be, I'd be surprised if it's as good as Snow Leopard but that argument could, and will, go on for years) then hell, call Microsoft's bluff and turn OFF any *intrusive* anti-virus BS. Windows 7 should NOT be susceptible to old-school viruses that propagate by copying executable code from file to file on your own PC. Having a process that checks *every* file as it is opened, hooking deep into very complicated layers of the filesystem drivers, means you're swapping the security of Microsoft's own filesystem driver developers (I'd say they're amongst the best in the business, wouldn't you? With the Windows filesystem hosting the majority of corporate and enterprise *critical* data, filesystem corruption due to bugs would be *catastrophic* bad news), for the stability and security of 'Anti Virus Company X's filesystem hook and file scanner code developers.
I'd bet on MS doing a better job. By all means check files on the way in and out for malware... but old-school Norton / Symantec / etc. scanning *every* file as it is accessed? Firstly there's a chance that it will reduce the life of your SSD. Do the numbers, it may not be significant, I make no claims other than 'check'. But secondly, with Windows 7, which is a GOOD operating system, do you really *need* Windows 95-era 'virus' checking methodologies???
I say no, and you'll notice a nice improvement in performance by removing it
99% of it is the SSD and the i7's memory interface rather than the amount of ram.If you decide to start swinging dicks with the PC equivalent of your local McDonald's car park lads with Z20LET motors in stripped out Novas, then you'll find that the *actual* benchmarked improvement in performance isn't as large as the *perceived* improvement in performance from actually *using* the machine.
That's the SSD. And the RAM. Raw optimised throughput will use code that fits into RAM, doesn't need to swap to disk, and if game-related will have optimised GPU routines to get the most out of the hardware.
But normal everyday 'general computing' tasks aren't optimised, neither are you often running every component flat out in an optimised fashion. Most of the time you're waiting for disc - either swapping back in due to insufficient RAM, or simply waiting for data, since today's CPUs are so many times more fast than any mechanical disc can supply data to work on. Or, at the last level, waiting on user input
The SSD and the extra RAM make a MASSIVE amount of difference to all of that last paragraph. On an optimised benchmark, you may gain 10%. In the real world, it'll feel like 100%.
And well done with the right choice of SSD. I know I've been evangelising these things for ages (and who would have thought it - an old diehard Apple chap praising Intel the corporate behemoth who crush their competitors in a similar way to Microsoft, hence the 'Wintel' epithet) but they really *are* that good.
Now all you need is Linux on there
to finally remove anti-virus and other apps that waste system resources (anti-virus constantly thrashes the disc. This isn't so bad with reads, but if it's one of those systems that constantly tags the files as accessed (i.e. a write) then it'll prematurely wear your SSD. It's a complete waste... this also applies to Linux, where setting the noatime flag is always useful for SSD systems, but that isn't anything to do with viruses). Alternatively, if Windows 7 really *is* as good as it sounds, and is properly secure, then I'd be tempted to get VMware on the box, put known 'old' Windows apps that have been known to have vulnerabilities into their own sandpit VMs, and then run your main Windows 7 completely naked. Maybe a network alert app to give you prior warning if some process is talking to the internet (you can then decide whether it's suspicious or not), and maybe a switch of browser (I don't know how good Microsoft's browser is these days for security - Ordinary_Chap is the man for objective, extensive knowledge and reliable opinion in this space) to something like Safari or Chrome (Firefox is good, don't get me wrong, but it's a BIG player and hence a target for the malware writers. Security via obscurity is never to be relied upon, but too many people pooh-pooh it.... it's an extra layer of armour. Use it!). Put big, proper, industrial-strength passwords on Windows and all you need fear is zero-day. And that exists for Linux and OS X too. So get a decent backup system running and enjoy running your PC at its full power!
If Windows 7 is as good as OS X Leopard (as it should be, I'd be surprised if it's as good as Snow Leopard but that argument could, and will, go on for years) then hell, call Microsoft's bluff and turn OFF any *intrusive* anti-virus BS. Windows 7 should NOT be susceptible to old-school viruses that propagate by copying executable code from file to file on your own PC. Having a process that checks *every* file as it is opened, hooking deep into very complicated layers of the filesystem drivers, means you're swapping the security of Microsoft's own filesystem driver developers (I'd say they're amongst the best in the business, wouldn't you? With the Windows filesystem hosting the majority of corporate and enterprise *critical* data, filesystem corruption due to bugs would be *catastrophic* bad news), for the stability and security of 'Anti Virus Company X's filesystem hook and file scanner code developers.
I'd bet on MS doing a better job. By all means check files on the way in and out for malware... but old-school Norton / Symantec / etc. scanning *every* file as it is accessed? Firstly there's a chance that it will reduce the life of your SSD. Do the numbers, it may not be significant, I make no claims other than 'check'. But secondly, with Windows 7, which is a GOOD operating system, do you really *need* Windows 95-era 'virus' checking methodologies???
I say no, and you'll notice a nice improvement in performance by removing it
I was very pleased when I moved to Win7 professional (got it on student offer) from Vista (both 64 bit). It does seem much quicker and smoother, I believe it feels like a major service pack rather than a new O/S. I've been reading about the x-25m, I'd very much like one but still a skint student at the moment!
I'm still lagging with a Quad core though! Q9300, but it is running at 3.5 ghz now
I'm still lagging with a Quad core though! Q9300, but it is running at 3.5 ghz now
I keep looking at new components. But I just don't really need an upgrade. My current Q6600 system plays every game at 1920x1200 on high (not highest) settings on an old 8800GTX. And I have a spare 8800GTX ready to be SLI'd - since my brother bought a ready-crossfired ATI card.
But I really want one of those Intel SSDs.
But I really want one of those Intel SSDs.
Blue Meanie said:
Well, in a few years it will appear slow, in the same way 16mb was a 'lot' of memory! I bet the computer you did have felt quicker than the one before, and so on... It's progress. At some point we will get to the point where you won't have to open anything, it will just be all on.
Resources to software designers are like red rags to bulls ( or more like car boot space to the missus) - the challenge is to use it all to maximum capacity .Once upon a time we had Win95 ,with HDD looking massive at around 1gb ,and anything over 32MEG of ram ,and 66Mhz was FAAAAAAST .The tail is wagging the dog -the PC must expand to fit the aspirations of the OS .iT'S LIKE CARS TO top gear -IF IT'S NOT FAST AND NOISY -IT'S NO GOOD .annodomini2 said:
twinturboz said:
Is it really that much quicker? Ive just ordered a new laptop with similar specs and cant wait for it to turn up.
i7 820 quad core
4gb ram
intel 80gb ssd
2 x 500gb 7200rpm
nvidia gtx285 1gb in sli
Battery will either last 5minutes with that spec or it weighs a ton.i7 820 quad core
4gb ram
intel 80gb ssd
2 x 500gb 7200rpm
nvidia gtx285 1gb in sli
AB said:
Whenever I see the name 'Cyberface' I always go to the kitchen and get a cup of tea before I read his post. I always finish said cup of tea before I finish his post.
Brilliant.
I skim read his posts, and generally all read like:Brilliant.
Cyberface said:
Catfish, I love Apple, I hate Apple, I want to try Windows 7, I've not tried Windows 7, Catfish
Mattt said:
AB said:
Whenever I see the name 'Cyberface' I always go to the kitchen and get a cup of tea before I read his post. I always finish said cup of tea before I finish his post.
Brilliant.
I skim read his posts, and generally all read like:Brilliant.
Cyberface said:
Catfish, I love Apple, I hate Apple, I want to try Windows 7, I've not tried Windows 7, Catfish
Kind regards,
Android.
Mattt said:
twinturboz said:
Is it really that much quicker? Ive just ordered a new laptop with similar specs and cant wait for it to turn up.
i7 820 quad core
4gb ram
intel 80gb ssd
2 x 500gb 7200rpm
nvidia gtx285 1gb in sli
Does your Laptop look like this?i7 820 quad core
4gb ram
intel 80gb ssd
2 x 500gb 7200rpm
nvidia gtx285 1gb in sli
Does weigh a ton and yes battery probably doesn't last long. But Ive been told if you press and hold the power button for 4 seconds you get 1000% extra battery life.In all seriousness it will be a desktop replacement so will be plugged in and not moved too often. Also the SLI is excessive for my needs so will be selling one of the gfx cards.
said laptop: http://www.kobaltcomputers.co.uk/g890_overview.php
Edited by twinturboz on Thursday 8th April 09:55
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff