W1zzard said:
gigabyte just told me it does not use sata-ii. the problem is that the xilinx chip can not run that fast. this is because gigabyte has to engineer a memory controller like in a chipset, without previous experience (like intel, amd or ati) this is very hard to do .. 2gb modules do not work yet either but its definitely planned
Overall, this sounds like a definite improvement over the unit I use (CENATEK RocketDrive) in that it can bootup an OS from itself, that it uses a faster memory type (DDR in init. version & DDR2 in this newer one), & also a faster bus type (SATA vs. PCI 2.2).
The ONLY QUESTION I have about it, is does it maintain state between reboots? I would guess YES, via somekind of CMOS battery, etc. (where the unit I use has an independent powersupply, external hookup).
Anyhow - It's making me want to put the rocketdrive back into my first rig (which is relegated to pure server work here, running IIS 6.x & SQLServer 2005, for work & lab purposes @ home), & replace it in my latest rig (see signature).
I do know 1 thing, from real-world practice & experience using these things (pagefile.sys on first partition here, & webpage cache, %temp% ops location (apps & OS), logging (apps & OS), print spool location, %comspec% location, & even running SETI from it on 2nd partition) that things DO speedup... I tested this out (not benchmarks, just "feel" performance of the system w/out the solid state disk in place) here, & there was a diff.
Just not hearing my disks "grind" paging/logging/webpage caching/temp ops etc. was proof enough (as we ALL know that memory is 1000's of times faster than HDD's are, & just common-sense if applied properly), as well as just getting crisper overall response from my system using a slower model of solid-state disk here for various things!
FOR REAL WORLD TESTS THOUGH? Well, YEARS AGO (circa 2003) I DID A REVIEW FOR CENATEK, "An independent users review" on their front page of their site, & it noted many things improving (synthetic tests, to ones with WinZip etc.).
* Things in this field just get BETTER, all the time, & it makes you want to burn dollars! That's for sure... oh well, that is good too (albeit not on a personal finance level, lol), because it keeps the economy running!
Makaveli said:
the hostility in these forums was the funniest part for me, not to mention the gang banging
I don't know you @ all, & you may be a heck of a nice guy...
HOWEVER, you DID startup with the "cereal box" thing (lol, which was funny, but it got the people you ribbed on, on your case now)... but, the point is, you DID kick up the mess iirc from my skim of this post.
Fact is? I think these forums are pretty cool, & folks are less prone to startups of fights... @ least so far, & I am new here myself.
Heh, & I may be the LAST person who should say "don't flame war" here, lol, because I have been known to be quite "notorious" for it myself!
APK
P.S.=> Guys! Enough with the debating/name tossing already... both sides have points imo.
Makavelli does in 1 regard - that nothing "real world application-wise" shows bennies from DDR2/AM2 iirc, @ least not yet (other than raw memory benchmarks tests/synthetics)... & the others did catch him on various points via exceptions. Anyhow, it dragged this way off-topic & started up a "flame war"...
Interesting read for a flame-war though, many interesting points were made on the hardware level & enlightened me in fact on many fine points (I just skimmed, so cut me some slack if I messed up on some points I noted above), so I guess it wasn't ALL that bad then, eh?
(Compared to many of you on the hardware-side? I am a relative "noob" when it comes to current/state-of-the-art equipment, so I can gain by your discussions... even when they are name-tossing flamewar ones!) apk