"Rate my Rig" thread

GEC: Discuss gaming, computers and electronics and venture into the bizarre world of STGODs.

Moderator: Thanas

User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2205
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign » 2018-09-07 11:48am

I read that Optane only really provides a performance boost to old-school HDDs, and only if they're the boot drive. Is that not the case? My boot drive is a SATA-SSD, which with the core upgrade already starts far faster than it used to- no need to stick an M.2 drive in there just yet.

I have a Raid-0 array comprised of a couple of velociraptors for my Steam library, if Optane would speed those up I could take the plunge as my board has two M.2 slots.
It's no use debating a moron; they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Just because you have the attention span of a fruit fly doesn't mean the rest of us are so encumbered.

"As you know science is not fact"- HuskerJay
"The Delta Fyler [sic] isn't even a shuttle craft" -HuskerJay69
"The Dominion War wasn't really all that bad"- Admiral Mercury

User avatar
The Infidel
Jedi Knight
Posts: 647
Joined: 2009-05-07 01:32pm
Location: Norway

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by The Infidel » 2018-09-07 03:41pm

As I understand, Optane has lower sequential speed than m2 ssd, but higher iops and durability. This makes it perfect for a pure boot/scratch device or as cache for a slower medium. I don't think the difference is big enough to be felt for a normal PC.

You can get a 32gb optane cache quite cheap, but I think you need a z3xx chipset to make good use of it. Starglider knows more about this, I guess.
Image
Image
It is very difficult to believe in a god when some people are never struck by lightning. -Calvin

"The world language is English as spoken by foreigners." -Kristen Nygaard

User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8620
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by Starglider » 2018-09-07 05:22pm

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2018-09-07 11:48am
I read that Optane only really provides a performance boost to old-school HDDs, and only if they're the boot drive. Is that not the case?
No, it has much better random read and write performance than Flash SSDs, and sequential speed only a bit slower than high-end SSDs (still better than low-end stuff). You may be thinking of 'Optane Cache' which was Intel's early attempt to get the tech into production by putting tiny amounts on the motherboard as a data cache for HDDs and slow SSDs. Compiles are definitely substantially faster than my previous workstation which had 4 x 2013 vintage SSDs in RAID 0 and 2 x 8 core Xeons. However I'm not sure if that's the Optane or the 32-core Threadripper.
I have a Raid-0 array comprised of a couple of velociraptors for my Steam library, if Optane would speed those up I could take the plunge as my board has two M.2 slots.
I didn't think anyone was still using Velociraptors, they topped out at 1TB each in the last ones made which were released in 2012. SSDs have closed the price gap enough that there isn't much point using (expensive, small) 10K RPM HDDs any more, and 15K RPM are nearly extinct. The only use case left for HDDs is for cheap mass (many TB per device) storage.

User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2205
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign » 2018-09-08 05:45pm

Starglider wrote:
2018-09-07 05:22pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2018-09-07 11:48am
I read that Optane only really provides a performance boost to old-school HDDs, and only if they're the boot drive. Is that not the case?
No, it has much better random read and write performance than Flash SSDs, and sequential speed only a bit slower than high-end SSDs (still better than low-end stuff). You may be thinking of 'Optane Cache' which was Intel's early attempt to get the tech into production by putting tiny amounts on the motherboard as a data cache for HDDs and slow SSDs. Compiles are definitely substantially faster than my previous workstation which had 4 x 2013 vintage SSDs in RAID 0 and 2 x 8 core Xeons. However I'm not sure if that's the Optane or the 32-core Threadripper.
It was articles like this that gave the impression that HDDs would benefit far more than SSDs: Link.

The SSD that I have was high-end when I bought it nearly 2 years ago, a SanDisk Extreme Pro 960GB; it was a great deal at £50 less than retail. It was only when I upgraded my motherboard that I saw the expected jump in performance.
I have a Raid-0 array comprised of a couple of velociraptors for my Steam library, if Optane would speed those up I could take the plunge as my board has two M.2 slots.
I didn't think anyone was still using Velociraptors, they topped out at 1TB each in the last ones made which were released in 2012. SSDs have closed the price gap enough that there isn't much point using (expensive, small) 10K RPM HDDs any more, and 15K RPM are nearly extinct. The only use case left for HDDs is for cheap mass (many TB per device) storage.
Yeah, they did- at one point I had two raptor arrays running. As WD were doubling capacity with each iteration, my first array comprised a pair of 300GBs, the second a pair of 600s. They never quite got to the 1,200 GB mark, which would have been the next logical step and my next array, but they never got that far. If there's a high capacity HDD that offers superior performance to those, I'd be very interested.
It's no use debating a moron; they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Just because you have the attention span of a fruit fly doesn't mean the rest of us are so encumbered.

"As you know science is not fact"- HuskerJay
"The Delta Fyler [sic] isn't even a shuttle craft" -HuskerJay69
"The Dominion War wasn't really all that bad"- Admiral Mercury

User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8620
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by Starglider » 2018-09-09 05:11pm

I bought a second Radeon Vega Frontier Liquid from Ebay to keep my current one company. It was vaguely unsettling seeing only one GPU device in OpenCL. That BeQuiet case is now crammed full, barely fitted the second GPU cooler in there by suspending it between some hard drive cages with cable ties.
EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2018-09-08 05:45pm
It was articles like this that gave the impression that HDDs would benefit far more than SSDs: Link.
The current 'Optane Memory' thing is an Intel revenue generator gimmick that is not worth bothering with; certainly no one in the enterprise space does. The sensible use for Optane is as a replacement for flash inside proper, stand-alone SSDs, which is the sort that I have.
If there's a high capacity HDD that offers superior performance to those, I'd be very interested.
Most contemporary 7.2K hard drives (4TB+) will outperform a Velociraptor, because transfer bandwidth scales with areal density. Which is to say that all other things being equal, a 2TB drive will have twice the sequential read/write rate of a 1TB drive, whereas a 10K RPM drive has only 40% better transfer than a 7.2K drive of the same capacity. Random R/W performance will probably still be better on the 10K drive due to rotational latency, but all the use cases that case about random access latency already moved to SSDs.

User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2205
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: High orbit

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by EnterpriseSovereign » 2018-09-10 05:12pm

Most contemporary 7.2K hard drives (4TB+) will outperform a Velociraptor, because transfer bandwidth scales with areal density. Which is to say that all other things being equal, a 2TB drive will have twice the sequential read/write rate of a 1TB drive, whereas a 10K RPM drive has only 40% better transfer than a 7.2K drive of the same capacity. Random R/W performance will probably still be better on the 10K drive due to rotational latency, but all the use cases that case about random access latency already moved to SSDs.
Makes sense, though would I need to put a pair of such drives in a RAID-0 array like the Raptors to see a performance gain?

An article I found on techradar still names the WD raptors as the best for gaming despite them being discontinued years ago. Weirdly the URL says 2016 yet the date on the article says it's from 11 days ago.
It's no use debating a moron; they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

Just because you have the attention span of a fruit fly doesn't mean the rest of us are so encumbered.

"As you know science is not fact"- HuskerJay
"The Delta Fyler [sic] isn't even a shuttle craft" -HuskerJay69
"The Dominion War wasn't really all that bad"- Admiral Mercury

User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8620
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: "Rate my Rig" thread

Post by Starglider » 2018-09-10 05:16pm

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:
2018-09-10 05:12pm
Makes sense, though would I need to put a pair of such drives in a RAID-0 array like the Raptors to see a performance gain?
A RAID-0 array on a decent controller increases sequential performance proportionally to the number of drives. It generally doesn't help with latency. So probably yes you would.
An article I found on techradar still names the WD raptors as the best for gaming despite them being discontinued years ago.
Sites without benchmarks are worthless for performance comparisons. Look at something like AnandTech instead, they have the random & sequential R/W speeds for a huge range of drives + workload-specific performance benchmarks.

Post Reply