Discussion in 'PC Industry' started by fellix, Oct 20, 2014.
My RD400 drive speed has almost halved since I first built it.
I have a 1TB 7200rpm drive as a cache drive where I put windows system cache on it . It's drasticly increased the life of my ssds
So, it's not recommended to put system cache on SSD? How much SSD lifespan is reduced and how much speed is lost then if cache is put on HDD?
AMD Raven Ridge Graphics On Linux vs. Lower-End NVIDIA / AMD GPUs
16 February 2018
well you will certainly decrease your SSD life span. it all depends on how often the cache is used. The more ram you have the less often it should hit it. As with speed your not going to loose much speed if the cache is on the HDD. Going from system memory to SSD is already a huge decrease in performance , dropping from ssd to mechanical is a much smaller decrease when compareed
I wouldn't worry so much about SSD lifespans.
My Crucial SSDs (M4-CT512M4SSD2) that I use for staging/editing/rendering HD videos have been holding up perfectly since 2012 (62-76 hours a week), without any performance lost. And my Samsung EVO SSDs for storage/dumping/retrieving large video-projects have been holding up as well. Hell, I had mechanical enterprise hard-drives fail me within 2 years.
Some interesting info on SSDs lifespans at the link below.
Modern 3D NAND has hilarious endurance.
Also a bit more relevant endurance testing (if you can read russian that is).
you are right about that , I mostly moved the windows cache to the mechanical to avoid any performance loss when things page out to the cache. However you do gain a lot more life out of the drive also. I had a 64 gig ssd (vertex ) die out due to the nand going bad. I would assume modern drives have more nand back up and longer endurance.
I have 8 SSDs and an NVMe SSD across various systems ranging from 8 years to 1 year old, none of them have experienced a single issue. Can't say that about any of my mechanical drives.
The only mechanicals I use now are NAS drives for my... NAS. I just don't see any reason to have them in any client PCs unless using them for local backup (lack of NAS) or scratch disk.
I highly doubt moving anything to a mechanical hard drive yields performance gains. "Caching" is the opposite of what you're doing
Maybe just in case of a not-so-good ssd which would have no space remaining
I've had games with performance issues if the page file is on the same drive as the game . By moving it to the mechanical the hitching would go away.
Eastman, what type (i.e., sata, pci-e, usb, etc...), brand and model SSD are you using? You shouldn't be receiving hitching (which sounds like texture streaming is causing some type of fps penalty) from having page file enabled on you're gaming drive. The only time you'll receive something like that, is that page file is fighting for resources (i.e., lack of space on SSD), or you have lot's of applications running in the background, requiring virtual memory.
Plus, if you have a decent amount of system ram (16GB or greater), virtual memory shouldn't be an issue (unless you have some legacy applications coded / requiring page file space). Personally, I have it disabled between my machines, or set to something ridiculously low (16MB), making sure that Windows OS, it's applications and games, are getting the most out of the system memory.
Mx 300 by crucial with sata 3.0 . At the time I had 12 gigs of ram .
Those drives are fine. If you have more system memory beyond the 12GB stated, and a GPU with a decent amount of VRAM, then your virtual memory requirements should be lowered or disabled.
Anyone seen recent news on the 12nm Ryzen? Isn't it supposed to be coming in March?
Yes, the "12nm" (refined 14nm renamed, kinda like TSMC "12nm" is refined 16nm renamed) Ryzen aka Pinnacle Ridge is coming, but the launch is in April, not March
(edit: just for the sake of it, it's been the official schedule since CES 2018 https://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/ces-2018-2018jan07.aspx )
OK thanks, yeah have been seeing April doing the reading I guess I should have done before posting that...
Was kinda hoping to see some clock/performance improvement details by now.
At least there is confirmation of being in production
If I recall there was talk of ~200Mhz improvement back when first announced.
Edit: oh, updated EPYC & Threadripper with the new chips in it 2H18
Edit2: a slide
Edit3: was just thinking, I've long lusted after an APU that would be something like a Zeppelin die linked to a big monolithic GPU but just occured to me looking at Raven Ridge die & thinking of the Threadripper socket, would an APU using Raven Ridge dies in the Threadripper socket make sense/provide decent GPU performance? It'd be 16 cores, 32 threads CPU, 2816 SPs (which I guess is where it falls over, thats only a bit more than an RX480...)
Edit4: Bunch of very interesting slides about Zeppelin die design here https://wccftech.com/amd-zeppelin-soc-isscc-detailed-7nm-epyc-64-cores-rumor/
full slide deck is near the bottom if you want to avoid the semi-random rest of article
It sounds silly but you should put that swapfile on a ramdrive
From that slide deck interesting numbers advantage/disadvantage of glued-together vs monolithic
Embedded RR APUs support faster memory (3200)?