Time to Upgrade ?:-}

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

Win7 is still preferable though leave it another year or so and Win 10
may have bedded down. Avoid Win8 unless you like pain.

Win 8.1 can be made somewhat less awful by making it look like Win 7
using Classic Shell:
<http://www.classicshell.net>
That brings back the real start menu, ease of adding shortcut icons to
the desktop, and explorer usability. I can totally ignore the page of
wiggly icons that MS calls a start page.

If I was buying today price no
object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an
aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it.

Agreed. I haven't seen a bad Intel CPU in probably 15 years, while
I've lost count of the dead or erratic AMD CPU's that have I've had to
deal with. I would go with a 4th or 5th generation i7. The i7-4790k
is about $330 and burns about 45 watts, while the i7-5960x is $1,000
and burns 140 watts. That should make the decision easy.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors>

A fast agile SSD for scratch files and
most frequently used programs is very worthwhile.

In general, an SSD is 3x to 5x faster than rotating memory for
everything. I'm partial to Samsung 850 EVO and Pro.
<http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372>
Most SSD drives have similar read speeds. However, the write speeds
is what makes the difference. There are benchmark tests all over the
internet. Don't overbuy on capacity as the prices of SSD drives are
still dropping and you can probably do better if you wait until you
need the space.

Not convinced by the Intel smart SSD cache of a big disk. Mine died
permanently after about two years flawless operation. I live without it
since major work files live on the Samsung SSD (consider also Crucial).

I had problems with a Crucial MX100 512MB. The drive was fine, but no
matter what I tried, it would not boot in the designated HP i7
something machine, even with a fresh Win 8 install. However, it
worked in another machine (Dell Inspiron 1725) so I kept it. Also,
the write speed is slower than a Samsung 850 SSD.

I must be leading a charmed life. I've installed (cloned) about 25
assorted SSD drives in the last year. Lately, I'm doing 2 pre-emptive
SSD upgrades per week and climbing. Zero failures or irate customers
so far and no indications of impending doom.

However, I did have some problems with Samsung 840 series which was
later fixed with a firmware update.
<http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/SSD/global/html/support/downloads.html>
I also had some problems with a user that did not properly shut down
his desktop, preferring instead to just switch off the power. He was
scrambling data on the SSD until I discovered the power problem.
Demonstrating how to operate the power button (i.e. push once to shut
down) solved that problem.

I don't have any great advice on what to buy. If you want
reliability, buy two machines. If you want performance, buy the
latest greatest. If you want to save money, buy last years model. If
you want reparability, buy an off the shelf Dell workstation. If you
want it all, give up now while you're still sane and solvent.

Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest
features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try
not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work,
not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:21:37 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

It's easier with a Macintosh. Just boot the old machine holding down the 'T' key
and it becomes a Firewire external drive. Link Firewire from old machine to new,
and on the new one, run the Applications/Utilities/Migration Assistant. Except for a game or two
(which give 'reinstall from original media' messages), it just works. Doesn't
Windows have a similar utility?

No. XP had the "Files and Settings Transfer Wizard" which worked
fairly well. Unfortunately, it also transferred copy protected
software, which I'm sure the software vendors did not appreciate. So,
it morphed into "Windows Easy Transfer" which is not easy and doesn't
transfer anything that could otherwise be done with a simple flash
drive.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Easy_Transfer>
<http://www.alphr.com/blogs/2014/07/11/windows-easy-transfer-%25e2%2580%2593-not-so-easy-in-windows-8-1>
There are some 3rd party utilities that claim to provide the function.
I haven't had much luck with them and have given up trying. The main
problem is that Windoze likes to lock files that need to be copied.
The default action is to just stop and wait for the lock to be
released, which can be forever. I find myself installing everything
from scratch, which takes much longer, but doesn't require any
troubleshooting after using one of the assorted wizards.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

On Monday, 3 August 2015 01:26:54 UTC+1, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 7:36:34 PM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:

I can't think of any use for one, and that sounds like a good reason to avoid them.

They would be good for anything you want to keep for more than five years. The Navy ran some tests and estimated the mean time to failure as 1000 years. No reason to avoid them except the media is several dollars per 25 gigabytes.

far more inconvenient and costly than spinning rust. The latter may be old tech but it still mostly rules the roost.


NT

 

On Monday, 3 August 2015 03:05:24 UTC+1, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:48:42 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:


We backup design releases to CDs, which I store in the cave at home.
Some are 10 years old, and I occasionally have to retrieve one. So
far, it has always worked.

I have had CD's that were no longer 100 % readable.

I had many turn out to be partly unreadable. Thanfully there's little reason to use them now.


NT

 

On Monday, 3 August 2015 05:54:33 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

I must be leading a charmed life. I've installed (cloned) about 25
assorted SSD drives in the last year. Lately, I'm doing 2 pre-emptive
SSD upgrades per week and climbing. Zero failures or irate customers
so far and no indications of impending doom.

In the world of computer retail that can just mean they put your number on the SSD, and since it died they can't find it

I don't have any great advice on what to buy. If you want
reliability, buy two machines. If you want performance, buy the
latest greatest. If you want to save money, buy last years model. If
you want reparability, buy an off the shelf Dell workstation. If you
want it all, give up now while you're still sane and solvent.

Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest
features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try
not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work,
not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached.

+1.

Something people often underaprpeciate is that installed software affects performance a lot. Choose with care.


NT

 

[Robert Baer]

Jim Thompson wrote:

I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine
is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least
at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent
should I replace it with?

====================================

Computer Profile Summary
Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG)

Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM

Operating System
Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195)

Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64

128 kilobyte primary memory cache
1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz

BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004

Drives Memory Modules c,d
137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K
[CD-ROM drive]

3.5" format removeable media [Floppy
drive]

WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy

1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

...Jim Thompson

I see nothing wrong with that setup. Be advised that SP4 has been
available (was free when i got it ages ago, hopefully still available).
M$ (on disc) sez "For Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional,Windows
2000 Server and Windows 2000 Advanced Server."

Guess you know i have been using Win2K since SP2 came out; still use
i 90+ percent of time.
I use Win7 only for the few sites that "improved" their "user
experience", and note that not ONE THING has (visually) changed.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 03/08/2015 05:54, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:


If I was buying today price no
object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an
aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it.

Agreed. I haven't seen a bad Intel CPU in probably 15 years, while
I've lost count of the dead or erratic AMD CPU's that have I've had to
deal with. I would go with a 4th or 5th generation i7. The i7-4790k
is about $330 and burns about 45 watts, while the i7-5960x is $1,000
and burns 140 watts. That should make the decision easy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors

Another thing to experiment with is limiting the number of threads the
simulation code is allowed to use. Mine generates more heat and less
speed when allowed to use more than 6 threads in heavy computation. It
goes IO bandwidth limited after that even with the faster ram

A fast agile SSD for scratch files and
most frequently used programs is very worthwhile.

In general, an SSD is 3x to 5x faster than rotating memory for
everything. I'm partial to Samsung 850 EVO and Pro.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372
Most SSD drives have similar read speeds. However, the write speeds
is what makes the difference. There are benchmark tests all over the
internet. Don't overbuy on capacity as the prices of SSD drives are
still dropping and you can probably do better if you wait until you
need the space.

I have been with Samsung SSDs for a while but I'd still consider
Crucial. My requirements are for maximum speed on incompressible data. I
avoid the newest models for a few months. Been bitten by early
firmware/chipset issues once in the distant past.

If you are using it for scratch disk you can go even faster by making a
RAID0 array of matched SSDs and accepting doubling the risk of failure.

Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest
features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try
not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work,
not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached.

The gaming community make quite a good testbed since they want machines
that are fast, well specified and reliable enough to overclock. I get a
bit of teasing for having machines with daft names but performance has
been magnificent. PC companies I buy from have a tendency to go bust
after a while since they are usually offering too good value for money.

I don't overclock mine and I do add some silicone washers and sound
deadening foam here and there because I like my office quiet.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Martin Brown]

On 02/08/2015 17:16, Jim Thompson wrote:

I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine
is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least
at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent
should I replace it with?

====================================

Computer Profile Summary
Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG)

Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM

Operating System
Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195)

Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64

128 kilobyte primary memory cache
1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz

Any chance of running CPUZ on it so we know just how slow the thing
actually is and what step level and full name of CPU?

I suspect its peers are somewhere around this neck of the woods:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html

You can get nearly an order of magnitude faster if so. It is generally
worth upgrading when the speed gain is 3-5x what you have at present
assuming that the PC is regularly loaded to the hilt with work.

I generally work on the principle of upgrading a PC every five years
these days although I have my previous two both lying around for jobs
which require real printer ports, SCSI and other legacy features.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2015-08-02, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs

Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel
processor for number crunching?

"Xeon Phi" FAICT

Prolly not what you want.


--
\_(ツ)_

 

On Monday, 3 August 2015 11:38:32 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:

On 03/08/2015 05:54, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:44:32 +0100, Martin Brown
|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:


If I was buying today price no
object then maybe i7-5930K but realistically i7 4790K. I have an
aversion to AMD due to self immolation but two are better than it.

Agreed. I haven't seen a bad Intel CPU in probably 15 years, while
I've lost count of the dead or erratic AMD CPU's that have I've had to
deal with. I would go with a 4th or 5th generation i7. The i7-4790k
is about $330 and burns about 45 watts, while the i7-5960x is $1,000
and burns 140 watts. That should make the decision easy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors

Another thing to experiment with is limiting the number of threads the
simulation code is allowed to use. Mine generates more heat and less
speed when allowed to use more than 6 threads in heavy computation. It
goes IO bandwidth limited after that even with the faster ram

A fast agile SSD for scratch files and
most frequently used programs is very worthwhile.

In general, an SSD is 3x to 5x faster than rotating memory for
everything. I'm partial to Samsung 850 EVO and Pro.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147372
Most SSD drives have similar read speeds. However, the write speeds
is what makes the difference. There are benchmark tests all over the
internet. Don't overbuy on capacity as the prices of SSD drives are
still dropping and you can probably do better if you wait until you
need the space.

I have been with Samsung SSDs for a while but I'd still consider
Crucial. My requirements are for maximum speed on incompressible data. I
avoid the newest models for a few months. Been bitten by early
firmware/chipset issues once in the distant past.

If you are using it for scratch disk you can go even faster by making a
RAID0 array of matched SSDs and accepting doubling the risk of failure.


Most of my customer initially want the fastest speed and the latest
features. After those fail, they ask for reliability and uptime. Try
not to repeat this pattern and buy something that you know will work,
not that has the latest acronyms and buzzwords attached.

The gaming community make quite a good testbed since they want machines
that are fast, well specified and reliable enough to overclock. I get a
bit of teasing for having machines with daft names but performance has
been magnificent. PC companies I buy from have a tendency to go bust
after a while since they are usually offering too good value for money.

I don't overclock mine and I do add some silicone washers and sound
deadening foam here and there because I like my office quiet.

Cardboard is very good at deadening steel in pc cases


NT

 

[Piotr Wyderski]

Jim Thompson wrote:

Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel
processor for number crunching?

Xeon Phi.

Best regards, Piotr

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2015-08-02, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

Den søndag den 2. august 2015 kl. 21.22.59 UTC+2 skrev Jim Thompson:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:52:57 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:34:42 -0400, Martin Riddle
martin_ridd@verizon.net> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine
is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least
at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent
should I replace it with?

====================================

Computer Profile Summary
Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG)

Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM

Operating System
Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195)

Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64

128 kilobyte primary memory cache
1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz

BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004

Drives Memory Modules c,d
137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K
[CD-ROM drive]

3.5" format removeable media [Floppy
drive]

WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy

1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

...Jim Thompson

Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend)

The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching
Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have.
You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy

Cheers

Floppy is not an issue... I long ago copied all my 5.25" and 3.5"
stuff onto CD's fearing those drives would fail sooner or later.

What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile?

...Jim Thompson

And 64-bit versus 32-bit?

all the cpus are is 64 bit now, it just depends on the OS
you want 64 bit, maximum memory with 32bit is 4GB

That's not carved in stone. Linux (and some rare versions of
windows) can do more than 4G when running a 32 bit kernel.
although AFAIK they don't support more than 4G per application.

--
\_(ツ)_

 

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 5:24:39 PM UTC-4, dca...@krl.org wrote:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 3:59:57 PM UTC-4, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:


The CDs are probably kackered now.


NT


CD's are not a very reliable archival tool. You might look at updating your optical drive to a 25 gigabyte M disc drive.

http://www.mdisc.com/faq/

warning , I have not used a mdisc. And the media does not seem to be in stores.

Dan

Supposedly the brand matters a great deal. And if you're using DVDs, use DVR+R. Discussion here:

http://adterrasperaspera.com/blog/2006/10/30/how-to-choose-cddvd-archival-media/

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On 3 Aug 2015 12:17:35 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

On 2015-08-02, Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:
Den sřndag den 2. august 2015 kl. 21.22.59 UTC+2 skrev Jim Thompson:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:52:57 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:34:42 -0400, Martin Riddle
martin_ridd@verizon.net> wrote:

On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 09:16:51 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

I think it's time I upgraded my 'Spice' machine... my present machine
is as follows... no laughter please... I've successfully done at least
at least 20 chip designs on this machine. What modern equivalent
should I replace it with?

====================================

Computer Profile Summary
Computer Name:Analog3 (in ANALOG)

Profile Date:Wednesday, June 29, 2005 11:59:53 AM

Operating System
Windows 2000 Professional Service Pack3 (build 2195)

Processor a Main Circuit Board 2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64

128 kilobyte primary memory cache
1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz

BIOS: Phoenix Technologies, LTD 6.00PG 07/28/2004

Drives Memory Modules c,d
137.44 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
93.05 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

LITE-ON COMBO SOHC-5232K
[CD-ROM drive]

3.5" format removeable media [Floppy
drive]

WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) SMART Status: Healthy

1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

...Jim Thompson

Anything would be an upgrade. What is your budget? (willing to spend)

The Dell Workstations are pretty good with their number crunching
Xeons. But even the little NUC's will be faster than what you have.
You'll have to give up the floppy, and get a Lacie usb Floppy

Cheers

Floppy is not an issue... I long ago copied all my 5.25" and 3.5"
stuff onto CD's fearing those drives would fail sooner or later.

What does multi-core buy you? And how many are worthwhile?

...Jim Thompson

And 64-bit versus 32-bit?

all the cpus are is 64 bit now, it just depends on the OS
you want 64 bit, maximum memory with 32bit is 4GB

That's not carved in stone. Linux (and some rare versions of
windows) can do more than 4G when running a 32 bit kernel.
although AFAIK they don't support more than 4G per application.

PAE (Physical Address Extension) first implemented in Pentium Pro
potentially supports 36 physical address bits (64 GiB).

Segment registers are still used in 32 bit mode, each segmented
address is added to the proper segment base register, but
unfortunately it is then truncated to 32 bits before performing the
virtual to physical address translation.

A much better approach would have been omitting the virtual address
truncation and apply the segmented address + segment base directly to
virtual to physical address translation. This would have allowed full
4 GiB code, 4 GiB data etc. segments, thus making it easy to use quite
large memory mapped files without windowing.

The code segment protection bits could have been used to prevent data
execution, so there would not have been a need for a per page NX bits,
but unfortunately some OS designers did not think about it :-(.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 8/3/2015 12:40 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 19:05:15 -0700 (PDT), "dcaster@krl.org"
dcaster@krl.org> Gave us:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:48:42 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:


We backup design releases to CDs, which I store in the cave at home.
Some are 10 years old, and I occasionally have to retrieve one. So
far, it has always worked.



I have had CD's that were no longer 100 % readable.

Dan


Hard drives are cheap. Get an mSATA drive and USB drive enclosure and
every design directory you ever had can be fully backed up onto a device
which reads as fast as your HD subsystems do and will for a long time to
come.

Easy greasy Slap-it-in-and-go-soeasy.

Readonly backups are very comforting if you ever have a ransomware
infection.

I use DVD+Rs and have never had a serious problem with them.

Also nowadays I never attach any remote drive to my filesystem. Rsync
and git all the way. Inconvenient, but reduces the attack surface by a lot.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs



--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <ae52a0bb-cb59-4d31-9390-079a34c0c186@googlegroups.com>,
<"dcaster@krl.org"> wrote:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:48:42 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:


We backup design releases to CDs, which I store in the cave at home.
Some are 10 years old, and I occasionally have to retrieve one. So
far, it has always worked.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
lunatic fringe electronics

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

I have had CD's that were no longer 100 % readable.

I read a study in PC World or the like showing that CD lifetime varied
by media type and manufacturer. Don't recall the details, other than
there was one very good option.

Joe Gwinn

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 08/03/2015 10:26 AM, Joe Gwinn wrote:

In article <ae52a0bb-cb59-4d31-9390-079a34c0c186@googlegroups.com>,
"dcaster@krl.org"> wrote:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:48:42 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:


We backup design releases to CDs, which I store in the cave at home.
Some are 10 years old, and I occasionally have to retrieve one. So
far, it has always worked.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
lunatic fringe electronics

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

I have had CD's that were no longer 100 % readable.

I read a study in PC World or the like showing that CD lifetime varied
by media type and manufacturer. Don't recall the details, other than
there was one very good option.

Joe Gwinn

Taiyo Yuden. I use them exclusively.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On 3 Aug 2015 09:07:59 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> Gave us:

On 2015-08-02, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 13:27:14 -0400, Phil Hobbs

Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel
processor for number crunching?

"Xeon Phi" FAICT

Prolly not what you want.

The new i7 units with six main cores are more consumer level. A Xeon
usually requires a better than normal motherboard as well, so are
outside what most folks want to spend.

I have a socket 2001 i7-3930k on an EVGA X79 Dark mobo.

It keeps up even with the newer class CPUs.

Why that idiot continues to include a binary group in his posts when
most NSPs do not even carry them is beyond me.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 12:03:42 +0200, Piotr Wyderski
<peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

Living in seclusion ;-) for quite awhile... what's the best Intel
processor for number crunching?

Xeon Phi.

Best regards, Piotr

My first Spice machine was a 386 with 486 co-processor. Looks like
the Xeon Phi requires software specifically written for it ??

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 09:50:09 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> Gave us:

On 8/3/2015 12:40 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 19:05:15 -0700 (PDT), "dcaster@krl.org"
dcaster@krl.org> Gave us:

On Sunday, August 2, 2015 at 8:48:42 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:


We backup design releases to CDs, which I store in the cave at home.
Some are 10 years old, and I occasionally have to retrieve one. So
far, it has always worked.



I have had CD's that were no longer 100 % readable.

Dan


Hard drives are cheap. Get an mSATA drive and USB drive enclosure and
every design directory you ever had can be fully backed up onto a device
which reads as fast as your HD subsystems do and will for a long time to
come.

Easy greasy Slap-it-in-and-go-soeasy.

Readonly backups are very comforting if you ever have a ransomware
infection.

The boot up under a Linux live distro, and make the file system on the
mSATA ext4. Done.

I use DVD+Rs and have never had a serious problem with them.

They degrade. Period. That rules them out for me.

Also nowadays I never attach any remote drive to my filesystem.

You are talking about Windows vulnerabilities, not file system
vulnerabilities. Get a decent OS and your problems go away.

Rsync
and git all the way. Inconvenient, but reduces the attack surface by a lot.

Live boot discs mean ZERO vulnerability.