Supermicro SC825TQ-700LPB Chassis with X9DAI Motherboard+complete build

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grebuloner said:
The internet is a bountiful place. I'll totally settle for a comparison review from a semi-competent tech website. You don't have to have one yourself.

I'd also like to express my condolences on how long you like to spend on booting up your systems. It's been a decade since I let a computer of mine take more than 1 minute to start. Thank you SSDs!
Click to expand...
I use spinners to boot some ESXi hosts - you're reading in 2.4GB sequentially to ram, and then doing ~nothing else~ with the drive. So... yeah, works fine for that :p SSD is faster, but I had spare old 2.5" 4k spinners that were sitting around as paperweights.
Zarathustra[H] said:
Agreed.

To be fair, some early "low cost" SSD's could be outperformed in certain sequential loads by hard drives.

I can't even remember the brands. I want to say they were first gen Toshiba SSD's maybe? Or were they Kingston? I can't remember.

Even some more modern SATA SSD's can struggle compared to the latest hard drives in some limited circumstances. I have a 250GB Samsung PM830 in my spare parts bin that came in a refurbed Dell Latitude I bought once that was an absolute dog performance wise, but even it just barely ties hard drives in sequential writes, and destroys them in reads, random writes and IOPS.

Also if you do heavy write workloads and don't have trim capability you can run into some cases where you are writing slower than hard drives.

But these are exceptions, not the norm, especially with modern hardware.

The slowest mass market SSD (I'm talking anything non-USB branded for the western market, not some noname made in china crap) you can buy today, yes even SATA ones will absolutely destroy the fastest hard drive you can buy in every workload. Sequential reads, sequential writes, random reads, random writes, IOPS, you name it. It's not a competition.
Click to expand...
There's a way to overload them, but it's not real-world nor applicable here.

There's a REASON everything is moving to all-flash, especially in the enterprise.

scharfshutze009 - why is it that Pure Storage, Dell (PowerStore, Unity, PowerMax), NetApp (FAS, E-Series), and HP (Primera and others) have all moved to all-flash if spinners are faster? If the biggest storage companies in the world are doing only all-flash now (minus a couple of outliers or unique solutions), why would it be slower? That's nonsensical.
 
Dan_D said:
No, you aren't. The only SSD you've tried by your own admission is one that is in an external USB enclosure. That drive will not perform well because of that. As for internal SATA connectors, it doesn't matter. Even with the constraints of SATA, any internal SSD will be faster than any mechanical drive. Even 15,000rpm SAS drives.
Click to expand...
Yes I am referring to how the internal SATA/SAS connector handled the SSD speeds because that's what my friend had when he showed me the benchmarks. I never mention an SSD in an external enclosure, so I don't know how you came up with that. I don't care if your comparing what I have to mSATA or m.2 either because I have only seen connectors for those on desktop motherboards and if servers have those those are only for boot drives as they can't hold much more than 1 TB or 2 TB, which isn't crap worth of storage capacity and would fill quickly resulting in drive failure not long after that.
 
kydsid said:
Is he really though?

Dude is trying to sell a bag of Oregano to Chech & Chong while claiming it's the best kush ever. That ain't a scammer. That's psychosis or drugs, lots and lots of drugs.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. He is bei g honest about hers he has (at least from as far as I can tell). He is just over hyping it and trying to play it off as it is worth much more than it is.

An educated buyer is going to look at the specs and have no interest that price. An uneducated buyer might kite I guess, but uneducated buyers don't usually buy enterprise computer hardware

It's a fairly knowledgeable potential customer base.
 
Dan_D said:
You are either lying or delusional. At the very least, you are completely and totally ignorant of how this stuff works and how a free market works.

NVMe SSD's are cheap. Yes, their cost per gigabyte is higher than mechanical drives but any drive you buy will vastly outperform even the best mechanical drives on earth.
Click to expand...

SSD's are not cheap because a 2 TB SSD costs about $600 and a 15.36 TB SSD from Seagate cost about $6000, but I can get a 16 TB Seagate Exos for about $600 or less and it is mechanical. Of course though you probably want proof, which I already showed you in an earlier post. The Server I'm selling includes eight 2 TB SAS 7200 RPM hard drives that were about $29 each, so explain to me how a $15 250 GB SSD is a better deal in terms of storage capacity and not speed because my sisters husband said the same thing to me when he got a good deal on a 5400 RPM IDE mechanical he got to how much I paid for a 15 GB 7200 RPM IDE mechanical and he said the same thing I am trying to make a point about being that some people might care more about storage capacity instead of speed.
Dan_D said:
Who cares? No one says you have to buy that drive, much less eight of them. 1TB NVMe drives are $100 or less.

You are missing the point. Used is used. Obsolete hardware is obsolete, regardless of its condition. You are selling hardware that's literally been available for a decade. You are trying to sell that hardware for 10x what it's worth.

Actually, that's not being nice. You are literally trying to rip people off by asking for about 10x what your hardware is worth.

Actually, I think what you are offering is worth less than a refurbished HP DL380 Gen8. The latter would have some kind of warranty on it and there is plenty of information out there to support the system should there be any issues with it. Also, what you get for that $509 is faster and more powerful than what you are selling As I pointed out earlier, the CPU's in these refurbs are far better than what you are offering.


True. Some very early SSD's had crap 4K writes and things like that. Also, mechanicals in RAID configurations can sometimes do better with sequential numbers compared to those earlier drives. However, modern NVMe drives absolutely demolish spinning disks of any class at just about everything.
Click to expand...
 
kydsid said:
Is he really though?

Dude is trying to sell a bag of Oregano to Chech & Chong while claiming it's the best kush ever. That ain't a scammer. That's psychosis or drugs, lots and lots of drugs.
Click to expand...
You can thank my idiot doctors for that because they think medication helps, but all it's made me do is get dizzy, vomit, get drowsy and sleep, have diaherria, and give me dry mouth because it's all poison and they just want to make money, but it's not illegal drugs though.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
SSD's are not cheap because a 2 TB SSD costs about $600 and a 15.36 TB SSD from Seagate cost about $6000, but I can get a 16 TB Seagate Exos for about $600 or less and it is mechanical. Of course though you probably want proof, which I already showed you in an earlier post. The Server I'm selling includes eight 2 TB SAS 7200 RPM hard drives that were about $29 each, so explain to me how a $15 250 GB SSD is a better deal in terms of storage capacity and not speed because my sisters husband said the same thing to me when he got a good deal on a 5400 RPM IDE mechanical he got to how much I paid for a 15 GB 7200 RPM IDE mechanical and he said the same thing I am trying to make a point about being that some people might care more about storage capacity instead of speed.
Click to expand...
You're... way, way, super wrong about the price of a 2TB SSD.
~$135 for 2TB, all day. They go cheaper pretty often, too.
https://www.newegg.com/crucial-mx500-2tb/p/N82E16820156175?Item=N82E16820156175
 
Eulogy said:
I think my favorite thing about this thread is, pretty much every week that it lasts, the system in question becomes even more worthless. It's not long before it just has to end up in a recycling bin or OP has to pay someone to take it away.
Click to expand...
We reached that point awhile ago, but despite our efforts he isn't seeing that.
 
Grebuloner said:
Some can't believe how stubborn you are about this.

Still, put up or shut up: Show us the benchmarks that back up your claims that mechanical drives are faster than SSDs. And I'm not talking about those USB flash drives, either.
Click to expand...
I can't show you pictures from my friends computer showing you the benchmarks he showed me of his SATA SSD to his 750 GB SATA hard drives because that was years ago and as I pointed out some people may not care about speed and care more about storage capacity because you can't honestly tell me that a 250 GB SSD for $15 is a better deal than eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives for $29 each in terms of storage capacity. Also you can't convince me that a 2 TB SSD for about $600 or a 15.36 TB for about $6000 is a better value than a 16 TB 7200 RPM Seagate Exos SATA mechanical hard drive in terms of storage capacity either. It's just like I said about my sister former husband when he said he got a really good deal on a 60 GB 5400 RPM IDE hard drive and we compared it to the 15 GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 IDE mechanical hard drive that I had, which he pointed out that some people might care more about storage capacity and not speed as that is who I'm trying to appeal to.

If you remember correctly I had only four 2 TB SSHD's in this server for the listing originally and I was asking over $4000 buy it now or best offer with the same 10 percent to 25 percent off best offer between those percentages. I didn't like that configuration because I could afford to buy four more 2 TB SSHD's and the configuration couldn't do RAID 60 regardless if Dan_D says that people don't use it as they use ZFS instead, which if I did include four more 2 TB SSHD's you better believe I would be charging more because it costs me more to include better hardware. Of course if you wanted to complain even more I'm sure you would have still complained if I would have included eight 4 TB SSHD's, but I couldn't and didn't because it was over the limit on the credit card I used at the time and yes I paid it off with a debt management company called Apprisen.
 
kydsid said:
That's psychosis or drugs, lots and lots of drugs.
Click to expand...
scharfshutze009 said:
You can thank my idiot doctors for that because they think medication helps, but all it's made me do is get dizzy, vomit, get drowsy and sleep, have diaherria, and give me dry mouth because it's all poison and they just want to make money, but it's not illegal drugs though.
Click to expand...
kydsid I think we got our answer.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
I can't show you pictures from my friends computer showing you the benchmarks he showed me of his SATA SSD to his 750 GB SATA hard drives because that was years ago and as I pointed out some people may not care about speed and care more about storage capacity because you can't honestly tell me that a 250 GB SSD for $15 is a better deal than eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives for $29 each in terms of storage capacity. Also you can't convince me that a 2 TB SSD for about $600 or a 15.36 TB for about $6000 is a better value than a 16 TB 7200 RPM Seagate Exos SATA mechanical hard drive in terms of storage capacity either. It's just like I said about my sister former husband when he said he got a really good deal on a 60 GB 5400 RPM IDE hard drive and we compared it to the 15 GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 IDE mechanical hard drive that I had, which he pointed out that some people might care more about storage capacity and not speed as that is who I'm trying to appeal to.

If you remember correctly I had only four 2 TB SSHD's in this server for the listing originally and I was asking over $4000 buy it now or best offer with the same 10 percent to 25 percent off best offer between those percentages. I didn't like that configuration because I could afford to buy four more 2 TB SSHD's and the configuration couldn't do RAID 60 regardless if Dan_D says that people don't use it as they use ZFS instead, which if I did include four more 2 TB SSHD's you better believe I would be charging more because it costs me more to include better hardware. Of course if you wanted to complain even more I'm sure you would have still complained if I would have included eight 4 TB SSHD's, but I couldn't and didn't because it was over the limit on the credit card I used at the time and yes I paid it off with a debt management company called Apprisen.
Click to expand...
You made a claim, you said you had the benchmarks to prove it and now you're saying you don't. You're also saying years ago. The first SSDs weren't much faster than HDDs at the time (basing on your 750GB drive mention. They stopped making those ages ago). SSDs of 2011 were already hitting 550MB/s.

A single 16TB spinner will cost $300 or less and perform just as well as your array. If we want storage capacity, yes, most of us go mechanical. My server is loaded with TBs of slow hard drives because capacity is more important than speed, but also has SSDs for booting and programs and needed high speed data. You have made the assertion that they're no good at all, which is simply untrue. I would have absolutely complained if you added 4TB SSHDs because it's just more overpriced unnecessary garbage you're adding to a pile of crap that still won't sell. It's like putting an air freshener in a rusted out car you can't get anyone to buy and saying "hey, look at it now, it's so worth my price!"
 
scharfshutze009 said:
I can't show you pictures from my friends computer showing you the benchmarks he showed me of his SATA SSD to his 750 GB SATA hard drives because that was years ago and as I pointed out some people may not care about speed and care more about storage capacity because you can't honestly tell me that a 250 GB SSD for $15 is a better deal than eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives for $29 each in terms of storage capacity.
Click to expand...
You are missing the point. Even if you need a lot of capacity, you still buy SSD's for your OS and programs. You only use mechanical drives for archive data, long term storage or for whatever you need the greater capacity for. You use mechanical drives as little as possible. Many of us have mechanical drives in our machines including me. I wouldn't dare run my OS, games or any professional applications from one.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
Yes I am referring to how the internal SATA/SAS connector handled the SSD speeds because that's what my friend had when he showed me the benchmarks.
Click to expand...
He was wrong, old, or did it wrong.
scharfshutze009 said:
I never mention an SSD in an external enclosure, so I don't know how you came up with that. I don't care if your comparing what I have to mSATA or m.2 either because I have only seen connectors for those on desktop motherboards and if servers have those those are only for boot drives as they can't hold much more than 1 TB or 2 TB, which isn't crap worth of storage capacity and would fill quickly resulting in drive failure not long after that.
Click to expand...
Wrong, but also .... wrong. Do servers use M2? Just as boot drives - they tend to use U.2, but it's the same damned drive, just in a different connector (NVMe). Even then there are larger M.2 drives available if needed. But even then, they include either U.2 Connectors or breakouts for them.
scharfshutze009 said:
SSD's are not cheap because a 2 TB SSD costs about $600 and a 15.36 TB SSD from Seagate cost about $6000, but I can get a 16 TB Seagate Exos for about $600 or less and it is mechanical. Of course though you probably want proof, which I already showed you in an earlier post. The Server I'm selling includes eight 2 TB SAS 7200 RPM hard drives that were about $29 each, so explain to me how a $15 250 GB SSD is a better deal in terms of storage capacity and not speed because my sisters husband said the same thing to me when he got a good deal on a 5400 RPM IDE mechanical he got to how much I paid for a 15 GB 7200 RPM IDE mechanical and he said the same thing I am trying to make a point about being that some people might care more about storage capacity instead of speed.
Click to expand...
You're looking in the wrong places as someone else pointed out.

As I pointed out prior - capacity is not the only metric. Speed is drastically different between them.

As for your question -

$15 / 100k IOPS = $.000015 per IOP.

$29 / 104 IOPS = ~28c per IOP. That's the measure I care about most of the time. Yours is orders of magnitude more expensive, thanks! Capacity is cheap, performance is king.
scharfshutze009 said:
I can't show you pictures from my friends computer showing you the benchmarks he showed me of his SATA SSD to his 750 GB SATA hard drives because that was years ago
Click to expand...
So not relevant.
scharfshutze009 said:
and as I pointed out some people may not care about speed and care more about storage capacity
Click to expand...
Some do, some don't. But capacity is CHEAP. Usable capacity is expensive. Yours is cheap because it's just capacity.
scharfshutze009 said:
because you can't honestly tell me that a 250 GB SSD for $15 is a better deal than eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives for $29 each in terms of storage capacity.
Click to expand...
I have a pile of 8T drives sitting here. I got them for free.
scharfshutze009 said:
Also you can't convince me that a 2 TB SSD for about $600 or a 15.36 TB for about $6000 is a better value than a 16 TB 7200 RPM Seagate Exos SATA mechanical hard drive in terms of storage capacity either.
Click to expand...
Sure it is. 2T drive and 15.36 drive are usable - the 16T drive isn't. Unless we're building for archive storage - speed is king.
scharfshutze009 said:
It's just like I said about my sister former husband when he said he got a really good deal on a 60 GB 5400 RPM IDE hard drive and we compared it to the 15 GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 IDE mechanical hard drive that I had, which he pointed out that some people might care more about storage capacity and not speed as that is who I'm trying to appeal to.
Click to expand...
2T drives are almost worthless. Even for me, and I use the 2.5" ones like candy.
scharfshutze009 said:
If you remember correctly I had only four 2 TB SSHD's in this server for the listing originally and I was asking over $4000 buy it now or best offer with the same 10 percent to 25 percent off best offer between those percentages.
Click to expand...
Pointless drives those. Price still nuts.
scharfshutze009 said:
I didn't like that configuration because I could afford to buy four more 2 TB SSHD's and the configuration couldn't do RAID 60 regardless
Click to expand...
No one uses RAID 60.
scharfshutze009 said:
if Dan_D says that people don't use it as they use ZFS instead,
Click to expand...
yup.
scharfshutze009 said:
which if I did include four more 2 TB SSHD's you better believe I would be charging more because it costs me more to include better hardware.
Click to expand...
...
scharfshutze009 said:
Of course if you wanted to complain even more I'm sure you would have still complained if I would have included eight 4 TB SSHD's, but I couldn't and didn't because it was over the limit on the credit card I used at the time and yes I paid it off with a debt management company called Apprisen.
Click to expand...
Someone would have offered to buy the drives then. Hell, I offered to buy the system years ago for what it was worth then - now? ehhhhh. I guess it could replace the last insanely old TORBox I have, but... meh?
Dan_D said:
You are missing the point. Even if you need a lot of capacity, you still buy SSD's for your OS and programs. You only use mechanical drives for archive data, long term storage or for whatever you need the greater capacity for. You use mechanical drives as little as possible. Many of us have mechanical drives in our machines including me. I wouldn't dare run my OS, games or any professional applications from one.
Click to expand...
Yup. Or in tiered solutions, like this:

1665535856481.png


That's 3x 1.8T Optane drives fronting 5x3.84T 7200 RPM NLSAS drives as cache. That's a usable config on a storage server I have here at home. THAT is a usable way to provide storage from capacity. The NLSAS drives are worthless - the Optane drives are... not worthless :D
 
Eulogy said:
You're... way, way, super wrong about the price of a 2TB SSD.
~$135 for 2TB, all day. They go cheaper pretty often, too.
https://www.newegg.com/crucial-mx500-2tb/p/N82E16820156175?Item=N82E16820156175
Click to expand...
Yeah an I still paid only $29 for eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives, but you expect me to put 2 TB SSD's in the server I'm selling just to please you and may I remind you that I would also have to buy 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch drive adapters that might be inexpensive except I would still charge more for the items for sale due to it having more expensive SSD's and the 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch drive adapters since you can't live without SSD's or can you.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
Yeah an I still paid only $29 for eight 2 TB 7200 RPM SAS mechanical hard drives, but you expect me to put 2 TB SSD's in the server I'm selling just to please you and may I remind you that I would also have to buy 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch drive adapters that might be inexpensive except I would still charge more for the items for sale due to it having more expensive SSD's and the 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch drive adapters since you can't live without SSD's or can you.
Click to expand...
I mean, you can keep raising your price if you want to, but, you already can't sell it so that seems like a patently stupid idea to me. Folks with an IQ above room temperature lower the price of things until they sell.
 
lopoetve said:
He was wrong, old, or did it wrong.

Wrong, but also .... wrong. Do servers use M2? Just as boot drives - they tend to use U.2, but it's the same damned drive, just in a different connector (NVMe). Even then there are larger M.2 drives available if needed. But even then, they include either U.2 Connectors or breakouts for them.

You're looking in the wrong places as someone else pointed out.

As I pointed out prior - capacity is not the only metric. Speed is drastically different between them.

As for your question -

$15 / 100k IOPS = $.000015 per IOP.

$29 / 104 IOPS = ~28c per IOP. That's the measure I care about most of the time. Yours is orders of magnitude more expensive, thanks! Capacity is cheap, performance is king.

So not relevant.

Some do, some don't. But capacity is CHEAP. Usable capacity is expensive. Yours is cheap because it's just capacity.

I have a pile of 8T drives sitting here. I got them for free.
Click to expand...

Good for you I don't get my stuff for free because I didn't work for an I.T. company that gives away free hardware that good. I have to actually pay for it and I don't get free hand outs on expensive 8 TB SSD's or HDD's whatever you meant because it's hard to tell.
lopoetve said:
Sure it is. 2T drive and 15.36 drive are usable - the 16T drive isn't. Unless we're building for archive storage - speed is king.

2T drives are almost worthless. Even for me, and I use the 2.5" ones like candy.

Pointless drives those. Price still nuts.

No one uses RAID 60.

yup.

...

Someone would have offered to buy the drives then. Hell, I offered to buy the system years ago for what it was worth then - now? ehhhhh. I guess it could replace the last insanely old TORBox I have, but... meh?

Yup. Or in tiered solutions, like this:

View attachment 517686

That's 3x 1.8T Optane drives fronting 5x3.84T 7200 RPM NLSAS drives as cache. That's a usable config on a storage server I have here at home. THAT is a usable way to provide storage from capacity. The NLSAS drives are worthless - the Optane drives are... not worthless :D
Click to expand...
 
scharfshutze009 said:
I couldn't and didn't because it was over the limit on the credit card I used at the time and yes I paid it off with a debt management company called Apprisen.
Click to expand...
Wow, I missed this buried nugget. So you messed around, got yourself F'd by making a horrible financial decision, and you're trying to recoup from that years later. I'm sorry man. Leave that bad decision in the past. You didn't pay this off afterall, you settled for likely pennies on the dollar owed. No one's going to buy this at your current price. No one's going to buy it "25% off". No one's going to buy it 75% off.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
Good for you I don't get my stuff for free because I didn't work for an I.T. company that gives away free hardware that good. I have to actually pay for it and I don't get free hand outs on expensive 8 TB SSD's or HDD's whatever you meant because it's hard to tell.
Click to expand...
I've offered a few times to help teach people here, including you, and even arranged interviews for a couple dozen at the places I've been in the past. You have to show a willingness to learn and time to dig in.
 
GoldenTiger said:
May I post the pm you sent me regarding my powerball and megamillions jackpot winnings? P. S. I still want to buy your stuff. Don't leave me hanging!
Click to expand...
No If you really want to buy my stuff you'll keep our conversation private. I might have made a few good points about what you can do with the items I'm selling though or at least I hope so, but don't post it here. If you seriously won the powerball and megamillions jackpot winnings I'd have no problem selling these items to you if you seriously want them too, but I hope you don't expect an insanely low price because there is still plenty that you can still do with this hardware and upgrading to a non-proprietary Xeon Scalable motherboard along with everything else you'll need should be no problem if you want to go that route. Thanks either way though if you're serious.
 
scharfshutze009 said:
No If you really want to buy my stuff you'll keep our conversation private. I might have made a few good points about what you can do with the items I'm selling though or at least I hope so, but don't post it here. If you seriously won the powerball and megamillions jackpot winnings I'd have no problem selling these items to you if you seriously want them too, but I hope you don't expect an insanely low price because there is still plenty that you can still do with this hardware and upgrading to a non-proprietary Xeon Scalable motherboard along with everything else you'll need should be no problem if you want to go that route. Thanks either way though if you're serious.
Click to expand...
He isn't.
 
Priller said:
scharfshutze009 Over 2 years later and you still cant sell your stuff. Ever think maybe it's you?

Or are you incapable of holding yourself accountable and realizing your price was trash 2 years ago, let alone now.
Click to expand...
4 years. Same price, same discount. This isn't his first legendary go round.
 
Priller said:
scharfshutze009 Over 2 years later and you still cant sell your stuff. Ever think maybe it's you?

Or are you incapable of holding yourself accountable and realizing your price was trash 2 years ago, let alone now.
Click to expand...
Don't you know? Computers are like wine and get better over time, especially if you keep them powered off and sitting without being used in a cool basement.
It's just unfortunate that the OP is selling boxed wine that was left open on a porch in Alabama, and even hanging a "free" sign on it now will probably not get movement :D
 
scharfshutze009 said:
I might have made a few good points about what you can do with the items I'm selling though or at least I hope so, but don't post it here. If you seriously won the powerball and megamillions jackpot winnings I'd have no problem selling these items to you if you seriously want them too, but I hope you don't expect an insanely low price because there is still plenty that you can still do with this hardware and upgrading to a non-proprietary Xeon Scalable motherboard along with everything else you'll need should be no problem if you want to go that route. Thanks either way though if you're serious.
Click to expand...
there is almost nothing that hardware can do that can’t be done cheaper, lower power, or faster, all at the same time. It’s outdated and obsolete.
 
lopoetve said:
there is almost nothing that hardware can do that can’t be done cheaper, lower power, or faster, all at the same time. It’s outdated and obsolete.
Click to expand...

I wonder if a Ryzen CPU on one of those Asrock Rack boards would not only be cheaper, faster ST, probably close on MT, and all while using less power.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Indeed, it would be much faster.

Still not a fan of running consumer hardware (even in an Asrock Rack board) as a server though.
Click to expand...
Not for anything real, but for testing or learning something (this is all long last gray market dates) it’ll get the job done just fine. 1st gen Zen will run anything current. Ivy and Sandy won’t anymore.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Indeed, it would be much faster.

Still not a fan of running consumer hardware (even in an Asrock Rack board) as a server though.
Click to expand...

Ryzen does support Unbuffered ECC provided the bios allows it but how much of a difference that makes verses RDIMMs or LRDIMMs I have no idea.
 
Priller said:
Ryzen does support Unbuffered ECC provided the bios allows it but how much of a difference that makes verses RDIMMs or LRDIMMs I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Mostly capacities for RDIMM - can’t get high capacity unbuffered ram. LR tends to be extremely high capacity
 
lopoetve said:
Not for anything real, but for testing or learning something (this is all long last gray market dates) it’ll get the job done just fine. 1st gen Zen will run anything current. Ivy and Sandy won’t anymore.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, what have you found you can't run in Sandy or Ivy?

Or are you talking about stuff for which hardware bugs concern you?
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm curious, what have you found you can't run in Sandy or Ivy?

Or are you talking about stuff for which hardware bugs concern you?
Click to expand...
The enterprise virtualization platform (Vmware) just dropped support for it, and I believe windows server will be soon for the rolling release - too many hardware mitigations required, and too old. No reason to keep it around and keep shipping some of those microcode updates.
 
lopoetve said:
The enterprise virtualization platform (Vmware) just dropped support for it, and I believe windows server will be soon for the rolling release - too many hardware mitigations required, and too old. No reason to keep it around and keep shipping some of those microcode updates.
Click to expand...
Ah,

Right, I'm still getting used to this new era of CPU's and platforms getting support end dates.

It's so weird to me after having gotten used to them being supported indefinitely and you just upgrading when they got too slow for your needs.

I'm a Linux/KVM/LXC guy, so I guess I won't have any issues nay time soon (unless I want to run Windows guests) but I am still shopping around for upgrades from my old Ivy E5-2650v2's. Performance wise they still do everything I need them to, but they do use a lot of power, and while my workloads aren't Meltdown/Spectre vulnerable, I'd still like to get rid of that problem.

Would be fun to go AMD this time around, so I've been eye-balling lower end 16 core Milan chips...

Would have upgraded years ago if I didn't have to re-buy all the RAM. That's why I stuck at Ivy. Last gen that took DDR3...
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
Ah,

Right, I'm still getting used to this new era of CPU's and platforms getting support end dates.

It's so weird to me after having gotten used to them being supported indefinitely and you just upgrading when they got too slow for your needs.
Click to expand...
Yep. It’s odd but with the number of required mitigations, especially in virtualization environments, they’re getting dropped fast now (they get really slow with all those turned on, and if you’re exposing at all to the web…). Plus power consumption levels have changed so much that they’re just not worth it. Especially with all the broadwell and later dropping.
Zarathustra[H] said:
I'm a Linux/KVM/LXC guy, so I guess I won't have any issues nay time soon (unless I want to run Windows guests) but I am still shopping around for upgrades from my old Ivy E5-2650v2's. Performance wise they still do everything I need them to, but they do use a lot of power, and while my workloads aren't Meltdown/Spectre vulnerable, I'd still like to get rid of that problem.
Click to expand...
Bingo. I’ve got a couple of 2690V3 if you want them - just the procs. They’ve been sitting in a static bag for two years now.
Zarathustra[H] said:
Would be fun to go AMD this time around, so I've been eye-balling lower end 16 core Milan chips...
Click to expand...
Avoid anything pre-Rome. Can’t remember where Milan fell into that.

Whacky performance issues at times. Early Epyc was not good - although the low core counts didn’t have most of the issues.
Zarathustra[H] said:
Would have upgraded years ago if I didn't have to re-buy all the RAM. That's why I stuck at Ivy. Last gen that took DDR3...
Click to expand...
I have some piles of DDR4 I’ll sell you cheap. How much do you need?

Like literal PILES.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top