Desktop PCs - Do You Still Have Them?

[StockEngine]

Dunno if it's still worth reviving my old rig. i have a feeling it's the mobo that conked out, and that the i5 processor and RAM are still OK. Problem is i think DDR3's are on the way out already?

with our humid climate it could be contacts. reinstall those ramsticks several times. i hope they had heatsinks. bare memory chips dont really last long especially with overclocks. what are the symptoms? windows freezing or insta-bsods?

some ddr2s burnt out because some manufacturers thought they'd survive without heatsinks.

[WallyWest]

Dunno if it's still worth reviving my old rig. i have a feeling it's the mobo that conked out, and that the i5 processor and RAM are still OK. Problem is i think DDR3's are on the way out already?

If you're lucky, it could just be bloated capacitors.

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

[Jun aka Pekto]

It's got 4GB RAM. It's not great but it ain't the worst. The unresponsiveness is attributed to its use of a mechanical SATA HDD. Otherwise, it runs Win10 just fine. You just get to see a lot of the HDD LED while you wait.

Really, SSDs makes all the difference.

That's odd. My AMD FX-8350 and Phenom II X3 720 BE both have SATA hard drives. Apart from a longer boot up time, they're fine with Windows 10. I'm also using Seagate hard drives which aren't exactly quality hard drives. I do prevent certain applets and services from starting during boot up because I don't need them yet. Nothing new though. I've been doing that since Win 9x.

All the HDDs I use are 3.5" 7200 rpm drives. That's also been the norm for me since Win 9x. I don't use 5400 rpm or *gasp* 4200 rpm drives. Many laptops come with the latter.

[grss1982]

Dunno if it's still worth reviving my old rig. i have a feeling it's the mobo that conked out, and that the i5 processor and RAM are still OK. Problem is i think DDR3's are on the way out already?

DDR3 is quite cheap now in PH. It's actually a good idea to get them used nowadays. Nothing wrong really with using DDR3 and an older i5 system. Unless you're into AAA gaming or some other professional work. For DOTA 2 and CSGO DDR3 based systems still are viable. Heck most piso2x net cafes here in Cebu are still using 2nd or 3rd gen Socket 1155 systems with DDR3 or even older AMD Socket FM2 systems.

[oj88]

That's odd. My AMD FX-8350 and Phenom II X3 720 BE both have SATA hard drives. Apart from a longer boot up time, they're fine with Windows 10. I'm also using Seagate hard drives which aren't exactly quality hard drives. I do prevent certain applets and services from starting during boot up because I don't need them yet. Nothing new though. I've been doing that since Win 9x.

All the HDDs I use are 3.5" 7200 rpm drives. That's also been the norm for me since Win 9x. I don't use 5400 rpm or *gasp* 4200 rpm drives. Many laptops come with the latter.

Well, responsiveness is subjective. I have been accustomed to SSDs in the last 5 or so years so using any system with mechanical HDDs are bloody slow by comparison.

Needless to say, boot-up times and other disk-intensive tasks like opening/loading apps or files, and installing Windows Updates stands to benefit significantly when using SSDs, all else being equal.

[Jun aka Pekto]

DDR3 is quite cheap now in PH. It's actually a good idea to get them used nowadays. Nothing wrong really with using DDR3 and an older i5 system. Unless you're into AAA gaming or some other professional work. For DOTA 2 and CSGO DDR3 based systems still are viable. Heck most piso2x net cafes here in Cebu are still using 2nd or 3rd gen Socket 1155 systems with DDR3 or even older AMD Socket FM2 systems.

I'm playing around with my AMD FX-8350 (with 8GB DDR3) and it's not bad at all apart from the initial boot times. It's responsive especially once data is in the cache. It's pretty much the equivalent of an older i5.

That reminds me..... If I had a gigantic RAM disk, it would almost be like having an SSD. That's why to me, an SSD is like a RAM disk except the data don't get destroyed when the PC is powered off.

RAM, even older ones are much, much faster than any hard drive.

[Jun aka Pekto]

Well, responsiveness is subjective. I have been accustomed to SSDs in the last 5 or so years so using any system with mechanical HDDs are bloody slow by comparison.

Needless to say, boot-up times and other disk-intensive tasks like opening/loading apps or files, and installing Windows Updates stands to benefit significantly when using SSDs, all else being equal.

Oh, yeah. I don't want to go back to HDD except for archiving files. I have the older 2.5" SSD. But, I haven't tried M.2 yet.

[oj88]

I'm playing around with my AMD FX-8350 (with 8GB DDR3) and it's not bad at all apart from the initial boot times. It's responsive especially once data is in the cache. It's pretty much the equivalent of an older i5.

That reminds me..... If I had a gigantic RAM disk, it would almost be like having an SSD. That's why to me, an SSD is like a RAM disk except the data don't get destroyed when the PC is powered off.

RAM, even older ones are much, much faster than any hard drive.

Holy.... RAM disks were like a thing in the 80's and it gave us a glimpse into how fast a program would load straight from RAM. Played with it during the floppy disk era so the difference in load times were night and day. But then, it still uses up your RAM, which was a tiny 640KB in my clone PC-XT. Suffice to say, it was more of a feel-good thing than being practical.

The concept is still being used to this day but with faster memory, SRAM, and using complex algorithms to predict what to put in there for faster retrieval later. It's called cache memory (if that wasn't obvious already).

[badkuk]

I'm playing around with my AMD FX-8350 (with 8GB DDR3) and it's not bad at all apart from the initial boot times. It's responsive especially once data is in the cache. It's pretty much the equivalent of an older i5.

That reminds me..... If I had a gigantic RAM disk, it would almost be like having an SSD. That's why to me, an SSD is like a RAM disk except the data don't get destroyed when the PC is powered off.

RAM, even older ones are much, much faster than any hard drive.

i heard that although SSDs are much more reliable than HDDs, when they do conk out, the probability of recovery is slim to nil...something about one cell/chip going bad that takes out the whole drive.

On the other hand, i've had personal experience recovering data from near dying HDDs. dd and an electric fan are your best friends :D

[papi smith]

My laptop shuts down a few seconds after it powers up, is this still repairable?

[oj88]

i heard that although SSDs are much more reliable than HDDs, when they do conk out, the probability of recovery is slim to nil...something about one cell/chip going bad that takes out the whole drive.

On the other hand, i've had personal experience recovering data from near dying HDDs.

SSDs are still statistically more robust than a spindle-based HDD. It will also help if you use tools like Hard Disk Sentinel to determine the condition of your drives and to check if there's a trend that the drive is failing.

These are the drives on my media server... a total of 10 drives (1x SSD, 2x Seagate, and 7x WD RED). Highlighted is the Intel 180GB SSD which has been running for 2,059 days (5.6 years). The health has dropped down to 35% but is still stable.


I am planning to replace it. In fact, I already have a replacement 250GB Samsung EVO 860 SSD on standby. It's a task I would have to undertake during the Christmas vacation.

Anyway, having a backup somewhere is still a must. Storage is cheaper now. You can use USB drives or cloud storage for as long as your important files has a copy somewhere safe.

[JohnM]

Oh, yeah. I don't want to go back to HDD except for archiving files. I have the older 2.5" SSD. But, I haven't tried M.2 yet.

IMO M.2 only makes sense in laptops because most have a ready slot and you can keep the stock HDD for storage. It doesn't make much sense in desktops because you have lots of bays that can hold a bigger form factor. Price difference between form factors is negligible IIRC.

Sent from my SM-A605G using Tapatalk

[oj88]

^ There are PC builds that calls for tiny cases like all-in-one PCs. But as you've said, if price difference is small and if the board supports M.2, go for it. It also consumes less power (however negligible). Besides, less drives on the bays means less cables to route and in many ways, promotes better airflow. Also makes for a tidier build.

Freeing up the drive bay allows you to add a secondary drive for bulk storage.

[badkuk]

^ There are PC builds that calls for tiny cases like all-in-one PCs. But as you've said, if price difference is small and if the board supports M.2, go for it. It also consumes less power (however negligible). Besides, less drives on the bays means less cables to route and in many ways, promotes better airflow. Also makes for a tidier build.

Freeing up the drive bay allows you to add a secondary drive for bulk storage.

You can also use an M.2 for your boot/OS drive if you need all the SATA slots on your board.

[oj88]

You can also use an M.2 for your boot/OS drive if you need all the SATA slots on your board.

It goes without saying. That's exactly what it is for.... it's typically setup to be the system drive.

[Archerfish]

Holy.... RAM disks were like a thing in the 80's and it gave us a glimpse into how fast a program would load straight from RAM. Played with it during the floppy disk era so the difference in load times were night and day. But then, it still uses up your RAM, which was a tiny 640KB in my clone PC-XT. Suffice to say, it was more of a feel-good thing than being practical.

The concept is still being used to this day but with faster memory, SRAM, and using complex algorithms to predict what to put in there for faster retrieval later. It's called cache memory (if that wasn't obvious already).

I think I remember this with our 386 where you will have an "additional drive" aside from the 5.25" drive. With large capacity RAM that we have, why is this no longer implemented?

[JohnM]

I think I remember this with our 386 where you will have an "additional drive" aside from the 5.25" drive. With large capacity RAM that we have, why is this no longer implemented?

Intel's Optane is similar. It's still volatile but it functions as a cache drive which aims to speed up common processes.

There are also hybrid HDDs like Seagate's Firecuda that have an onboard SSD (not user controllable) which stores commonly used programs and aims to speed up load and reload times.

Sent from my SM-A605G using Tapatalk

[Walter]

It's got 4GB RAM. It's not great but it ain't the worst. The unresponsiveness is attributed to its use of a mechanical SATA HDD. Otherwise, it runs Win10 just fine. You just get to see a lot of the HDD LED while you wait. Really, SSDs makes all the difference.

Agree on the SSD but adding RAM would also help with Windows 10 ... DDR3s are quite cheap these days ... Added 8GB RAM to an i3 system with a 1GB HDD ... Performance was improved by a margin ... 4GB RAM will have your system swap pages in and out of the HDD ... The additional RAM will prevent it from doing that ... and you can open a lot of processes ... If I added an SSD, it would still be swapping pages in and out of the limited RAM ... Sure the SSD will make it boot faster but the added RAM makes it more usable when it's up and running ...

[WallyWest]

I think I remember this with our 386 where you will have an "additional drive" aside from the 5.25" drive. With large capacity RAM that we have, why is this no longer implemented?

I've tried it before. However, what happens is at shutdown, the ram drive must be copied to disk as an image and reloaded upon start up.

RAM Disks Explained: What They Are and Why You Probably Shouldn’t Use One

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

[WallyWest]

Agree on the SSD but adding RAM would also help with Windows 10 ... DDR3s are quite cheap these days ... Added 8GB RAM to a Core i3 system with a 1GB HDD ... Performance was improved by a margin ... 4GB RAM will have your system swap pages in and out of the HDD ... The additional RAM will prevent it from doing that ... and you can open a lot of processes ... If I added an SSD, it would still be swapping pages in and out of the limited RAM ... Sure the SSD will make it boot faster but the added RAM makes it more usable when it's up and running ...

I have 8GB DDR2 RAM (with about 256MB taken by the onboard graphics). I noticed that Windows would only use 2 to 3 GB of RAM under normal use like web browsing or office apps. The highest RAM utilization (around 7GB) I see is when I run Prime95 for torture testing. So, I'm no longer sure about Windows 10 benefitting that much from more RAM.

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk