Giganizer300PRO

Interesting. I'm assuming software RAID would work over PCIe...? Is software RAID really as effective as controller RAID? What I mean is; will it be nearly the same in this scenario (8 drives, speeds from 54 to 77 MB/s, hobby project for infrequently used storage) or are there any drawbacks, etc. Is it as smooth as having a RAID card? I also found some port multiplier cards. I found this a lot at low price points. I converts 1 SATA port to 5 SATA ports. It supports FIS-based switching, so could I take this and connect all 8 drives to the mother board, 5 on the PM and 3 directly to the MB and use the motherboard's integrated Intel RAID or software RAID with the drives? I read that a PM is transparent to the drive, but the host knows of the multiple drives and with FIS-based switching I could output to all the drives at once. The controller in question is SATA 2, so does that mean each of the 5 drives connected to it could do up to 60 MB/s or do the real world speeds vary?

I want to hook up 8 drives to reach a reasonable capacity and higher speeds. There's no way for me to add 8 drives to my system without adding some other equipment/component.

I only have 4 SATA ports free on the motherboard. Even if I wanted to test just 4 drives, I'd have to run out and buy SATA cables.

Thank you for your help. I've looked at some used RAID cards. Is there anything that I need to watch out for or is it more or less a matter of does it have the necessary ports? Some of the cards I found have SAS SFF-8087 ports. Is there a relevant difference between the 2 ports (I didn't see one)? Is there anything I should watch out for with other SAS connectors? From the cards I found, this one looks very promising: IBM ServeRAID M5015 LSI 9260-8i I also found some other ones: LSI L3-25121-79D Lsi L3-01144-01D LSI SAS 9210-8i LSI L3-01144-10A 8708EM2 Is this the right direction? I also found an Intel RAID card (INTEL SRCS28X). This thing has SATA ports and not SAS (I think). Would this also work?

Wow. 200W on full or at least semi full (80-100%) load on both? I knew not to take power calculators too seriously, but that's a big difference. I didn't think it could be that far off. I guess I'll just test and see if it boots. Maybe I'll get some kind of a meter to see the actual load.

I have a Corsair CX500M (see full build in spoiler). I'm currently running 3 1080p monitors (2x 60Hz, 1x 75Hz). I have 2x 120mm fans on the CPU cooler and 3 140mm fans in the case. The CPU is overclocked at 4.5GHz on 1.216V max (both variable, adjust to load). I overclock my GPU as well with the power limit maxed out at 120% and core voltage at +25 mV. I'm looking to add 8 hard drives as well as a PCIe RAID card to my system. I used some load calculators and the extra drives add almost 100W to the load consumption. These drives would be in a RAID array for secondary storage for rarely used files. Here are the drives (total 11, would only be adding 8 of these): - 2x WD1600AAJS - 7x ST3160812AS  - 1x ST3160815AS - 1x WD1600AAJS My question is, can I get away with adding all these drives and the RAID card to my system without changing the PSU? When the CPU and GPU would be under load (gaming), the drives would most likely not be in use (if that's what it took, I'd make sure). How much over PSU's rating can I go and still boot and how much when under load? Would not stressing the drives at the same time as the CPU and GPU help with the load on the PSU? Would it help if I got rid of one monitor or some fans?

All the EK 1070 (except for the Asus RGB) and GTX Founders Edition blocks seem to be compatible. The card listed in there is the "Inno3D INNO3D GeForce GTX 1070 Ti X2" (lacks the V2 at the end), but it seems like this should be pretty much the same thing. Maybe check to make sure before ordering. Store link: EKWB

I was talking about a dedicated GPU. Should've been more clear. Integrated GPUs aren't exactly the same as dedicated GPUs, since they get their memory from the system RAM. Apart from the Ryzen series, integrated GPU's can be taken pretty much for granted in the consumer market these days. And even then, we have the Ryzen APUs.

If it's really only web surfing, then no. You don't need a GPU for web surfing, even if making a beefy computer. Just get a decent CPU and plenty of RAM. If there are some other tasks/uses you think you might need a GPU for, then it depends on what those are. Sometimes integrated graphics on something like an Intel can get you pretty far.

If you want to hit 240 fps on 1080p with all on low, I wouldn't upgrade at all. I'm assuming the games you play are more esports like and not very demanding. But if you were to upgrade, in your case probably go for a 1080ti get it for cheap (used or something) and save some money, since it sounds like the games you play are esports or low demanding.

This only works if you enter a key and OEM keys will not work on this site. If you need to download without entering a product key first, you will need a third party tool or website. I found this thing with a quick search, but I've never used it before.

Thank you all for your help so far. I have now checked all the drives. They're not actually all from 2010, some are also from 2008, but most are from 2007. There's 11 of them, all 160 GB as follows: - 2x WD1600AAJS (2010) - 7x ST3160812AS (2007) - 1x ST3160815AS - 1x WD1600AAJS (2008) They're all SATA 2, 7200 RPM with 8 MB of buffer. They all have listed internal data rates/transfer rates at 100 MB/s. That should be their max speed (maybe less in a real world scenario and not the same for both reads and writes), right? My question is, how can I expect these speeds to stack up in a RAID 0 or a RAID 10 configuration. In RAID 0, are the real world speeds of the array actually n (number of drives) times the real world speed of an individual drive, assuming all drives can perform identically? Or, for example, let's say I took 8 drives and put them in RAID 10, would the performance of the array be 4 times as fast as a single RAID 1 pair of drives (so if one RAID 1 pair could read at 100 MB/s, could the entire RAID 10 array read at 400 MB/s)? Or are there drop offs? I've checked my computer and my motherboard (MSI Z97-G45) supports RAID 0, 1, 5 and 10. It has 6 SATA 3 ports, 4 of which are available. I can fit 9 more drives in my case. It's here that I obviously run in to an issue. How can I connect more than 4 drives to my motherboard? I'm trying to get away with this as cheap as possible. Maybe I could get some "cards" or something that has SATA 3 on one end and multiple SATA 2s on the other? I've looked a bit in to this and if I understand correctly, depending on the configuration of such a thing, I might not be able to communicate with all of the drives at once (which would impact performance of the RAID array). Another option might be a PCIe SATA card. In that case, would I have any trouble setting up drives connected to that PCIe card and drives connected directly to the motherboard SATA in the same RAID array? What could I do to keep as much performance as possible (wouldn't want to bottleneck or slow down the array, because the whole point of this is to get these old drives to work a bit faster)? Are there any other areas or components I need to check or that could be affected by having this array in the system. Also in terms of reliability, I might do RAID 10. In any case, this would server as some extra dump storage for stuff I would rather keep, but would otherwise delete if I was forced to free up storage space. Even if the drives start dying in a couple of months or a year, that's totally fine. A part of why I want to do this is also to see how it works. That's why I don't want to spend too much to get this set up.

If I understand correctly, you have the RAM already purchased. If so don't worry too much about it. If you're still choosing, go for something faster. 2400 is quite slow even for a budget build. If you can, get faster, if you already have it it's fine. Unless there's a specific reason for the NVMe drive, I would recommend dropping it out of the build completely. Go SATA and HDD for extra storage (if you need it). With the money you save you can double down on SATA SSD(s) or put it towards a monitor or just keep it, whatever you want. Most everyday users don't need NVMe, but it's a personal preference thing. As far as the M.2 heatsink goes there isn't really a reason to worry unless the PC is in an abnormally warm environment or there's something in the computer that's causing it to heat up more than usual (but still, it should be pretty much fine unless there's a heat gun aimed at it). If you want to know more or make sure, I'd suggest looking up the recommended and maximum operating temperatures. As far as the monitor goes, I wouldn't recommend shipping it form a different country. You should buy it locally and eat up the added costs. There's just too much risk of it breaking in transport or arriving with something not working properly. And if there's a problem with the panel, the repairs are usually almost equal to buying a new one. You don't want to be shipping it back if it's DOA either. I'm not sure how things are over there, but where I live monitors do have an added cost, sometimes quite extreme. Unfortunately that's just how it is and gambling with shipping such a big product from somewhere else is not worth it, especially since with the shipping and import fees paid, you'll in most cases pay about as much as you would if you bought locally.

The platform you have picked here is totally fine. The only thing was the price. If you need a small form factor that's ok. If your case supports micro ATX boards, you'd probably be better with one of those. I can see why you're concerned with quality control. If you still want to save some of the money, you can get a bit more expensive mATX board, maybe something with good reviews or from a quality product line. In an ideal scenario, you'd want your RAM to be at least 3000MHz. With a value build you can definitely go lower. Since you already have the 2400MHz RAM purchased you shouldn't worry too much about it now and just stick with that (if you want more than 8 GB get another identical kit). If you have a GTX 1080 and a R5 2600, you might want to invest in a better monitor as well. You could say a GPU is only as good as the monitor it outputs to and with a 1080p 60Hz you are very limited. I would recommend higher resolution or refresh rate, maybe both - depending on the budget. If I understand correctly, you're getting a 1TB WD Black NVMe drive? Where did you find it run hot? Putting heatsinks on M.2 drives is generally a bad idea, as it will cool the drive's controllers, which prefer to get a bit hot thus degrading them (see this for more info). Also, is there a particular reason why you need a 1TB NVMe drive? In most consumer systems it's better to go for SATA SSDs over NVMe to save money, because NVMe doesn't offer much of a performance increase in real world scenarios (for example you will boot faster, but the difference in loading most games will be minimal or non existent). If you have any other questions, please link the entire build if possible.

Do you need an ITX board? If not, I would recommend a standard ATX or microATX board, because it will make things a lot cheaper. Like @fasauceome said, that is quite expensive for an AM4 board, at least for B450. Here's a list of B450 boards, sorted by price. Don't just go for the cheapest ones, go thru a few of them that fit your budget and find something you like. Then make sure it's compatible and has everything you need. There are Biostar boards in there, so maybe don't pick one of those unless you really have to (not that there's anything wrong with them, I just feel safer when picking one of the other consumer manufacturers, because Biostar is mostly server gear).

The most ideal would probably be a B450 chipset. X470 would also work, but I can't think of a reason to have it in a R5 PC. B350 or X370 would also work, but they're older and they're made for the Ryzen 1000 series, not Ryzen 2000, so not ideal. With any 300 series chipset you would probably need to update the BIOS to use a Ryzen 2000 series CPU.

1: In theory, using more monitors will always affect your GPU performance. But it shouldn't really be noticeable. It really depends on your system and what GPU you have, what resolution both monitors use and what kind of load you put on the GPU. Unless you are already pushing your GPU past its capabilities, you should notice little or no difference. 2: No, not really. I think you can however add another GPU like the one you already have (assuming everything in your system supports multiple GPU setups like SLI or CrossFire) and plug the monitor(s) in the second GPU as well and the 2 GPUs will render the image together. Not exactly sure how that works, but I've seen setups like that in the past.

What does "the google drive method is no longer valid" mean? Does it not ask you to restore from Google Drive or did something happen to the copy on the account? You mentioned you had trouble transferring your chat histories. What happened? have you tried transferring the chat history by manually copying the backup file?

The CHG70 is actually a 16:9 curved, not an ultrawide. It is still a nice monitor, but there is a similar newer model, the JG50. They look pretty much the same and they've got mostly identical or very similar specs (1440p, 144Hz, 27" and 32" variants, a VA panel, 16:9 aspect ratio, etc.), but there is one main difference. The CHG70 is a Quantum Dot and is marketed as HDR. That's also why it's around $200 more expensive (MSRP). However, I would advise anyone interested in buying the CHG70 to first investigate the HDR capabilities/actual performance, because things seem a bit vague. On Samsung's website it says the brightness is 350 nits, which might be a bit low for HDR. I also remember seeing something about it might being an 8+2 and not an actual 10 bit panel.

1080p 60Hz is definitely old stuff and with a 1080 it's worth getting a better monitor. $USD is a very nice budget for a monitor and you can get some amazing stuff for that kind of money. Now, you should probably buy one great monitor and keep one or two of your existing 1080ps as extra (it will work fine). Now it's really up to you what you want, but for $600 you can get away with a lot. First decide between high refresh rate 1440p and low refresh rate 4K. This really depends on the games you play. If you play esports titles, then 1440p is for you and if you play only AAA titles, go for 4K. If you play a mix of the 2, i would recommend 1440p unless you're really casual in the esports games. With 1440p, the higher refresh rate will also benefit you outside of esports games, because you will hit 100+ in some older/less demanding games. If you go for 1440p, you have to decide if 120-144Hz is enough for you or if you want to go all refresh rate and go over 200Hz. You can get an IPS or VA panel at 144Hz (which I would highly recommend), but if you want to go higher you'll probably have to drop to TN. You should only go full refresh rate if your focus is mainly in esports games and you're highly competitive. Here's a 27" 1440p 144Hz Samsung monitor that I believe just came out not that long ago: Samsung - LC27JG50QQNZA It's quite affordable, but it's not perfect. It's a VA panel, which is pretty good, but not quite as good as IPS. It is also curved, which is more or less a gimmick, but it does bother some people. It also comes in a 32" variant with the same specs. I saw some great options mentioned by other people before me, like the Acer XB271HU. Here it might also be worth mentioning the AOC AGON AG271QG and the ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q. These would usually be above your given budget, but if you can find a good deal on them they might be worth picking up. You are paying the G-Sync premium tho, so it's up to you if you want to skip on that and drop $100-$200. There is however one more that I would mention. For the given budget, this one is only an option if you live in North America. It's a sort of middle ground between 1440p high refresh rate and 4K. It's a 1440p 34" Ultrawide with refresh rates from 100-120Hz. While these models do have decent refresh rates, it's highly likely you will see ghosting and similar unwanted effects (how much varies from model to model, but mostly depends on how lucky you get with the panel). It's more or less the same or a very similar panel, sold by different brands. It's the same panel or almost the same that's in the more expensive Samsung, LG, Asus, Acer, etc. monitors, but it's not of the same high quality. The panels in the expensive ones are something like A+ tier, but the panels in these cheaper ones are around B tier, at best A-. Here's a few models: Massdrop Vast Pixio PX347c VIOTEK GN34C

At my work, they're throwing away a bunch of old server hard drives (the drives were used in a server/storage bank, but they're not necessarily server grade drives). There's a few 160 GB SATA 2 drives (manufactured 2010). My question is would it be useful to put these drives in something like a RAID 0 array? Apart from the basics of array configurations I'm completely new to RAID. SATA 2 is slow, but could an array with a few of these drives achieve usable speeds? I know the reliability here would be low, especially since they're used drives, but if I was to do this I would use it for storing files that I mostly wouldn't use anyway. Is a project like this worth it or pointless? Thank you for your help.

I found this Kingston mS200 240GB SSD going on sale tomorrow for only €50. That has to be a good deal for a 240GB SSD. I'm thinking of buying it, but the fact that it's mSATA has me concerned. I've never dealt with this form factor/interface before. I looked it up a little and it looks similar to M.2, but without PCIe support. Some mess with the contacts and electrical connections. I can't really seem to get a good understanding of it. I checked my MB and it has an mSATA slot, so it would work, right? I have a new PC planned in a few months (not before Volta releases, most likely soon after) and I was thinking I could just buy this now, start using it right away and then take it over to the new build later on. But I also saw something about mSATA being pushed to the side by M.2. So, does mSATA still appear on new motherboards/platforms or would I need an adapter? Is an additional SSD really worth it if I already have 120GB 840 EVO + a 2TB HDD in my build? It wouldn't be the main SSD in the new build.

Weird... For me it doesn't matter how I run it (I normally run Windowed Borderless, but Fullscreen or Windowed made no difference), it happens if Synapse is on and never if off... But if you have no more problems playing, don't worry about it.

I have the same issue, only in CS:GO. It wasn't always like this, but it's very consistent now. I found my problem was Razer Synapse. Whenever it was running, this would happen, but as soon as I closed it, everything worked fine. If you don't use Razer Synapse, try closing your driver utilities (whatever you use). Origin can also cause this, so if you have it running, try closing that too.

I'm not that great with networks, but here's my theory. I want to try a Minecraft server that friends can connect to. I've done this in the past with Minecraft and GMOD, but I used Hamachi in both cases. We would just all connect to the same Hamachi network and they'd be able to connect to my server thru my local IP address. Now I'm thinking, if I get my network's public IP, would others be able to connect to my server using my IP and a port? And would I need to do a port forward or not? This is just a test server and I a have a hosting service picked for anything serious, but I want to try this. Would it work and if not, what would I need to do? Thanks for helping.