hhamama66

Ok, updated chipset drivers and bios version to the latest stable release and I'm still getting bad transfer speeds. It starts off writing at 250 mbps then drops as low as 0 but for the most part hovers around 10mbps. Storage space usage us at 100% according to task manager. No idea what the hell is going on. Transferring from the array to the internal drive is even worse. It's stuck at 5 mbps. Either the problem is this drive box or i made a big mistake using storage spaces.

EDIT: it looks like my bios version is much older than I realized. I have a file transfer still going on that I'll wait to finish before updating. Here is a link to the cable I'm using. I know it looks like a cheap generic cable, but this one has been the best type c usb 3.1 cable I've been able to find. I've used it with my phone for large data transfers and for 25 watt fast charging (not relevant for external drives, but still it's a really high quality cable from my person experience). I believe the last time I updated all the drivers was In October of last year. I'll double check the BIOS & chipset driver versions, but it can't be a USB issue because I've gotten much faster transfer speeds using the same exact cable with my phone. Also, transferring from the internal HD to an internal SSD has been much faster than this.

Recently purchased a bunch of WD red pro drives to set up as a raid array in windows storage spaces until I can afford to buy another computer to use as a NAS later this year. I chucked them all in a QNAP-TR004 direct attached storage device. After doing a little research both on this forum and r/dataHoarders I came to understand that any kind of software raid is risky from a driver and hardware standpoint. So many recommended to just use some kind of software raid and I ended up using Windows storage spaces because I pretty much have no other option with my current desktop. Luckily the QNAP device allows users to flip a few switches and set the drivers to individual so Windows can view all of them as individual disks. My question now is, what is causing my transfer speeds to be so slow? I'm trying to transfer from an internal WD Black 10 TB to 4 WD red pro 12 TB drives in a raid 5 array (Called parity option in storage spaces). So why is my write speed so low? Is it the DAS box that's bottlenecking transfer speed or was it simply a bad idea to use windows storage spaces altogether? Or is it a USB problem? I'm getting transfer speeds of at most 14 MB/s and as I understand it, USB 3 has a theoretical maximum speed of about 625 megabytes per second. Now I understand that realistically, USB devices are not going to reach the maximum, especially not hard drives but in practice shouldn't I be getting higher than 15 megabytes per second? I've attached a picture of the properties for both partitions as well as the CPU and drive usage from task manager.

Whoa, whoa whoa I don't need all that lmao. I'm just a simple guy with a data hoarding problem. Like I said above, I only stream plex a few times a week at most but I mostly download torrents and ummm other files that I want to store. But question though, how would I handle backups? The user above said you need a device separate from the main file server and I understand why that's necessary. So what should I do about that? Should I just set up an unraid server with my SMB shares, plex server and then have some kind of direct attached storage device connected via USB for said backups? I was thinking of just building a new system from scratch with extra head room in case I need more horsepower. Right now I have my eyes set on a Ryzen 5600G (6 cores, integrated graphics), 16GB of ram (already have), a fractal meshify 2 xl case (because it fits at least 10 drives if you buy the extra sessions they sell) and a corsair hx850 power supply I bought less than a year ago. I don't need more than standard gigabit ethernet nor do I really need a powerful GPU for transcoding as I only stream to one device at a time. I also don't need this running 24/7 though I might leave it on overnight from time to time if I have large torrents I want to finish downloading. Final thought is what would be better for reliability, fewer drives with larger capacities or many drives with smaller capacities? I've seen a few horror stories of reddit users who nearly lost an array because the drives started failing in sequence immediately after the array finished rebuilding with the new drive. I understand raid 6 can handle up to 2 failures at once, though to be honest I'd rather just avoid a raid array altogether if I can. I don't really need the data available 24/7 nor do I need the increased read/write speed that comes with raid.

I was transferring using a USB to sata enclosure. Any guide available on where to start with unraid? I guess I'll go with your advice and build a basic file server with unraid and then have some kind of external box full of drives and back up the raid array to said drives once a week as you said

Yeah, I don't need much horsepower. I'm a simple person who just wants a solution that's reliable and with automated backups. Though I understand as you said having backups on the same device doesn't count. I'm concerned about using bigger drives though. The last time I went from a 6 to a 10 TB drive, it took about an entire day to transfer everything. What I had in mind was that I could use smaller drives and swap them out with equivalently sized drives and transfer the data as they reach the end of their lifespan with the backups being on a separate device and it won't matter what size the drives are as I'll only be transferring data from larger to smaller drives. example, one 12 TB drive would be a backup for three 4 TB drives and as the drives fail one by one, I would only transfer 4 TB of data at a time as opposed to the entire 12 TB And as I looked into raid arrays, I saw stories of people with drives failing one after the other immediately after the array finished rebuilding the first failed drive and so on and I would very much like to avoid that at all costs.

Alright, fair enough. I'll separate backups and storage

I'm a bit of a data hoarder and at this rate I have close to 10 TB of data. I can't just keep buying bigger and bigger drives because the last time I went from a 6 to a 10 TB drive, it took nearly 24 hours to transfer. I started looking into raid arrays and soon learned that raid helps with availability and isn't a substitute for a proper backup. Fair enough. So now I want to build a file server with automatic backups and I don't know what software to use. I don't use my desktop for anything fancy. I just have a couple SMB folder shares for documents and a few ISOs that I transfer from and to from my laptop at home, occasionally I stream from plex so I have a bunch of 1080p and 4k tv shows and movies, I torrent quite often and would love to have a server I can run overnight but at the moment I can't because it's too risky leaving a custom loop running all night. I also have a couple of, lets just say personal files that I've collected and don't want to lose. I don't need it running 24/7 so power consumption isn't on my mind at all. I'm thinking I want a server I can wake on LAN when I'm at home and remote into to stream or download files and then shut it down when I'm finished with it. I just need to run plex, the SMB shares and a torrent client. I don't need any kind of fancy hardware to speed up transfer in any way, nor do I really need a raid array tbh. I just want reliable data storage and backup all in one convenient box. For hardware I'm thinking a bunch of WD red pro drives for reliability and the extra warranty and a Fractal meshify 2 xl case because it can fit a ridiculous number of drives if I buy the drive sleds.

Ok, I just went through 4 runs of memtest86 that lasted 9 hours. It found absolutely no errors.

Will the built in windows memory test suffice? And do you have any resources to learn how to read these memory dumps?

Computer hard reset randomly while I was watching a video. Went to windows event viewer and here's the error it spit out: The computer has rebooted from a bugcheck. The bugcheck was: 0x00000050 (0xffffc58f6ef94068, 0x0000000000000000, 0xfffff8016d3f351a, 0x0000000000000002). A dump was saved in: C:\Windows\Minidump\122021-8468-01.dmp. Report Id: 4967f270-28aa-470b-99ca-a05a67639251. Now, I opened the dump file that was created and I have absolutely no idea what I'm looking at. Here is the text: Microsoft (R) Windows Debugger Version 10.0.22473.1005 AMD64 Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Loading Dump File [C:\Users\[username]\Desktop\122021-8468-01.dmp] Mini Kernel Dump File: Only registers and stack trace are available Symbol search path is: srv* Executable search path is: Windows 10 Kernel Version 19041 MP (16 procs) Free x64 Product: WinNt, suite: TerminalServer SingleUserTS Machine Name: Kernel base = 0xfffff801`6ce00000 PsLoadedModuleList = 0xfffff801`6da2a1b0 Debug session time: Mon Dec 20 14:01:50.647 2021 (UTC - 8:00) System Uptime: 1 days 16:48:27.056 Loading Kernel Symbols ............................................................... ................................................................ ................................................................ ................................ Loading User Symbols Loading unloaded module list .................................................. For analysis of this file, run !analyze -v nt!KeBugCheckEx: fffff801`6d1f70d0 48894c2408 mov qword ptr [rsp+8],rcx ss:0018:ffff8901`e6076520=0000000000000050 13: kd> !analyze -v ******************************************************************************* * * * Bugcheck Analysis * * * ******************************************************************************* PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA (50) Invalid system memory was referenced. This cannot be protected by try-except. Typically the address is just plain bad or it is pointing at freed memory. Arguments: Arg1: ffffc58f6ef94068, memory referenced. Arg2: 0000000000000000, value 0 = read operation, 1 = write operation. Arg3: fffff8016d3f351a, If non-zero, the instruction address which referenced the bad memory address. Arg4: 0000000000000002, (reserved) Debugging Details: ------------------ KEY_VALUES_STRING: 1 Key : AV.Type Value: Read Key : Analysis.CPU.mSec Value: 2389 Key : Analysis.DebugAnalysisManager Value: Create Key : Analysis.Elapsed.mSec Value: 4668 Key : Analysis.Init.CPU.mSec Value: 499 Key : Analysis.Init.Elapsed.mSec Value: 32234 Key : Analysis.Memory.CommitPeak.Mb Value: 85 Key : Dump.Attributes.InsufficientDumpfileSize Value: 1 Key : Dump.Attributes.RequiredDumpfileSize Value: 0x917931bb FILE_IN_CAB: 122021-8468-01.dmp DUMP_FILE_ATTRIBUTES: 0xc Insufficient Dumpfile Size Kernel Generated Triage Dump BUGCHECK_CODE: 50 BUGCHECK_P1: ffffc58f6ef94068 BUGCHECK_P2: 0 BUGCHECK_P3: fffff8016d3f351a BUGCHECK_P4: 2 READ_ADDRESS: fffff8016dafb390: Unable to get MiVisibleState Unable to get NonPagedPoolStart Unable to get NonPagedPoolEnd Unable to get PagedPoolStart Unable to get PagedPoolEnd unable to get nt!MmSpecialPagesInUse ffffc58f6ef94068 MM_INTERNAL_CODE: 2 CUSTOMER_CRASH_COUNT: 1 PROCESS_NAME: csrss.exe TRAP_FRAME: ffff8901e60767c0 -- (.trap 0xffff8901e60767c0) NOTE: The trap frame does not contain all registers. Some register values may be zeroed or incorrect. rax=0000000000000040 rbx=0000000000000000 rcx=ffff8a0c4ffae640 rdx=ffff8a0c537fa810 rsi=0000000000000000 rdi=0000000000000000 rip=fffff8016d3f351a rsp=ffff8901e6076950 rbp=ffff8901e6076a39 r8=ffffc58f6ef94080 r9=0000000000000a04 r10=0000fffff8016d3f r11=ffff8afd2a400000 r12=0000000000000000 r13=0000000000000000 r14=0000000000000000 r15=0000000000000000 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz ac pe nc nt!ObCloseHandleTableEntry+0x6a: fffff801`6d3f351a 0fb64b18 movzx ecx,byte ptr [rbx+18h] ds:00000000`00000018=?? Resetting default scope STACK_TEXT: ffff8901`e6076518 fffff801`6d24a36f : 00000000`00000050 ffffc58f`6ef94068 00000000`00000000 ffff8901`e60767c0 : nt!KeBugCheckEx ffff8901`e6076520 fffff801`6d09f470 : 00000000`00000001 00000000`00000000 ffff8901`e6076840 00000000`00000000 : nt!MiSystemFault+0x18cedf ffff8901`e6076620 fffff801`6d20525e : 00000000`00000010 ffffffff`ffffff00 ffffd58f`69fed6d0 fffff801`6d007bae : nt!MmAccessFault+0x400 ffff8901`e60767c0 fffff801`6d3f351a : ffffd58f`59d558a0 00000000`000003b8 00000000`00000000 ffffd58f`69fed080 : nt!KiPageFault+0x35e ffff8901`e6076950 fffff801`6d3f79ac : 00000000`00000a04 ffff8901`e6076b80 00000001`006ff558 ffff8901`e6076aa8 : nt!ObCloseHandleTableEntry+0x6a ffff8901`e6076a90 fffff801`6d208ab8 : ffffd58f`69fed000 ffff8a0c`6f799850 ffff8901`e6076b80 ffffd58f`69fed080 : nt!NtClose+0xec ffff8901`e6076b00 00007ffd`ea20cf54 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : nt!KiSystemServiceCopyEnd+0x28 00000001`006ff4a8 00000000`00000000 : 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 00000000`00000000 : 0x00007ffd`ea20cf54 SYMBOL_NAME: nt!ObCloseHandleTableEntry+6a MODULE_NAME: nt IMAGE_NAME: ntkrnlmp.exe IMAGE_VERSION: 10.0.19041.1415 STACK_COMMAND: .cxr; .ecxr ; kb BUCKET_ID_FUNC_OFFSET: 6a FAILURE_BUCKET_ID: AV_R_(null)_nt!ObCloseHandleTableEntry OSPLATFORM_TYPE: x64 OSNAME: Windows 10 FAILURE_ID_HASH: {c0cda093-6ea1-5243-e884-71752c58139f} Followup: MachineOwner --------- 13: kd> lmvm nt Browse full module list start end module name fffff801`6ce00000 fffff801`6de46000 nt (pdb symbols) C:\ProgramData\Dbg\sym\ntkrnlmp.pdb\3177D31000BA7590DED335936C93E3741\ntkrnlmp.pdb Loaded symbol image file: ntkrnlmp.exe Mapped memory image file: C:\ProgramData\Dbg\sym\ntoskrnl.exe\FA45FA211046000\ntoskrnl.exe Image path: ntkrnlmp.exe Image name: ntkrnlmp.exe Browse all global symbols functions data Image was built with /Brepro flag. Timestamp: FA45FA21 (This is a reproducible build file hash, not a timestamp) CheckSum: 00A61591 ImageSize: 01046000 File version: 10.0.19041.1415 Product version: 10.0.19041.1415 File flags: 0 (Mask 3F) File OS: 40004 NT Win32 File type: 1.0 App File date: 00000000.00000000 Translations: 0409.04b0 Information from resource tables: CompanyName: Microsoft Corporation ProductName: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System InternalName: ntkrnlmp.exe OriginalFilename: ntkrnlmp.exe ProductVersion: 10.0.19041.1415 FileVersion: 10.0.19041.1415 (WinBuild.160101.0800) FileDescription: NT Kernel & System LegalCopyright: © Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. 13: kd> .trap 0xffff8901e60767c0 NOTE: The trap frame does not contain all registers. Some register values may be zeroed or incorrect. rax=0000000000000040 rbx=0000000000000000 rcx=ffff8a0c4ffae640 rdx=ffff8a0c537fa810 rsi=0000000000000000 rdi=0000000000000000 rip=fffff8016d3f351a rsp=ffff8901e6076950 rbp=ffff8901e6076a39 r8=ffffc58f6ef94080 r9=0000000000000a04 r10=0000fffff8016d3f r11=ffff8afd2a400000 r12=0000000000000000 r13=0000000000000000 r14=0000000000000000 r15=0000000000000000 iopl=0 nv up ei pl nz ac pe nc nt!ObCloseHandleTableEntry+0x6a: fffff801`6d3f351a 0fb64b18 movzx ecx,byte ptr [rbx+18h] ds:00000000`00000018=??

I'm looking to buy a new power adapter for my zephyrus g15 ga503. I just spent nearly $3000 on this laptop and I hesitate to trust aftermarket power adapters. I found a couple links with Asus branded adapters but I have no idea of verifying of verifying if they're legit Asus made adapters, one of the companies I've never heard of before and the other one is a 230 watt that looks to be for another model not my ga503. Here are the links: https://www.ebay.com/itm/324566990994 https://www.sears.com/asus-f9d-165032000124584-230w-asus-rog-zephyrus-g15/p-A103212902 https://www.asus-accessories.com/charger-200w-for-rog-zephyrus-89851-75251.htm#ga503qs|l Keep in mind, I still have my original adapter and it isn't damaged. I'm not in any hurry to get it replaced, I'm just looking for an extra adapter for convenience.

Honestly, I did consider other models. The strix edition for example looked like a better value because of the cooling, but the 1440 screen was only available on the hideous looking "scar edition." I would've gladly sacrificed the premium build of the zephyrus and the portability for the greater performance and better upgradeability of the strix had Asus not created the scar edition. MSI didn't have a single AMD model (which I won't compromise on as Intel gaming laptops have atrocious battery life), Lenovo I don't trust because they were caught selling their devices with adware baked right onto the motherboard and then there's Dell (and Alienware) who I will absolutely never purchase a product from under any circumstances. Finally there's the HP Omen which I feel is just really cheaply made and I don't mean that it's made out of plastic, I mean that it's just very mediocre. Ultimately, the zephyrus was the only device I felt comfortable taking to school and work that wouldn't make me look like a child.

Yeah, I definitely understand why Asus did this. Having some upgradeable ram is ultimately better than no upgradeable ram as it seems to be the case for many other high end slim laptops. I think there are 32GB dimms out there, the only problem is that Asus doesn't explicitly guarantee you can expand those 16GB models to more than 24GB (8GB soldered+16GB so dimm)

I'm buying this to run a bunch of virtual machines and attend zoom meetings (at the same time). In my class my workload would be as follows: anywhere from 4 to 8 virtual machines with some of them installing software, 3 or 4 word documents, a couple browser tabs and a zoom window running at the same time. Of course, I wanna play games on this but I already know games are unlikely to use more than 8GB of ram in dual channel. And did Asus limit the size of the so dimm module? Damn, that's unfortunate. I might actually have buy the 32GB configuration then.