johmei

decided to delete this post and there's no option to do that....

(Sorry for necromancing the thread. It isn't THAT old and I can't stand misinformation) Dude... No. I don't care what GPU you pair it with, the CPU doesn't contribute enough to most games that you'll see any kind of consistent performance increase in an 8700k over an 8600k. That is simply not true at all. There is a limit to this, of course, and it does somewhat depend on the game, but what you said is simply not true no matter how you look at it.

In all honesty, it's probably not going to matter that much. However, warmer AIR does rise, so the top exhaust might be better, if there's any noticable difference at all. I emphasized air because people often mistakenly say that heat rises. Heat itself moves in only one direction; whatever is cooler that it can transfer to fastest. So flip a coin, or just go with what Firewrath9 says. In fact, the rear may be better because of what firewrath says. But I suppose it would depend on how lined up the front intake fans would be with the CPU cooler. If your front intakes were much lower then I'm not sure it would matter.

I took a quick look at the model and judging by it's age and generation of Intel core CPU, it's very unlikely an external graphics card is possible. To the best of my knowledge though there are only two ways to use external graphics; the first would be with a thunderbolt enclosure and a laptop with thunderbolt (this laptop doesn't have thunderbolt) and the second would be the "janky" way. Using one of the PCIe mini slots which I don't know much about but if there are any PCIe mini slots (I'm saying mini, but there's probably a few different types or sizes and I'm not 100% certain "mini" is an actual or technical term) they probably don't have enough bandwidth....I don't know much about this approach honestly. I briefly looked into it some time ago,but either way, I don't think it would be possible with that model of laptop.

Yeah you might try straightening them out carefully, but it shouldn't be an issue with such a small area overall damaged like that. But I personally wouldn't even bother straightening them out with what looks like very few damaged spots. Should be good to go as is.

I've never really thought about it but they are a little silly. Sidenote; old dishclothes have all kinds of thoughts put into them. Think of how many people have used an old dishcloth...must be alll kinds of thoughts. (\/) (°,,,,°) (\/) Post script...please don't floof me.

?!?!?!? Are you guys serious?! NO SUCH THING?! What....are....how....are you...Let me help you..."There is PROBABLY no such thing as a dustproof case". this makes you sound less arrogant and less stubborn and more reasonable and more open minded. I know this is old and I'm sorry for creating an undead thread, but those kinds of attitudes irritate the ever living PISS out of me, and why wouldn't they? And one more thing...Linus actually TESTED A DUST FREE PC CASE and it did DAMN good (IP43). Now, granted that wasn't until this year (published date of 04/12/2018) but the case LAUNCHED in 2015, AND it was linked in this very thread. Now, if any of you had just taken a few minutes to look through google, or to LOOK AT THE CASE LINKED before deciding that you are the end all be all on what does and doesn't exist, maybe you wouldn't have made yourself look like morons like I HAVE so many times before to random internet people that...I guess don't really matter, BUT THE POINT IS, you are wrong. And you didn't keep an open mind. You took a firm stand on an answer, when you actually didn't know the answer. And before you go saying, "IP43 isn't dustproof" well technically, no, it isn't. But that's because it's virtually impossible to have a completely dustproof case but this case works SO SO well from the video that I don't know how it wasn't certified IP53. Oh yeah, the 3 means you can spray it with a hose...it's splashproof. Which, is great. Okay, zombie thread, back to the grave with you! Hope the town doesn't come after the necromancer. BUT...this will be useful for people on Google, because that's how I found this thread and so, I leave useful information, including the video link, in addition to criticism (sorry)

What? I don't even....I....what? I don't even know where to begin. I guess I can start by pointing out the complete irrelevance of it being a "powerhouse" or not. That doesn't have a damn thing to do with anything. Thunderbolt 3 is just a bus, the graphics processing power and processing power of the system are not relevant. Unrealistic rumors? Miracles? (which btw, they do happen, and they're rare, do some research maybe?)....ummm...first of all, it's not unrealistic. At all...it is actually perfectly feasible that it could have used thunderbolt 3. It just so happens that it was not necessary for the needs of the dock and system and so it doesn't. Why the hell would you call that unrealistic? And comparing that "rx 480 kills gtx 1080 for 200 usd" bullshit to the dock using thunderbolt 3 or not?! again....what?! That doesn't make any sense as a comparison. It's like apples to oranges. To sum it up, while you obviously understand what you're saying, you're not making any sense.

What a pain in the lower back...I got it working, but largely due to my limited knowledge of linux and it's CLI, I may have not done it in the best way. I had to unbridge the connections first in unRAID which caused network issues which was frustrating. I believe I'll have to manually pass through a network adapter to a VM now which is not a big deal really, although not ideal at all. I manually set the interfaces up using ifconfig and I THINK I have it set so that everytime it boots it will reconfigure the interfaces appropriately. At any rate, it seems to be working now, so hopefully it keeps working

Yay! I received access to my account again! This is Cantgetintomyoriginalaccou...I'm going to be replying from this account from now on. Just wanted to clear that up! Thanks!

Bought unRAID with support for 12 devices. Getting it setup now. Hopefully this serves me well! It seems to be the best fit for me, especially since my HDDs have a relatively low error rate at only 10 TBs. So using them for stripping would, I'm guessing, cause them to break down sooner and since they would all be spinning and accessed all the time every time, the drives would wear out at the same rate. Now obviously they are not all going to fail at the same time, and maybe even not close to the same time. But I imagine the risk is higher in contrast to a system such as unraid where it does not use stripping and only the disk with the data that's being accessed is in use. Of course, I could be wrong but that's what I'm guessing. Oh, btw, Lime-technologies confirmed that 2 parity drive options are coming with 6.2 which should be relatively soon! I just hope it's a free upgrade since I just now bought a license! Or I hope, at least, there is a grace period!

That is what I had thought about RAID controller failure, but that sticky made me think otherwise. That's great to hear! I'm intrigued about btrfs integration. I don't know a lot about it, but I'm all for unRAID being more flexible and having more redundant storage methods! The only thing I don't like about Btrfs is that apparently, it is distributed as well, so more than 2 disk loss would mean all data is toast and also all drives would be spinning all the time which would wear them out faster and use more power. I guess there simply is no perfect solution, at least not yet it would seem!

Hmmm...there is one more issue I have with unRAID actually that I'm not sure is addressed or will be addressed :\ it seems that it has no Integrity validation and can't fix silent errors. Which means, from what I understand, that you could rebuild an entire drives worth of data with corrupted data and that's kind of a big deal I would think! Any thoughts on this?

Well I'm not crazy about FreeNAS because you can't add drives, and if more drives fail than the supported redundancy model (2 for RAIDZ2) then every bit of data in the array is lost. Maybe I'm being overly paranoid (especially considering that I'll be using an offsite backup) but that type of failure does scare me my ISP does have a data cap but I still plan on using an offsite backup solution (my friend actually was suggesting that very solution, CrashPlan) and I'll just have to deal with tearing them a new one if the need comes. I thought I noticed one of his videos featuring 2 entries for a parity disk, but after I read about unRAID, I couldn't find anything that said it had support for 2 parity disks, so I thought I must have either been seeing things, or didn't understand what I saw. This is fantastic news!! I want to recap though with unraid to be sure of a few things: any one drive (including the parity drive) can fail, and be rebuilt, correct? And with traditional RAID or RAIDZ, if a controller dies, or if all the drives are on a single controller and it dies, there is potentially no recovery, correct? That is what I understood after reading the following http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/72545-reducing-single-points-of-failure-spof-in-redundant-storage/ With unRAID, if one or all Controllers die, since the data is not distributed, does that mean all you have to do is replace the controller, and maybe make some changes in the setup and it will be fine again? Or is unRAID also susceptible to this type of failure? If unraid is immune to this type of failure and has support for 2 parity disks such that ANY 2 disks can fail (including the parity drives) and they be rebuilt, then I am seriously considering unRAID again! Congratulations on the 500th post, btw!

I'm banging my head against a wall here. I thought I had decided on unraid, but they only allow 1 parity disk and if, while rebuilding a data drive or the parity drive (if it failed), another drive fails, then you've lost all the data on the newly failed drive, as well as the already failed drive. One of the things I do like about unraid is that it doesn't distribute and so you don't lose all of your data if two drives fail, just what was on those two drives....but the way I see it, if you only have 1 parity drive, you're at risk from the time that drive dies, until the time it finishes rebuilding the replacement drive. So having two parity drives, as far as I'm going to look at it, really only allows for 1 drive to fail at a time safely. But I digest...I've been looking reading and watching as much as I can to try and figure this out but I feel like I'm getting nowhere slowly. I've looked into ZFS (FreeNAS), unraid, SHR2 (somewhat) and I recently found SnapRAID which has a nice comparison of several redundant storage solutions that are available:http://www.snapraid.it/compare Bottom line is that I'm overwhelmed and undereducated. I would just pick something and play with it, except that I'm paranoid about playing around with all of my data, even though I'll keep the copies on my old disks and even though I plan on looking into offsite backup solutions as well. To put it as simply as possible (although it's not a simple matter), I want the Redundant storage solution with the biggest safety net and that I can add drives to without having to rebuild the entire array. I realize there is a great potential read performance boost by distributing data across all disks, but this will only be on a 1 Gbps network and only accessed by, at most, a few people at a time. So I do not need the read speed advantage at this point. What I have to work with: 5 x 4 TB NAS Drives (will very likely add a 6th): Intel Z77 chipset SATA controller with 6 total ports: ASMedia PCIe SATA controller with 2 total ports: an LSI Raid card that I can not find the model number on and so I have no idea if I can completely disable raid on it or not (a friend gave this to me): 32 GB of RAM (but it is not ECC): a few Gigabit network cards: What would you pros suggest given my predicament? Thanks!