Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Drak3

  1. Hardware wise, The Trashcan pro had server grade hardware. It takes a unique rack mount system to use them as rack mount servers, but the hardware was there.
  2. The old OSX Server variant has been replaced by an optional software package that gives 10.8 and up versions of OSX the same utilities. So, instead of having a different OS, where the only difference is a software package, they just give you the software package.
  3. Drak3

    Xbox Series X

    Xbox Xbox 360 Xbox One Xbox One X Xbox 10 Someone really needs to tech Bill how to count. /s
  4. Not really. The typical consumer doesn't know what benchmarks or IPC is, the only metric they know about is clockspeed. And Intel advertises their product to typical consumers, AMD doesn't. That alone guarantees that Intel's new line of CPUs are going to sell somewhat well.
  5. Yup, and they’re making custom ones for Apple now too. Nvidia also made dual GPU cards years ago.
  6. It’s not a huge difference. Basically the same difference between a FourTwo and a Peterbilt.
  7. IIRC, JayzTwoCents demonstrated that the whole AiO v high end air cooler debate really hinges on what ambient temperatures are like. AiO tend to outperform high end air coolers in hotter environments, even if the opposite is true in cooler environments.
  8. None of that conflicts with the statement that RAID 1 is a type of backup. It just explains why RAID 1 isn’t a comprehensive backup.
  9. Argumentum Ad Populum. You haven't presented a counterpoint as to why RAID 1 doesn't fit the definition of backup. You just summarized what I said: RAID 1 only covers data loss that would result from a disk failure.
  10. So, fitting the definition of backup. Yes, it is. No backup is truly safe from damage in some form. I thought you knew that, considering how concerned you are with house fires, and how you spoke down upon another member when they bought a firesafe to store an external drive. No, there isn't. Some backup systems are just multiple duplicates of of the drive, sometimes not even on a separate disk (meaning partitions, which is fine for basic safe guarding against corruption). No raid will protect you against accidental loss or corruption and it's questionable if it will even save you from corrupted files. RAID protects against loss from drive failures, meaning that still fits that definition. It is literally a copy of a drive to protect against the failure of said drive. No, I'm not. I'm taking a word, and using it for its actual definitions. The ACTUAL definitions presented don't contradict what I said. Because those people haven't given a counterargument to the actual definitions. You evade or dismiss outright the definition. And this is why I separate Mira as being one of the smartest members of the forum. From the get go, they acknowledged that they had their own concept of what a backup was, and didn't treat it as absolute. After some discussion, they acknowledged that there is a distinction to be made between types of backups, that you can have backups for hardware and backups for data, and that RAID doesn't really handle the task of data backup. Mira 'listened' to those with different viewpoints, considered them, and adjusted their own accordingly. Whereas multiple people have been shown the actual definition, how this type of backup is used, and ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, you'd rather try to hide behind """expert""" opinion pieces and trying to frame the discussion as "semantics," than do any critical thinking.
  11. That would be a type of backup. You have dedicated a set of drives to being local and live backups of each other. That's true of any backup system. NAS and versioned libraries are not failsafe either. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/backup These are the two relevant definitions. A drive failure results in the practical data loss of that drive. RAID 1 is a mirror arrangement where the purpose is that data is not lost if a drive fails. By both definitions, RAID 1 is a form of backup. A scenario specific backup. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/redundant And here's the most applicable definition of redundant. Any backup exists as duplicate data to get a system running again. Different types of backups do so in different capacities. RAID 1 enables a system to be restored with little downtime in the event of a drive failure. That's what it's good for, that's what it should be used for. It's redundant, as every backup system is, by definition.
  12. How about reading all of my comments? Hell, read the one before the last one I made: I have acknowledged, time and time again, that RAID 1 is not a comprehensive backup. I've said that RAID 1 is only useful as a basic backup for drive failure and nothing more. And I don't give a shit about the specifics of your company's backup system. It's irrelevant. It doesn't counter anything I've said. It doesn't build on the argument. As far as I'm concerned, it's nothing more than a weak appeal to authority to weasel your way out.
  13. I don't run RAID. Nor is that the type of system failure RAID 1 covers. It's a backup system that covers a disk failure. I've said that, multiple times.
  14. Seeing as solder is used as a thermal interface material, yes. Except that for the vast majority of tasks, the FX lineup couldn't compete with Intel chips' performance. Whereas Intel's 8 cores and AMD's 8 cores are pretty close to each other. And, unlike AMD, Intel has a large enough bank account that they can advertise to the masses, who don't know how to compare CPUs outside of GHz.
  15. These two statements contradict each other. As I've said before: So far, you and three other guys have screeched "RAID's not a backup!" with no substantive arguments. Just lame excuses and """expert""" opinions (that are no more valid than asking random people on the street). But by actual definition, it is. If we ignore the microcosm of arrogant elitists, connotation is that RAID 1 is a type of backup. And one of the smartest members of the forum already made the distinction you're to ignorant to realize: backup does not inherently and exclusively apply to remote data backup.
  16. Arguing pure semantics, RAID 1 is a local backup. Any form of backup is redundant, and every redundancy is a backup, as in this context, they're synonyms. Arguing connotation (outside a microcosm of techies), RAID 1 is a local backup. RAID 1 is a setup where data is cloned between two drives, so that they act as reserves to each other if one fails. You can say RAID 1 is not a robust or comprehensive backup. That it only protects from drive failure. But it is a backup. Trying to redefine the word because you don't like the idea of RAID as a backup (or don't understand how RAID can be an effective piece of a comprehensive backup system) isn't going to change anything, as the term "backup" has well understood meaning in many other areas of life. The only thing you're really doing is creating unnecessary confusion and forcing a divide that isn't there.
  17. Any form of backup is a redundancy. Which would constitute a form of local backup.
  18. For me, I have to see what the entire setup someone is using looks like. But I agree that RAID isn't going to protect against data loss resulting from anything other than the other disk in the RAID config failing.
  19. In a sense, yes. RAID 1, as a single solution data backup, is not going to work. But using RAID as a basic backup to reduce downtime if a disk fails does have *some* merit to it, as long as the user understands that it isn’t a comprehensive backup system. Bad analogy time: it’s like buying a second alternator for a truck. You can leave it in its packaging and not put any strain on it, so that if your current one fails, you have a new one, but you’re fucked if it fails on the road or if you’re in a hurry. Or you can install it to work with your current one, and if one fails, the other one keeps going; but you’re also putting strain on it.
  20. It looks pretty standard IMO. The MPX modules are just passive, more up to date versions of cards like the Titan Z or 295x2, with a different power connector. Overall, not much new is really brought to the table with this system, just the dedicated power slot.
  21. TB3 only supports 4 lanes of PCIe 3.0. That 40gbps number is the maximum bandwidth a controller can support when combining USB, DisplayPort, and PCIe signalling. For anything running PCIe over Thunderbolt, bandwidth would double, which would reduce the bottleneck on higher end GPUs like the 1080 and up.
  22. Yeah most, if not all, pokemon are based on something. Lockstin & Gnoggin has many videos covering them. Some of these animators are that fast. And many of them do freelance, so Gamefreak could EASILY commission out animations if needed.
  23. So it would just be counting how many moves each pokemon learns, and a bunch of indie devs have recreated Pokemon models and made better animations just by using reference points on those models. Things like tail wags can easily just be reduced to moving a few common joints on pokemon with tails.