msacco

Gotta love arrogant people.

The one thing I'm certain about is that the spread with the X method consistently works fantastic for years now, so it's surely not that.

I expected the thermal paste to last longer tho. I used the thermal paste that I received with the cooler, should I maybe try some higher quality? I don't want re-paste every year. I use the X method btw, I found it to be pretty decent. Thanks.

I bought the cooler exactly a year ago, so temps should be around the same, my AC is always on too, temps are probably not exactly the same but 10C difference is surely not the case. I did try to check for dust, cleaned a bit but there wasn't much to begin with.

Hey, I'm using the Peerless Assassin 120 SE with my 5800x, been using it for a year now and lately I'm starting to notice some heating issues, when CPU is running at 100% temps reach a maximum of 90.5C(not staying there, that's just the peaks). While some comments I've seen online indicates that it's not a big deal, first of all I'd prefer not reaching these temps, and second my cooler used to work much better. When I first installed it the CPU was running on around 40C on idle and around 75-80C when CPU is running on 100%. Now it's running at around 50C on idle and 85-90C at 100%. According to benchmarks, it seems like that cooler should be able to handle the 5800x decently. I wonder what I should try, is it just reapplying thermal paste? Should I replace the fans to better fans maybe? I don't really care about noise, maybe I can slightly boost the fans RPM somehow to make it work slightly better. I'm not familiar with air cooling degradation since there shouldn't really be any, any suggestions? Thanks.

Solution: I used xcopy to copy some files, this caused the folder to turn into a protected operating system folder for some reason, so showing hidden folders still didn't show it as I had to show protected operating system folders to see it. Used the following solution: https://superuser.com/a/1362050/942315 tl;dr: attrib -s -h D:\hiddenfoldername

Hi, I have a new 8TB drive that I purchased, formatted to NTFS and started working with it. I've copied quite a big chunk of files to the drive over night, seeing it going through with no issues and the files being transferred, but when I woke when to check the drive I'm getting 'This folder is empty' on the file explorer. Going to 'This PC', I do see x TB free of y TB(which looks correct), also when I go to folder through CMD and try to check for the files(dir) I am able to see the files and even access and open them, if I search on the file explorer I also see the files, and I also moved the drive to another linux machine and it worked with no issues at all, so I'm just really confused about why would this happen. It doesn't seems to be related to hidden files/folders in any way as I always have it shown. Any ideas? I don't want to format the drive or anything again. Thanks.

Well I already bought the 2x8TB hard drives, so that was expensive enough I guess, the chances of both of them dying at the same time is possible, but very small, so hopefully that will be enough, I'll also have another smaller backup for the really important stuff. And yeah that's basically the idea, I actually thought of switching between them, but if you think that having one that's always running and one only for backup is better then that's great. So should I just like whenever I want to backup(daily, weekly), connect the backup drive, backup the data and then just disconnect it? I know that powering on things could shorten the lifespan as well, so basically it's a power on/off vs moving parts discussion I guess? Thanks

Hey, I recently bought 2x8TB hard drives after I had 2x2TB HDD failures(had a small data loss), I plan on using them both to backup each other in case of a failure, not sure if I want RAID1 or just a simple backup every x time. No' my question is, what would be the best way to extend my HDD's lifespan? Should I have both of them running 24/7(while one should be on idle generally), should I switch between them every day so one HDD is off for a day while the other is running? (could also be a few days, a week, idk...). Is there any 'best practice' here? Or Is should just have them both running and that's it? Thanks!

Hmm I was not aware of that or how it actually works since it's my first time doing that, so I guess I'd start with that and see how it works for me. Thanks

That's really not about my decision, but about what is more hassle free as I'm extremely lazy and messy ^^ I fear ending up just using only 1 drive due to that.

The thing about it, my actual backups would probably be around once a month, and a week of data might be rather crucial. What do you think is a better odds? Having RAID1 and once a month backup, or as you suggested and the fear of 1 week or data loss. Obviously, I'll probably have my testing first to see that the RAID 2 bay actually works with various scenarios(it's really cheap anyhow? :x) I do agree with what you said really, but as I said I have my reasons, not sure how valid they are, but that's just the result of past experience.

That's an option, but I'd still want some sort of case for all the drives in order to have minimal space for that, doesn't really matter whether it's RAID1 or just backup between the drives(even though RAID1 just seems much easier).

I don't really know how much I need, but it's not only for now, but also for the future. I just lost 4TB of data due to lack of backup(even though it wasn't really important data), so I want to get new drives in a RAID configuration for extra backup in addition to other backups I'll do. I'm thinking of getting 2x8TB hard drives for now in RAID1 configuration, that will surely be enough for a while, but you can never know how much space you'll need in the future. There are a few other reasons that I don't want my hard drives inside my PC even though I do have enough room for that.

Thanks, but I don't really think it would be an actual option for my current room setup due to many reasons, it's also rather expensive on its own. I'm also wondering, there are various orico raid bays(2/4/5 for example), each one contains different RAID options obviously like RAID5/10, that's more expensive if you consider each slot, but I wonder if the additional cost would be better for RAID5/10 instead of a single or double RAID1 bays(not sure how many drives I'd use or have in the future).