Snowwie88

The biggest issue I am facing is the method of recovery with both JBOD and Raid 5, I don't see any real comprehensible options within Windows 10 to do this and the chances of failure is still very big because these drive are not only 4TB in size, but they are also WD Blue, and those drives have not made to run in a Raid 5 configuration. I think JBOD would be no problem. 2 sets of Raid 0 would have the benefit of an easier trouble shoot, and I also know what data would be missing, raid 0 is also faster in both reading and writing and last but not least I would keep the entire 16TB of usable space.

Hi guys, I have here 4 hard drives, all 4TB and they are Western Digital Blue's. I do know these drives are not specifically made for a RAID setup, but I also can tell that the usage will be relative minimal. Reason for this is because I want to use them for my own home media server. This thing will be more off than on, because I only use it for media files, such as a whole bunch of movies and tv shows, also one copy of my backups (in a TrueCrypt container), my music collection (mostly flac) and installation files where necessary. I am a bit struggling whether to choose between Raid 5 or JBOD, or even two sets of 2 drive in raid 0. I am just working with Windows 10, I am not a professional Windows server user. I do know that Windows 10 has a feature called Storage Spaces, but what I also read is that Raid 5 becomes less popular if the drives get bigger. The reason what is states, if one drive fails, than you better have not a singular problem on one of the other disks otherwise all your data is gone. Furthermore with Raid 5 you loose 4TB of space. Then JBOD comes into the picture. The data I have on the home media server is not the most important data (much of it can be redownloaded, but not everything). The thing with JBOD, if I create a spanned volume in Windows 10 it sees the 4 drives as a singular drive of 16TB. But what happens if one of the drives fail? What I read most is that you loose the data on that drive and the other drives keep their data. BUT, since those drives were part of an 'Array', even though JBOD is technically NOT an array, but just a stacking of drives into 1 singular drive, I wonder how the other non-affected drives can be approached without loosing data. Can these drive be converted back to individual drives with their own data on them intact? How would that work? The same question I would have with Raid 5. Raid 5 would allow restoration, but how is the procedure using a Storage Pool in Windows 10? I can't seem to find any option that says, "restore Storage Pool". Let's say I figured out which drive is failing, I remove it, insert a new one, and then what? Is there a feature in Windows 10 that allows to Storage Pool to be reconstructed? Considering my usage of this system, maybe being on for several hours per day, sometimes not running for 2 or 3 days. What is the best option? I already dismiss Raid 1 and Raid 6 since they will cost me half the storage space, which is not worth it. - Raid 5 - JBOD - 2 x Raid 0 (Creating two drives of each 8 TB) What is best in a Windows 10 environment with these types of drives?

I never said I expected that as such, but just by looking at the channel and how many staff there is working at LTT I would think Linus himself barely has time to be even on this board. Besides, when having computer related issues it's the 'community' that helps. Still, it's a cool thing knowing he is around here also. Actually I have a family member not living so far away from Linus in Port Hardy, Vancouver. And yes, he is also a Dutch man. ?

The man himself. ?? Thank you for responding, whether it's actually you or one of your employees, does not matter, it shows you care for your viewers and board members. Keep up the good stuff on YouTube, we love it. ?

Thanks guys, I need to let sink in this information. It's also to be expected since my system is already 4 years old. Still 'beefy' in many ways, this processor, 64GB of ram and a GTX 1080ti videocard, but when I think in the long run, especially with video encoding in mind sooner or later I would love to prefer a more faster processor and lots faster ram than I have now. But there is a pricetag to it. Although the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is not a bad option with the right amount of FAST ram...

Even if all these 8 modules are running in quad channel mode? It makes me wonder, this motherboard supports only up to 64GB, which I have now. What if I get some 3.333Mhz ram but which only would run in dual channel mode?

Is RAM speed really of the essence while video encoding? I mean, it's not like a lot of data is being put through ram, it seems like merely the CPU speed that does the trick. I even use Nvidia's hardware accelerator to use the 1080ti GPU, but video encoding is mostly a CPU task.

Sure the system will just do fine, but like I said, the waiting for a rendering is annoying. And especially on 4K 60fps. And I even overclocked this processor (with thanks for Linus who demonstrated this once on exactly the same processor) to 4.2Ghz (base = 3.3 Ghz), still it takes so much time to render video's.

You mean my 8 dimms, of this type: Crucial CT2K8G4DFD8213, speed 2.133Mhz, is also suitable on a Motherboard that supports the Threadripper processor? That would be nice, since if I have to buy NEW 64GB of ram it will cost a ton. Look at this picture from the pricewatch and look how the prices dropped in 2015/2016, back then I took my chance and filled up my mainboard, even knowing that I would probably not need it: (sorry for the Dutch, but the idea is clear). How about my Aorus Gigabyte GTX 1080ti? I have read there are some issues between Aorus and Threadripper processors.....but I cannot verify this.

I already bought my i7-5820k processor way back in 2015, together with the Asus X99-A motherboard and also 64GB of ram (just because RAM was very cheap in 2015/2016 when it only costed like 50 euro's per 16GB, while 2 years later that price was quadrupled). But anyhow, I notice that for my YouTube channel the rendering of video's takes just so much time. And the last thing I want to do is to cut in on the video quality so I can encode faster. I don't want people to watch my video's and be annoyed by artifacts. So, I am looking around here (in The Netherlands) on the Pricewatch of Tweakers.net and it shows that these Intel processors are still available, and even pretty expensive as well. These things are al ready 4 years old, but they still want more than 300 euro for a i7 5820k processor. For the 2011-3 socket there are not much alternatives I have the idea. There is a 8 core processor, the 5860k but that one is so expensive and I am not even sure it will make that much of a difference. I do know that AMD with their Ryzen Threadrippers have like monster CPU's, for example the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which is a 16 core processor, with 32 threads, costing 'only' around € 600,- (~ $677,-), but the issue here is, that if I would like that processor, I need to completely change my motherboard and ram as well. So what is the best thing to do: - Keep the Asus X99-A and the 64GB of ram and search for an alternative processor....? or - Maybe sell the entire PMM set (which is still in essence a beefy configuration) and then buy all that AMD stuff. Interesting note: I like playing Cities: Skylines, and I use the 81 tiles mod, and recently with a city at 300.000 pop. I saw that the game used 24Gigs of memory.... (whuutttt...!!).....and that entire map was not even build full for like 10%.... So 64GB of ram or more is not unwanted.

Hehe, to be honest, most of the time yes. As soon Linus uses the words "Speaking off"....then I know enough, because usually the thing he is going to speak off has nothing to do with the subject on hand and chances are they will not interest me. But I do this everywhere, I simply don't like commercials or advertising. If I want to know something then I look it up myself or ask. ?

I just came fresh on this board a few days ago, even after watching already too much LTT video's on YouTube it never occurred to me that LTT also has a board where you can ask or share any (computer) technical related questions and/or answers. But a single thought crossed my mind: Does Linus himself also come to this board? I guess the guy must be simply too busy to even be here around, if he even has an account over here. ?

Lot of piping in a transparent case? I would say "Industrial Aquarium"? ?

Thanks, it kinda bugs me that Filmora is not able (or not willing) to encode much better than it does now. Now I am working with just 1080p content, but when working 4K 60fps material (which comes from my phone from example) then the differences really run up whether you use Filmora or Handbrake.

Hi everybody, this is my first message on the LTT-board, and I have a question. For video editing I am using Wondershare Filmora. A fairly pretty nice program, which has a very easy to understand interface. The only thing that is bothering me is it's encoding quality. In relation to Handbrake it basically 'sucks'. Handbrake can give the same quality at nearly half the file size. And it's not like Handbrake takes more time than Wondershare Filmora. So at this moment I am busy with (another) Cities Skylines video for my YouTube channel, and I don't want to re-encode every time I make a video of this game. I record it at 1080p 60fps with Bandicam (yes, the paid registered version), and video edit it in Filmora. The question is what would be the ideal bit-rate? I read a lot about 1080p and 60fps that 8,000kbit/s would be most ideal. BUT, games differ a lot. Some games involve a lot of movement (like Battlefield), but in Cities Skylines most of the visuals are images of buildings and the only things that are moving is the traffic and the people in the city. And of course you yourself scrolling around and doing things. Now would 6,000kbit/s be enough? It would reduce the file size to a point I am content with to upload to YouTube. Without re encoding it saves also video quality. But is 6,000kbit/s enough for a pretty static game like Cities Skylines?