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

TheNuzziNuzz

Member
  • Content Count

    1,971
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards

This user doesn't have any awards

1 Follower

About TheNuzziNuzz

  • Title
    I make music

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Location
    New England, USA
  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Music Production, Lights, and occasional Node.js/Web Development
  • Occupation
    Music Production

System

  • CPU
    i5 4440 @3.2ghz
  • Motherboard
    MSI Z97 SLI Krait Eddition
  • RAM
    24gb DDR3 1600 2x4+2x8
  • GPU
    XFX Amd Radeon R9 270X
  • Case
    Thermaltake Chaser A31
  • Storage
    2x Samsung 850 Evo 128gb
  • PSU
    Raidmax Vampire 700W 80+ Gold
  • Display(s)
    3x 24inch 1080p Westinghouse TVs
  • Keyboard
    Corsair K70 RGB
  • Mouse
    Logitech G502
  • Sound
    Logitech z603
  • Operating System
    Windows 10
  • PCPartPicker URL

Recent Profile Visitors

1,961 profile views
  1. I got a score of 4620, I'm not sure where to look for comparison.
  2. Thank you, downloading right now.
  3. I'm aware that it is not accurate. I'm not suggesting it's a good test to compare pc parts however that doesn't mean it cannot point out statistical inconsistentcies. It's possible there is an issue in their testing method, which we will find out if after benchmarks DX9 results are normal. This has nothing to do with weather userbench is good for comparing GPUs, I know it isn't. It's just the first benchmark I ran because I already had it downloaded and I was stability testing overclocks. What benchmark should I use? I don't want to pay $20 for 3d mark.
  4. Hi everyone. I noticed while benchmarking my 2080 Super vs my 1080ti and other online comparisons, my 2080 Super completely bombs the DX9 userbench test. Here are my userbench results: 1080ti: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/36697183 2080 Super: https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/38766127 You can see my 2080 Super is performing at 91% DX9. This is strange as the average dx9 for 2080 Super's on userbench is 144%. On the other hand, my DX10 is 135%, compared to average 133%...card seems to work perfectly fine but this is a significant oddity.
  5. I'd also agree with this. For the most part the i9 vs i7 vs i5 is marketing. Performance differences are all very very small at exponentially higher cost. People fall victim to the marketing because they feel like they want something fancy when they are really just getting marginal performance and wasting their $. Save money on the CPU, focus your budget on the drives.
  6. VM would be best for security, but if you are looking for the dead simplist, easiest soloution you can just use windows no VMs 1. you can do a software raid in windows 10 (its not very performant but for simple redundancy and cost effectivness its easy) 2. Familiar interface, no learning curve 3. Built in defender and firewall 4. Dead simple secure file sharing between windows (and even mac/linux if setup right)
  7. https://www.google.com/search?q=1000+megabits+to+megabytes Your 1000 gigabit LAN system will support up to 125 MB/s, which is the average speed for mid-range hard disk drives. SSDs can get up to 500 mb/s. Now, SSDs have a lot more responsiveness, but don't be expecting extremely fast transfer speeds with a fancy array of SSDs. I think you should just get two SSDs in raid 1 at either 2tb or 4tb.
  8. Cat5 can do gigabit. It's more about the router/switch everything is connected to.
  9. IF your local network isn't even gigabit, then your local hard disk drive will be faster than a server with SSDs.
  10. Offerup, Ebay, Facebook marketplace. There are dozens if not thousands. Again, this makes no sense. AT&T has absoloutely nothing to do with your LAN. They provide internet to your building, that is it. The network hardware you have inside your walls is not AT&Ts responsability.
  11. LAN is "Local Area Network" That means everything downstream of your wifi router (in this case from AT&T). When computers inside your home share file data, they do not go into the wide open internet to do so. Instead they stay within your local area network. That gives you much better speed and latency, not to mention security. Your local in home system's speed is independent of whatever you pay at&t for outside your walls.
  12. Given the use case of the computer, I'd really suggest you look into getting all the other parts used so you can get SSDs instead.
  13. Another idea here, look for $1000 used gamming PCs in your area. Buy a fully working computer with enough upgradability to maybe get some more RAM. It will likely have a GPU worth $200-$600. Sell the GPU and use the extra money to buy your SSDs. Probably best bang for the buck option and the least work.
  14. I'm talking about your internal network. One SSD on it's own is likely to saturate 1000 megabits per second. If your internal internet infrastructure between computers isn't more than 1 gig (not talking about internet here) multiple SSDs in a striped raid won't give you any benefit.
  15. Your're going to rack up cost with SSDs very quickly here. Look here: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=i5+8600&_sop=13 This CPU is little older but still very comparable. Its single core performance is excellent making it awesome for a minecraft server, and still leaving plenty of power for disk transfers at the same time.
×