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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About aLlamaWithARifle

  • Title

Recent Profile Visitors

381 profile views
  1. This is what I was leading to but all the files play fine and don't show any signs of a corrupted file other than being transferred. Though I did notice the drive utilization was a little funky... The drive on the left is where I'm copying from and the drive on the right is what I'm writing to. The only time the speed picks up is when the drive utilization drops on the left drive, from this I'd assume that the drive on the left is having problems reading the files especially due to the very high average response time of 156ms (when copying "good" files this number is cl
  2. I've got a whole bunch of video files off my camera all of similar size around 3-4gb each and I've found that copying these files is just painfully slow and inconsistent. Speeds will start at 160mbps+ but very quickly drop down to under 5mbps. I've tried copying to and from a whole bunch of different drives, ranging from WD Red Pro's, a Samsung SSD, to raid 0 arrays, all of these drives are capable of speeds nearing the 200mbps mark but yet I'm still getting terrible speeds. I've tried testing with some different video files that came from the same camera, with the same settings an
  3. Seems like such a basic peripheral and almost silly to ask help for but all USB hubs I have used have had terrible performance less than 40mbps when plugging in an external drive where as the drive gets 150+ when plugged into USB 3.0 directly. No idea if this is just a flaw with usb hubs or if I've just bought cheap/bad hubs. I have broken my front USB ports on my computer by my own idiocy by breaking a pin on the motherboard so I'm only a 2-4 port hub that can offer max performance over a single port.
  4. Hmm big shame, I guess there's no way to brute force a method either? May look into an AMD option since I'm looking at new graphics cards at the moment as well. Thanks for the answers guys.
  5. Not entirely sure if hardware is the right place for this question... I already have a 21:9 1440p and a 16:9 1080p monitor, if I were to get a second 16:9 would I be able to run all three monitors in surround? Nvidia Surround is very new to me, I've tried to do some light reading but there is very little out there with a definite answer when it comes to mixing 21:9 and 16:9. Has anyone tried a set up like this and would it be possible with little complications afterwards since a few games already don't run that well with 21:9 on its own.
  6. Thanks for the replies so far. @Geekazoid I don't really have a preference over aspect ratio but yet again I've never actually used a 16:10 monitor so don't know what it would be like to actually use on a daily basis but only 20 vertical pixels extra I doubt I'd notice that much and even if I did I'm sure I'd get used to it. If anyone has tried both ratios I'd like to hear your experiences. I've thought about getting a singular more expensive monitor but I don't think I could live with only one, I currently have two and there are often times I wish I had a third. So far I'm leaning
  7. So I'm looking to upgrade from my monitors, I've had enough of the different sizes and major difference in quality. Main uses would be a mixture of gaming as well as semi-professional video/image editing so obviously quality is important - I assume this means I'd need an IPS panel monitor judging from what I've read? I have about £200/$340 to spend on an individual monitor, don't mind going a little over if I need to. Looking for a 24 inch monitor (minimum) with a high brightness, I've pretty much become accustomed to 300 cd/m since both my current monitors and even laptop are this so