backtop

Gadgets Tom's Holiday Gift Guide
Tom Corelis (Blog) - November 28, 2008 2:21 PM
Print 59 comment(s) - last by daar.. on Dec 3 at 5:47 AM

SAMSUNG T240HD 24” HDTV Monitor

LG Black GGW-H20L 6X Blu-Ray, DVD, and CD Burner with HD-DVD Support

Apple iPod Classic 120GB

SENNHEISER HD 280PRO Circumaural Headphones
Tom Corelis gives his picks for hot tech items this holiday season

By day, I’m a student, programmer, and DailyTech writer. By night, I’m a gamer and budding drum-and-bass musician/DJ/turntablist. Yours truly is a discerning consumer.  I don’t buy – nor want – a lot in the way of electronics, but the things I do want had better give me the flexibility that my ADD personality craves. When it comes to electronics, I look for features and quality – because getting something once and keeping it for 5/10/20 years is much better than getting a cheap variation of the same thing and then replacing it every 18 months.

SAMSUNG T240HD 24” HDTV Monitor

Now that flat-panel prices are in freefall, those of us that like our monitors large (and who doesn’t) have a wide variety of choices, at a wide variety of price points. The T240HD offers a nice, middle-of-the-road compromise -- it’s not the cheapest kid on the block, but the features it offers more than make up for it. I prefer versatility in my hardware setups, and the T240HD delivers exactly that: an abundance of hookups – DVI, D-Sub, Component, and a pair of HDMI connectors – as well as a built-in HDTV tuner and fast 5ms response time. I can hook up my computer, an Xbox 360, a PlayStation 3, and tune in to over-the-air HDTV broadcasts, and still have room for my laptop’s VGA out, a second PC, and some other HD device.

LG Black GGW-H20LK 6X Blu-Ray, DVD, and CD Burner with HD-DVD Support

I can’t think of a better way to enjoy a nice, big LCD screen than with a high-def movie or video game. Not only does this thing play Blu-Ray discs, but it burns them too (and fast!) and reads HD-DVD discs -- allowing a thrifty shopper to take advantage of all these wonderful HD-DVD firesales.

Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1TB SATA Hard Drive

Man, storage is cheap nowadays. About two years ago I spent over $400 on hard drives to build a 1TB fileserver for myself – two 300 GB hard drives and a 500 GB drive to top it off. Now, the same thing costs just a little north of $100. It’s a crazy world out there, folks. One of these will cover nearly every A/V storage need that will ever arise in the near future.

Hard drives are, unfortunately, a bit of a gamble. In a previous job working at a PC Club tech shop, I saw lots of dead hard drives from every brand: Samsung, Maxtor, Seagate, Western Digital, enterprise, consumer – you name it's failed, catastrophically. For this reason I recommend the Seagate, as opposed to other brands.  They fail the least, in my experience, and the drive comes with a 5 year warranty should anything go wrong.

SUPER TALENT 4GB DDR2 800 RAM Kit

Following the pattern of “stuff I don’t want to have to worry about for the next several years,” comes a superb-yet-inexpensive memory kit from Super Talent. For the past several months there have been two of these kits in my PC – 8GB total – and let me tell you, Windows Vista screams. To everyone who says Vista’s too slow: get one of these kits and switch off your pagefile. I’m serious.  

Apple iPod Classic 120GB or Microsoft Zune 120GB

For the music lovers with tastes as diverse as their music collection is large; you simply can’t go wrong. While the 120GB drive is slightly disappointing compared to the iPod classic’s original 160GB SKU, both players will allow one to fit tens of thousands of tracks and/or dozens of hours of video. I keep mine loaded with over 11,000 MP3s and multiple seasons of my favorite TV shows – and I still have about 40GB left! With a stupid-long battery life, you could go a month without having to plug the thing in – even if your particular preference tends to turn on a dime, like mine. Trip-hop to baroque? Drum-n-bass to power-chord metal? With your entire library in your pocket, these babies aren’t gonna say no.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 2.66GHz Quad-Core Processor

While we weather the transition between single-threaded and multi-threaded software, this CPU will hopefully make the wait a little more comfortable. 2.66 GHz per core is a respectable number for single-threaded apps, and a more-than-respectable number for multi-core, well, anything. There’s not a lot to say about the Core2 CPUs that hasn’t already been said: they’re fast, power-efficient, and cool, and unlike AMD, stick with the same socket.

SENNHEISER HD 280PRO Circumaural Headphones

While these certainly aren’t the highest-end headphones, how many of us feel safe walking around town sporting a $500+ pair of cans? Inexpensive yet high-end, a pair of these will knock the socks off of whoever uses them – without breaking the bank.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Have we entered an alternate universe?
By Cogman on 11/28/2008 8:58:21 PM , Rating: 5
Last line in the Q9400.
"...and unlike AMD, stick with the same socket."

WTH? Intel has JUST AS BAD if not worse of a track record for switching sockets every generation. It is only recently (P4 Prescots -> Intel Core 2 duos) That they have stuck with the same socket. However, this is still a dumb statement because we already KNOW that intel is switching sockets with their next generation. So if the intent of the statement was something like "and you can upgrade later" Its completely wrong. This is it for this socket, the end, finito. The processors that are currently available are going to be the same ones that are available in 1-5 years. There will be no more new processors for this socket.

Even With the recent stint of using the same socket, that still doesn't mean that you could use the same motherboard for a CPU upgrade. Nope, classic intel dictated that when going to Prescots->Conroe you need a new mother board. Their older stuff just couldn't hack it. There are a FEW that got bios flashes to enable them to work with the new generation, but not every single one.

Yes, har har AMD CPUS suck now. We get it. But leave stupid purely fanboy statement out of your articles. Especially one that is so wrong, because just wait. Now that intel is supporting an IMC on their newer chips, we are going to see JUST AS MANY socket switches from them as we do from AMD, because they have to change every time the memory type does (well, they don't have to, but its a good excuse for intel to make them).




RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By masher2 (blog) on 11/28/2008 9:42:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
WTH? Intel has JUST AS BAD if not worse of a track record for switching sockets every generation.
In the last 9 years, Intel has had 4 desktop sockets (370,423,478,775). AMD though, has had 7 -- Slot A, 462, 754, 939, 940, AM2, and AM3.

Even if you toss in Intel's upcoming Socket 1366, it still is running fewer socket changes than AMD.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By tjr508 on 11/28/2008 11:13:39 PM , Rating: 4
940 was a desktop socket? If you want to go by that loose of a criteria, then you have to add two or three onto the Intel list (LGA771 for example). It is also worth noting that AMD has had very few compatibility problems (even when the x2s were released) whereas you cant just go out and use any 775 board for any 775 processor you wish.
-Also, socket A is socket 462.
-Including AM3 requires including LGA1366.
-Intel's socket 8 was in use 9 years ago(and isn'9 years sort of an obscure time line used to fit your needs?).
-Finally, I can think of at least 3 different pin layouts of socket 478 (sounds confusing to me).


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By masher2 (blog) on 11/28/2008 11:35:13 PM , Rating: 3
> "Socket A is socket 462"

Not Socket A. Slot A. AMD's cartridge-based socket.

> "Intel's socket 8 was in use 9 years ago"

No, it was phased out in 1997, when the P2 was released.

> "940 was a desktop socket?"

Once AMD introduced Sledgehammer, it was. Admittedly that part didn't exactly burn up sales records, but it was still a desktop solution.

> "Finally, I can think of at least 3 different pin layouts of socket 478 "

I believe you're confusing the 478-cpus that use other sockets besides Socket 478, such as Sockets M and P. Those are for laptops, however, not desktops.

> "isn'9 years sort of an obscure time line "

I chose it because both AMD and Intel introduced new sockets that year, making the comparison most fair.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By nah on 11/29/2008 7:29:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, it was phased out in 1997, when the P2 was released.


This is not correct--I bought a Intel 440 BX-2 in 1999/2000 with a P III 600 which was still Slot 1--I don't know where you got the Socket 8 from--I remember Socket 7 being the last--then being replaced with Slot 1--

In any event the point is still moot because a LGA 775 Motherboard doesn't automatically ensure that you can still plug in any CPU--my Avalon 915 GAV (LGA 775) will not take in a Core2Duo--only P 4s--to make the comparison really accurate you would have to factor in chipsets--heck, even my D965GRY (Intel M/B) can't take anything above the original Core2Duo 2.66 Ghz


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By GaryJohnson on 11/29/2008 8:46:57 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By nah on 11/29/2008 9:33:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Socket 8 Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_8


Socket 8 is a server socket--I thought we're talking about desktops


By tjr508 on 11/29/2008 10:38:20 AM , Rating: 2
It started as both, the P2 release pushed it back only into servers.


By Lord 666 on 11/29/2008 4:11:29 PM , Rating: 1
The OP took the wrong angle of the sockets; while they technically stayed the same, the transition for 65nm to 45nm was an Intel bungle. Some P965 boards could make the transition while others could not and likewise for 680i's. Quad core support was also questionable.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By Lezmaka on 11/29/2008 12:33:29 AM , Rating: 5
You forgot Slot 1. It may not have been introduced in 1999, but Intel was still releasing new CPU's that used it. Intel even released several Slot 1 CPU's in 2000.

And since you can buy Socket 1366 CPU's and motherboards, I'd say that would make it a "current" socket. Also, there are no AM3 motherboards/processors available that I am aware of, so I don't know why you included that in your list. AMD 6, Intel 6.

But if you want to include "upcoming" sockets such as AM3, then you might as well include Socket 1160/1156/whatever it is now. AMD 7, Intel 7.

If you really want to get technical on "desktop" sockets, then you can include Socket F/1207 (AMD 4x4) and Socket 771 (Intel Skulltrail). AMD 8, Intel 8.

There may be others I missed on both sides, but it's not 7 to 4.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By masher2 (blog) on 11/29/2008 2:26:57 AM , Rating: 1
> "[Slot 1] may not have been introduced in 1999, but Intel was still releasing new CPU's that used it"

We're counting socket *changes* though. Releasing a new cpu for both new and older sockets (such as Intel did with the P3 for Slot 1 and Socket 370) means the older socket has a greater longevity, not less.

> "If you really want to get technical on "desktop" sockets, then you can include Socket F/1207 (AMD 4x4) and Socket 771 "

I left off the server sockets. 771 was never marketed as a desktop solution. The AMD Socket F could marginally be considered as such.


By zzeoss on 11/29/2008 3:08:11 AM , Rating: 5
What is the point in discussing socket changes when new intel CPUs don't work on all 775 motherboards?

Few months I tried with a E8600 and a Asus Maximus II Formula. Try all you want, the bios to support this cpu was released 3 days ago.

So socket changes == irrelevant.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By Lezmaka on 11/29/2008 3:23:14 AM , Rating: 4
Intel was still supporting and releasing new CPU's for two completely different and incompatible desktop sockets at the same time, regardless of when they introduced the sockets.

> "771 was never marketed as a desktop solution."

Intel would disagree with you:

"...Intel Corporation has introduced the Intel® Dual Socket Extreme Desktop Platform. Formerly codenamed 'Skulltrail,'..."

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20...


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By masher2 (blog) on 11/29/08, Rating: 0
By Lezmaka on 11/29/2008 7:10:33 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
You're still missing the point. You buy a new motherboard, and 6 months later a new socket format is released. Now you're stuck-- you can't upgrade to new CPUs without also replacing the mobo, right? That's the problem with socket changes-- they invalidate your hardware.

But, if Intel releases a new socket, but continues to release new CPUs for the old socket as well, that problem doesn't exist. You still have an upgrade path.

That's why you can't count Slot 1 against Intel in 1999. The fact they were still retroactively releasing CPUs for it is a positive for those users who had older Slot 1 boards -- not a negative.


In that case, if you don't want to count Slot 1 in 1999, you would need to count it in 2000 because they stopped releasing Slot 1 CPU's in 2000. You bought a Slot 1 processor in 1999. Then in 2000, Intel stops releasing Slot 1 processors, and now you're stuck. You can't upgrade to new CPU's without also replacing your motherboard.

If you want to talk about upgrade paths, then AMD is actually ahead of Intel. Same number of slots/sockets, but compatibility between two different sockets - Socket AM3 processors are being designed to be compatible with Socket AM2 motherboards.

With AMD...
You buy an AM2 processor. AMD stops releasing new Socket AM2 processors, and is only releasing new processors using Socket AM3. Good news! AM3 processors are being designed to be compatible with Socket AM2 motherboards!

With Intel...
You have a Socket 775 Pentium 4 processor. You buy a Core 2 Quad Q9400 as recommended in the gift guide because Intel sticks to the same socket. What? The brand new Socket 775 processor isn't compatible with your older Socket 775 motherboard, and you're stuck.

Or... Intel stops releasing Socket 775 processors, and you're stuck. You can't upgrade to new CPU's without also replacing your motherboard.


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By StevoLincolnite on 11/29/2008 2:05:00 AM , Rating: 5
Intel:

1) Socket 370.
2) Slot 1.
3) Socket 423
4) Socket 478
5) Socket 775
6) Socket 1160
7) Socket 1366
8) Socket 603
9) Socket 604
10) Socket 771
11) Socket LS

AMD:
1) Socket A
2) Slot A
3) Socket 754
4) Socket 940
5) Socket 939
6) Socket AM2
7) Socket AM2+
8) Socket AM3
9) Socket F
10) Socket F+
11) Socket G34

List of sockets can be found here: http://users.erols.com/chare/sockets.htm


RE: Have we entered an alternate universe?
By Hapikern on 11/29/2008 3:54:03 AM , Rating: 5
Also take in mind that socket 775 had two versions. The one that supported the pentium D and the upgraded version with the VRM (voltage regulation module) which is the actual LGA775 which supports the Core and Core 2 processors.

So in theory LGA775 were 2 different sockets.


By StevoLincolnite on 11/29/2008 11:49:14 PM , Rating: 2
Same could be said about the Socket 370, where the later model Pentium 3 Tualatins wouldn't work in the older boards which supported the Coppermine or the Katmai chips, which was due to the voltage differences etc' - however with the use of a Socket 370 converter or a slotket you could run one in an older board.


By nah on 11/29/2008 7:36:46 AM , Rating: 2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_CPU_slo...

to be really complete---

Intel compatible

* DIP socket (40 contacts) - Intel 8086, Intel 8088
* PLCC socket (68 contacts) - Intel 80186[1] [2]
* PLCC socket - Intel 80286
* PLCC socket - Intel 80386
* Socket 1 - 80486
* Socket 2 - 80486
* Socket 3 - 80486 (3.3 V and 5 V) and compatibles
* Socket 4 - Intel Pentium 60/66 MHz
* Socket 5 - Intel Pentium 75-133 MHz; AMD K5; IDT WinChip C6, WinChip 2
* Socket 6 - Designed for the 80486, but little used
* Socket 7 - Intel Pentium, Pentium MMX; AMD K6; some Cyrix CPUs
* Slot 1 - Intel Pentium 2 233 - 450MHz, Pentium 3 450 - 1133MHz, Celeron first editions;
* Socket 370 - Intel Pentium 3 650 - 1.4GHz, Celeron 300 – 533 MHz; later editions.
* Socket 423 - Intel Pentium 4 1.3 - 2GHz; first editions.
* Socket 478 - Intel Pentium 4 1.4 - 3.4GHz, Celeron 1.7 - 2.8GHz; the most popular socket for Pentium 4.
* LGA775 - also known as Intel Socket T, used by some Pentium 4, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad
* LGA1366 - also known as socket B

[edit] AMD

[edit] Desktop

* Super Socket 7 - AMD K6-2, AMD K6-III; Rise mP6.
* Slot A - AMD Athlon
* Socket A (also known as "Socket 462", 462-contact PGA) - AMD socket supporting Athlon, Duron, Athlon XP, Athlon XP-M, Athlon MP, Sempron, and Geode processors.
* Socket 754 (754-contact PGA) - AMD single-processor socket featuring single-channel DDR-SDRAM. Supports AMD Athlon 64, Sempron, Turion 64 processors.
* Socket 939 (939-contact PGA) - AMD single-processor socket featuring dual-channel DDR-SDRAM. Supports Athlon 64, Athlon 64 FX to 1 GHz[3], Athlon 64 X2 to 4800+, Opteron 100-series processors . Superseded by Socket AM2 about 2 years after launch.
* Socket 940 (940-contact PGA) - AMD single and multi-processor socket featuring registered (ECC) DDR-SDRAM. Intended for Opteron servers, but also used for "SledgeHammer" series Athlon 64 FX processors .
* Socket AM2 (940-contact PGA) - AMD single-processor socket featuring DDR2-SDRAM. Replaces Socket 754 and Socket 939[3] (some confused Socket AM2 with "Socket 940" for server processors). Supports Athlon 64, Athlon 64 X2, Athlon 64 FX, Opteron, and Phenom processors.
* Socket AM2+ (940-contact PGA) - AMD socket for single processor systems. Features support for DDR2 and HyperTransport 3 with separated power lanes. (Replaces Socket AM2 , electrically compatible with Socket AM2). Supports Athlon 64, Athlon 64 X2, Athlon 64 FX, Opteron, and Phenom processors.
* Socket AM3 (938-contact PGA) - Future AMD socket for single processor systems. Features support for DDR3 and HyperTransport 3 with separated power lanes. Planned to launch mid 2008. Replaces Socket AM2+ with support for DDR3-SDRAM.

[edit] Mobile

* Socket 563 - AMD low-power mobile Athlon XP-M (563-contact µ-PGA, mostly mobile parts).
* Socket 754
* Socket S1 - AMD socket for mobile platforms featuring DDR2-SDRAM. Replaces Socket 754 for mobile processors (638-contact PGA).
* Socket FS1 - future Fusion processors for notebook market with CPU and GPU functionality (codenamed Swift), supporting DDR3 SDRAM, to be released in 2009.

[edit] Server

* Socket 940 - AMD single and multi-processor socket featuring DDR-SDRAM. Supports AMD Opteron[3] (2xx and 8xx Series), Athlon 64 FX processors (940-contact PGA).
* Socket A
* Socket F (also known as "Socket 1207") - AMD multi-processor socket featuring DDR2-SDRAM. Supports AMD Opteron[3](2xxx and 8xxx Series) and Athlon 64 FX processors. Replaces Socket 940 (LGA 1207-contact), and partially compatible with Socket F+.
* Socket F+ - Future AMD multi-processor socket featuring higher speed HyperTransport interconnect of up to 2.6 GHz. Replacing Socket F but socket F processors remained supported for backward compatibility.
* Future processor which is in development under the Fusion project codename, will employ Socket FS1 and two other sockets.
* Socket G34 - successor to socket F+, originally planned as Socket G3 paired with Socket G3 Memory Extender for servers to expand memory.


By Omega215D on 11/29/2008 10:50:04 AM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that Socket AM2 processors can be placed in AM2+ and I think vice versa though without the enhancements of AM2+. I think this is better than Intel's 775 where not all processors worked with one motherboard since the needed supplied voltage differed.


By Samus on 11/30/2008 3:44:01 PM , Rating: 2
If you're going to include socket 940, you should include the half dozen Intel server sockets as well.

Also, Intel supported Slot-1 through 2000.

Lastly, Intel has unique packages for their mobile processors that usually have specific mPGA sockets and are not compatible with desktop sockets. AMD does not do this. So add two more sockets to the list for Intel.

Tom's has a long standing tradition for having biased, often untrue opinions.


By Cogman on 11/29/2008 12:03:09 PM , Rating: 2
The point I was trying to make, (and I think you all pretty much validated it) is that was a dumb fanboy statement that is pretty misleading.

Getting a Q9400 now so you can upgrade later is a retarded move as the next generation is using a new socket.


By walk2k on 11/29/2008 1:53:59 PM , Rating: 1
Wow. All he said was Core 2s all use the same socket, which is 100% accurate and true, and you go off on a huge rant... who's the fanboy retard again?


Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 3:45:37 PM , Rating: 2
I heard that some braindead apps (photoshop or ms word or something?) really don't like it when Windows swap file is off. What's your experience with turning Vista swap file off guys? Any gotchas? Does it really make Vista snappier/faster?




RE: Vista with swap file off
By MikeMurphy on 11/28/2008 4:11:23 PM , Rating: 2
I have been running XP 32-bit for awhile on 3.3gb of ram with no swap file. The only problem I ran into was that Titan Quest does not run without a swap file.

I would suggest that unless you have 8gb+ of ram not turning off the swap file. I'm no expert on the matter in Vista but that is my instinct.

I hope that helps.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 4:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
Okay so it's true one may have problems with some dumb software if swap file is off. Guess it's not very smart to switch it off then. Tom Coriolis just got lucky.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 4:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I meant Corelis. F#cking missing edit button!


RE: Vista with swap file off
By TomCorelis on 11/28/2008 4:53:08 PM , Rating: 3
There are a handful of apps that get cranky with the swap file turned off, but they're rare. I've played around with all the major suites by Adobe, Macromedia, Microsoft's Visual Studio, FLStudio, Native Instruments, MS Office, and Cubase and never had VM issues.

Adobe actually uses its own VM, but it calls it a scratch disk. I did have some issues with After Effects back when Vista was in beta, but thats because AE kept thinking it was out of RAM because it wasn't aware that Vista uses available physical RAM as a cache (which is why free RAM always shows so low).

It's not luck :-)


RE: Vista with swap file off
By TomCorelis on 11/28/2008 4:54:57 PM , Rating: 2
Correction: Adobe Photoshop uses a scratch disk.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By overzealot on 11/28/2008 10:31:06 PM , Rating: 2
Running a swap file on a (software) RAM disc will give you the best of both worlds.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 10:45:51 PM , Rating: 2
holy f**k!!! best post of the week


RE: Vista with swap file off
By TomCorelis on 11/28/2008 4:44:28 PM , Rating: 4
I picked up another 4gb to make 8gb in my computer because, of all the reasons, Age of Conan needed it :-) I never ran into memory issues, except with that game cause its memory footprint was something around 2.5-3 gigabytes.

I'd say 4gb with swap off in Vista is perfectly fine. I ran XP with 2gb and no swap for years without issues, and ran out of memory only a few times. 8gb Vista64 with no swap and the highest memory consumption I've managed to rack up where I checked is 5gb. I just picked up Native Instrument's grand piano sample-libraries though, and some of those push 1-2gb of data in order to accurately emulate a single grand piano, so I may find a way to run out of memory yet :-)


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 5:23:43 PM , Rating: 2
So is really Vista faster with swap file off? How is it manifested? I mean what parts/functions of Vista become faster (if any)?


RE: Vista with swap file off
By TomCorelis on 11/28/2008 5:47:50 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is, both XP and Vista use the swap file, even when there is physical RAM available. Supposedly there are registry hacks you can use to override this behavior, but I've never found them to work.

The lack of a swap file is most visible on an already "lived-in" Windows install, where you have all your programs installed and your tray icons and such are where you're at your most comfortable. As I said before, Windows uses the swap file for some things no matter what -- particularly GUI stuff. I've found that having the swap file off keeps Windows pretty responsive even in stuff Windows' cacheing doesn't expect you to use -- whereas with the swap file enabled, uncached actions may have to read information off the disk first.

In essence, disabling the swap file overrides Windows' internal routines for balancing physical memory consumption with overall memory usage, keeping everything that should be loaded in RAM, in actual RAM.

The other thing I've noticed it helps a lot with is start-up time. Not quite sure how or why that works, but Windows spends much less time scrubbing hard disks. If you have other sources of startup slowdowns then the lack of a swap file with accentuate those sources.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 11/28/2008 8:01:09 PM , Rating: 1
So you're saying that Vista's superfetch doesn't work properly, is that correct?

'Cause if it were working properly, you wouldn't see any speedups from turning swap file off, since with superfect things are SUPPOSED TO BE _always_ in memory when you need them.

According to your experience and simple logic, superfect seems to NOT cache things in memory, which is weird.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By JonnyDough on 11/29/2008 5:53:09 AM , Rating: 2
A few of those ideas are listed here:

http://cod4boards.com/cod4-pc/34681-best-possible-...

I have yet to try them, but I don't see why it would be so difficult to set Windows to use more available ram. Maybe you didn't do it right?

I'm working on my first nLite installation. Pretty interesting stuff, and I imagine it will make a good sized difference. The only thing I don't like about nLite is driver installation can get a bit tricky - as many vendors release install files rather than just the specific drivers. Having to install it just to find out what folder they decompress to is tricky, and sometimes there are several driver files. Windows installation needs a LOT more customization in my opinion. It's laziness on the part of Microsoft. I think they should have an "advanced installation" option during installation with REALLY good descriptions of what things do. Most home users never use 7%0 of what Windows offers.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By walk2k on 11/29/2008 2:02:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yes turning off the swap file completely is a very very BAD idea. If you really have 8GB ram (and you have to use Vista 64-bit, article failed to mention that as well) then the swap file won't be used very much anyway, there's very little point to turning it off. About the only bonus is the extra 2-3 GB of HDD space you save, but with 1TB drive(s) don't think that matters very much.

Better off setting up a permanent swap file (min and max the same size) on your fastest partition (the 1st partition on a drive will always be faster) and forget about it.

I only have 2GB and the swap file is hardly ever used.


RE: Vista with swap file off
By Pirks on 12/1/2008 1:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
Well, your info contradicts Tom Corelis's


Sennheiser
By BruceLeet on 11/28/2008 3:20:56 PM , Rating: 2
I can vouch for those headphones, for the hell of it I got a .flac version of The Ecstasy of Gold and switched headphones with $189 Sony's which I bought around springtime.

My verdict: Sennheiser sounds alot more clear at all volumes I 'tested' so I gave my old ones to my brother :^)




RE: Sennheiser
By TomZ on 11/28/2008 3:30:56 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, the HD280PRO's sound awesome...and at a reasonable price, too!


RE: Sennheiser
By Mitch101 on 11/28/2008 4:06:12 PM , Rating: 2
Ditto got a pair here to drown out the kids while listening to training material.


RE: Sennheiser
By masher2 (blog) on 11/28/2008 3:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I got a .flac version of The Ecstasy of Gold
I'm guessing you're not a Morricone fan -- which must mean someone has again remade that classic. Have you heard the original? If not, I recommend it highly. . . preferably in its preferred setting of the movie from whence it came: The Good, Bad, and The Ugly.


RE: Sennheiser
By soydios on 11/28/2008 5:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
I've had a pair of HD280pros for several years now, and they have always sounded great.


RE: Sennheiser
By TomCorelis on 11/28/2008 5:55:23 PM , Rating: 2
Anyone ever tried to use those headphones in a studio monitoring environment? I have a pair of M-Audio BX8's but no sub... getting sub-bass to sit well is always a pain in the ass as I have to A/B with my computer speakers. In any case, I'm not sure future roommates will take kindly to a guy writing basslines at 3 in the morning :-)


RE: Sennheiser
By HaZaRd2K6 on 11/30/2008 11:50:12 AM , Rating: 2
Speaking from experience with regards to the BX8s, I'd say upgrade to either the BX8a Deluxes, or to the KRK Rokit 8s. The bass response on them is much better than the original BX8s. Other than that, grab an M-Audio BX10S (they're cheap now--under $300) for added boom.

Just keep in mind that if you're producing (and judging from the NI references above, you are) adding a sub will colour your audio. The great thing about the BX10S is that it comes with a subwoofer bypass footswitch so you can just disable it temporarily.


RE: Sennheiser
By TomCorelis on 12/1/2008 4:02:20 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the tips. As for speakers (of any kind) coloring your audio, it helps a lot to A/B your track against other artists' published music, and to play your own music on as many different sound systems that you can get your hands on.


Samsung T240HD 24” HDTV ***MONITOR*** ???
By Basilisk on 11/28/2008 9:30:06 PM , Rating: 2
This article uses the name/description NewEgg and Samsung use. But... have I had too much Dewars tonight? Didn't "monitor" used to mean a display w/o a tuner ? This just seems to be an HDTV which can be used as a monitor -- like most of them can.

I'm not saying I don't like the unit; I do like it, albeit it's a few inches too small for my ancient eyes. A 28" would be a win for me.

But... am I missing some feature of this that makes it specially advertisable as a MONITOR????? I really don't "get it".




By S3anister on 11/28/2008 9:50:32 PM , Rating: 2
It's a monitor because its primary function is to operate in unison with a computer. The fact that is runs at 1920 x 1200 is proof of this, where a normal HDTV would specify it's operating range to be 720p/1080i/p.


By walk2k on 11/29/2008 1:56:28 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. This isn't a computer monitor. It's an HDTV that happens to have a PC input - which many of them do. It has a tuner and built-in speakers, like you'd expect a TV to have - not a monitor.


By walk2k on 11/29/2008 1:57:40 PM , Rating: 2
AND a remote control...


RE: Samsung T240HD 24” HDTV ***MONITOR*** ???
By walk2k on 11/29/2008 2:06:20 PM , Rating: 2
THIS appears to be the "monitor" version of that display.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

No speakers, no TV tuner or TV inputs (just DVI and VGA), it's also $100+ cheaper (after rebate).


By walk2k on 11/29/2008 2:12:38 PM , Rating: 2
AnandTech, what's that?
By Lifted on 11/28/2008 7:42:01 PM , Rating: 3
Funny how the URL's all say AnandTech promotion when we've been told numerous times that the two sites have nothing to do with one another. ;)




RE: AnandTech, what's that?
By BruceLeet on 11/30/2008 2:22:18 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
DailyTech stands completely against online “payola.” If any member of the DailyTech team is caught accepting any sort of gift, bribe, or form of monetary compensation in order to push coverage of a certain company or product, it will result in immediate termination of contract. All content at DailyTech.com is completely advertising-independent; there is a strict separation between all forms of advertising and editorial activities. If any member of the team is approached for advertising, the contact must immediately be redirected to our third-party advertising team.


OkieDokie


GGW-H20L only plays Blu-Ray, doesn't burn them.
By zagood on 11/28/2008 11:30:18 PM , Rating: 3
LG Black 6X Blu-ray DVD-ROM 16X DVD-ROM 40X CD-ROM SATA Internal Blu-ray/HD DVD-ROM & 16X DVD±R DVD Burner Model GGC-H20L - Retail:

Read Speed:
Blu-ray DVD-ROM 6X
DVD-ROM 16X
CD-ROM 40X
HD DVD-ROM: 3X

Write Speed:
DVD+R: 16X
DVD+RW: 8X
DVD-R: 16X
DVD-RW: 6X
CD-R: 40X
CD-RW: 24X
DVD+R DL: 4X
DVD-R DL: 4X
DVD-RAM: 5X




By TomCorelis on 11/29/2008 1:42:10 PM , Rating: 2
I got the links mixed up while writing this... though, I could have sworn I posted the correct link. In either case, thanks for the heads up -- it's fixed.


Disagree on Some Products
By jmurbank on 11/30/2008 3:02:37 AM , Rating: 2
I would not buy a LG optical drive because it is just not reliable and quality is poor. I have a ASUS and TEAC optical drives they are reliable after using them for 8 years. I have used Sony, Pioneer, and LG that have failed with only little use. If you are going to talk about reliability and long life of optical drives, spend the money on more quality brands like the brands that I listed and in addition Plextor.

Relating the quality of hard drive brands to how many failures is not a good way to compare. All hard drives fails. Back ups are needed, so data is not lost. When using a hard drive, it is the performance that matters. Performances relates to latency and throughput. Since latency can not be improved, throughput can be left out. Hard drive brands that has low overall latency are Hitachi and Western Digital. For a cheap terabyte hard drive, I would pick Western Digital Green series or model WD10EACS. The reason is this series uses less electricity, produces less heat, and generates less noise (vibrates less).

The memory that you selected is OK, but there is something better at the same price. A memory that is better is G.SKILL PI Black model F2-6400CL4D-4GBPI-B. The heat sink may put off many people because it requires some height clearance. The G.SKILL memory has lower latency and the voltage can be set at the normal voltage for DDR2. The normal voltage for DDR2 is around 1.8 volts to 1.9 volts. The Super TALENT memory is OK if you do not mind the memory to not last long with overvolting to 2.1 volts, produces more heat, and it lags the computer from its higher latency. The G.SKILL will last longer because it has a larger heat sink and the voltage can be at the normal voltage.

The Cowon O2 looks good as a multimedia portable player. It can be an alternative to the iPod Touch.




RE: Disagree on Some Products
By daar on 12/3/2008 5:47:08 AM , Rating: 2
What's your sample size like though? I've had the opposite with TEAC and Lite-On drives fail, but Sony, LG, and Pioneer still going strong. Reviews from cdfreaks show them to produce good results as well. Though, I don't know about Sony, that was back in the CD-RW days and they've changed a lot since then. My school department had dozens of LG as well, still working fine, and it was because of this longevity that I bought from them.


Samsung T240HD
By AlexWade on 11/28/2008 8:25:15 PM , Rating: 2
I have the Samsung T240HD monitor. It is great but not perfect. My main complaint is that it takes 3 seconds for the display to activate from standby or from off. It also does not display 720p channels as well as 1080i channels. Those gripes aside, it is a great monitor. I got mine on sale at the Egg. The T260HD monitor isn't worth the extra money because it is only 1.5" larger.




"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il









botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki