Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Red_Fred
Oct 21, 2010


Fallen Rib

Lambert posted:

I usually have two front fans (filtered) for intake and one in the top back for exhaust, works well. And yes, the CPU cooler should blow towards the back fan in your situation.

Thanks. Final weird question is; would it work to mix the stock 120mm front fan with a new 140mm fan? The Meshify C supports 120mm or 140mm and I figured I only need one more fan in the front so 140mm would be better than 120mm.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



Yeah it doesn't matter what the fan sizes are, they aren't going to know the difference. :ssh:

Larger fans can move more air at lower RPM and thus be quieter, though, so go with that.

Red_Fred
Oct 21, 2010


Fallen Rib

Atomizer posted:

Yeah it doesn't matter what the fan sizes are, they aren't going to know the difference. :ssh:

Larger fans can move more air at lower RPM and thus be quieter, though, so go with that.

Sweet, thanks. I’ll pick one up tomorrow so I don’t need to mess with RPMs.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



Well I mean ideally you have the system regulate their speed, but in general like I said, larger fans can push more air. You may have heard laptop and/or SFF PC (think NUCs) fans, which are necessarily tiny, sounding like a jet engine because they have to spin up very fast to cool their components.

The only reason I can think of to go with a smaller fan (e.g. 120 instead of 140) is if space was an issue or something like that.

Eregos
Aug 17, 2006

A Reversal of Fortune, Perhaps?
I accidentally erased a hard drive partition while upgrading a computer (logical failure). I did this by reformatting the wrong hard drive from acronis true image I was running from a CD (easy mistake to make given how the names get displayed in programs run from bios sometimes). It's likely the reformatting happened multiple times by accident. I read about logical recovery, attempted data recovery with Puran file recovery, but this was basically only able to recover the file structure. Mostly video files were lost, they either don't play at all or play for a few seconds or minutes before reaching data corruption. It's inconvenient to lose, easily worth $100, maybe $750 at most. After realizing my mistake I made sure not to format the drive and it's been sitting disconnected for a year now. What should I do? I've been researching professional logical data failure recovery services, but it occurred to me somebody here might have good advice. I can make copies of the files I recovered, perhaps I should be using some kind of tool that can reformat most file extensions to make them error tolerant?

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib
You could try running recovery tools like Easus or Recuva. They're of differing quality, so if you can't get the files you need with one tool, another might work.

hobocat76
Jan 4, 2019
So if this is the wrong thread, I apologize, and if someone could point me in the right direction it would be appreciated. So with my current rig I have a i5 4690k in a ASRock B85M-DGS. Would this motherboard be ok to overclock on? I know the cpu should be fine, but I am unsure of how much the motherboard affects overclocking since I have never done it before. I'm just hoping to get a bit more power out of my i5 since things like BFV, and total war: warhammer 2 tend to dip frames below 60.

CPU: https://secure.newegg.com/NewMyAccount/OrderHistory.aspx?RandomID=58601209341956620190104121034

Mobo: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157573

Indiana_Krom
Jun 18, 2007
Net Slacker

hobocat76 posted:

So if this is the wrong thread, I apologize, and if someone could point me in the right direction it would be appreciated. So with my current rig I have a i5 4690k in a ASRock B85M-DGS. Would this motherboard be ok to overclock on? I know the cpu should be fine, but I am unsure of how much the motherboard affects overclocking since I have never done it before. I'm just hoping to get a bit more power out of my i5 since things like BFV, and total war: warhammer 2 tend to dip frames below 60.

CPU: https://secure.newegg.com/NewMyAccount/OrderHistory.aspx?RandomID=58601209341956620190104121034

Mobo: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157573

B85 chipset is the lowest feature set of its generation, it does not support overclocking (and that board couldn't handle the increased power demand anyway). You need a board with a Z87 chipset.

hobocat76
Jan 4, 2019

Indiana_Krom posted:

B85 chipset is the lowest feature set of its generation, it does not support overclocking (and that board couldn't handle the increased power demand anyway). You need a board with a Z87 chipset.

Alright, Might be time to upgrade then.
Thank you!

Farecoal
Oct 15, 2011

There he go
9 errors with MemTest is bad right

Melp
Feb 26, 2004

You know the drill.

Farecoal posted:

9 errors with MemTest is bad right

nah 10 is the threshold, you good

Rexxed
May 1, 2010

Dis is amazing!
I gotta try dis!

Farecoal posted:

9 errors with MemTest is bad right

Yeah, even one error is too many. Either it's your RAM or the motherboard. I usually try to switch sticks around in the slots to find the bad one if it's a dual channel kit, but you can RMA the whole thing. It could be the motherboard but usually I try replacing the RAM first since it's almost always got a lifetime warranty.

sb hermit
Dec 13, 2016





Rexxed posted:

Yeah, even one error is too many. Either it's your RAM or the motherboard. I usually try to switch sticks around in the slots to find the bad one if it's a dual channel kit, but you can RMA the whole thing. It could be the motherboard but usually I try replacing the RAM first since it's almost always got a lifetime warranty.

yes... to be clear, anything greater than 0 is bad

Gunder
May 22, 2003

I'm considering picking up an RTX 2060 to replace my current 1060 and was wondering if my current PSU would be up to the task. Currently, my system is as follows:

Intel i5 6600k
16 gigs of RAM
Nvidia GTX 1060 (6gb version)
EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2. (650 watt)

I'm not really sure how to calculate this stuff, but the 2060 reviews I've read online seem to indicate that it draws quite a bit more power than the 1060 does. Do I need a new PSU?

Gunder fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Jan 15, 2019

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



No, that PSU should be fine. Modern PCs don't use as much power as you'd expect; the high-power supplies from a decade ago (i.e. kW-class) were really only necessary because multi-GPU SLI/Xfire configurations were a thing. I'm not even going to look up the power draw values for your components but I'll estimate to prove a point: budget 75 W for the CPU, 150 W for the GPU, and say 100 W (which is overkill) for everything else (fans, mobo, RAM, drives) and you can see that you have plenty of headroom.

All of the miscellaneous components use power in the low tens of watts range (e.g. RAM is a few per module) and CPU TDPs are easy to find. For GPUs, just remember that the PCIe slot supplies up to 75 W, each 6-pin connector is up to 75 W, and 8-pin connectors are for 150 W. The most power any graphics card can draw is 375 W with 2x8-pin connectors, and even then that's pretty rare, especially for nVidia's more efficient cards.

For comparison, I have a 3770k, 1070, 16 GB of DDR3, 1 HDD and 2 SSDs in my old desktop with a 500 W PSU; according to the UPS, it draws in the 200-300 W range when gaming.

Dominoes
Sep 20, 2007

Do y'all have any recommendations for a small desktop PC? Looking to run a (fairly intensive) browser-based app on 4k TVs, all day. Something like the mint box looks great, but do you have any alternatives you'd recommend instead? Thanks.

Rexxed
May 1, 2010

Dis is amazing!
I gotta try dis!

Dominoes posted:

Do y'all have any recommendations for a small desktop PC? Looking to run a (fairly intensive) browser-based app on 4k TVs, all day. Something like the mint box looks great, but do you have any alternatives you'd recommend instead? Thanks.

Intel has their NUC PCs in all kinds of configurations from low end to high and they're solid choices. I've used a Zotac Z-Box on a 4k TV with an i5, 8gb of RAM and an SSD for a client to just do basic stuff on. I forget how much it all cost but I think it was around $300. There's also some others like the Gigabyte Brix, HP Mini desktops, etc. I'm sure there's even more than that from Dell, ASUS, Acer. The one I used came with a bracket to fit on the back of a monitor with 75mm or 100mm VESA mounting holes but I just attached it to the wall next to the TV.

The main things to keep in mind is that are some mini pcs that are basically ultrabooks with portable CPUs in them that often have eMMC flash storage and soldered on RAM. Those tend to be under $200 and usually have 2 or 4GB of RAM and 32 or 64GB of storage. Those won't be good for what you want. The better options will have laptop or desktop CPUs, usually take laptop RAM (sodimms) and most have a spot to put an SSD in them. That way you can kind of spec out what you need. Depending on how intensive your application is you might want an i5, 8 or 16GB of RAM and 250GB SSDs are pretty cheap these days.

Rexxed fucked around with this message at 10:18 on Jan 16, 2019

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib
The Lenovo Tiny and Dell Optiplex Micro systems should fit the bill as well, very happy with my Lenovo M710q (M720q is now out)

Geoj
May 28, 2008

BITTER POOR PERSON
Word of warning with NUCs and knockoffs - Intel HD graphics is limited to 30hz refresh rates at 4k resolution over HDMI. If a 60hz or higher refresh rate is desired/required make sure whatever you end up buying has a DisplayPort connection of some kind.

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib

Geoj posted:

Word of warning with NUCs and knockoffs - Intel HD graphics is limited to 30hz refresh rates at 4k resolution over HDMI. If a 60hz or higher refresh rate is desired/required make sure whatever you end up buying has a DisplayPort connection of some kind.

This isn't true for current NUCs.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005571/mini-pcs.html

Stevefin
Sep 30, 2013

I have a question regarding a motherboard and case I am looking at, in that I am not sure if the motherboard has enough fan sockets for the fans the case comes with

Case in question is a Thermaltake Versa J24 with RGB
Motherboard is a Asus Tuf B40m micro atx

and if the board does not have enough slots for the fan how could I go about fixing it?

Indiana_Krom
Jun 18, 2007
Net Slacker

Stevefin posted:

I have a question regarding a motherboard and case I am looking at, in that I am not sure if the motherboard has enough fan sockets for the fans the case comes with

Case in question is a Thermaltake Versa J24 with RGB
Motherboard is a Asus Tuf B40m micro atx

and if the board does not have enough slots for the fan how could I go about fixing it?

Use splitter cables and fan hubs, amazon has a billion of them for cheap. For relatively low powered case fans, a simple Y or 3-4 way fan splitting cable will let you run multiple fans off a single header from the motherboard. There are hubs that can drive 8-12 fans at once, but they should only be used with PWM fans (identified by having a 4 pin power cable) and use a separate power plug to deliver the necessary amperage.

For best results never drive different types/sizes/brands of fan together on the same cable. So if you plug 4 fans into a 4 way cable, they should all be identical fans.

Indiana_Krom fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Jan 17, 2019

Eletriarnation
Apr 6, 2005

People don't appreciate the substance of things...
objects in space.


Oven Wrangler

Geoj posted:

Word of warning with NUCs and knockoffs - Intel HD graphics is limited to 30hz refresh rates at 4k resolution over HDMI. If a 60hz or higher refresh rate is desired/required make sure whatever you end up buying has a DisplayPort connection of some kind.

In my experience you can get HDMI 2.0 out of a DP1.2 port on a NUC with a $20 active adapters; I've had good results with the Plugable branded ones from Amazon.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



Geoj posted:

Word of warning with NUCs and knockoffs - Intel HD graphics is limited to 30hz refresh rates at 4k resolution over HDMI. If a 60hz or higher refresh rate is desired/required make sure whatever you end up buying has a DisplayPort connection of some kind.

This, if true, is dependent on the versions of HDMI and/or DP present, rather than it being an Intel or iGPU thing. You can look up the bandwidth and capabilities of each HDMI and DP version, but roughly, the contemporary versions of each result in DP generally having higher bandwidth and thus output in a given system.

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib

Eletriarnation posted:

In my experience you can get HDMI 2.0 out of a DP1.2 port on a NUC with a $20 active adapters; I've had good results with the Plugable branded ones from Amazon.

Current NUCs supports HDMI 2.0 directly.

Eletriarnation
Apr 6, 2005

People don't appreciate the substance of things...
objects in space.


Oven Wrangler
Yes, I know, but on some older models that don't like the Broadwell one sitting in front of me you can get 2.0 using an adapter. If I recall correctly current models don't even do DP so I didn't think I was going to be confusing anyone there, just figured I'd mention it in case someone was in that position.

Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Jan 17, 2019

MeKeV
Aug 10, 2010
Whats the best way of choosing a graphics card (identifying if one can) run three monitors at 1080, while on a budget.
Or would something external be a better way to go?

I'm looking at a new build (none gaming) and although I'm on 2 screens currently, I'd like to set up with the possibility of a third somewhere down the line.

So far I've only noted the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, at about £170 as an option, though I'm not 100% certain the three outputs can all be used at once. edit It's OK with 3 screens at 4k @ 60hz

edit2 found the output sliders on parts picker. Finding cards with min 3 outputs is a start, then I can look at their specs in detail when I find one in stock and cheap.

MeKeV fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Jan 17, 2019

Eletriarnation
Apr 6, 2005

People don't appreciate the substance of things...
objects in space.


Oven Wrangler
Three at 1080? Anything remotely new with three outputs should be OK, I have a Geforce 640 and a Radeon 7750 that can both do that. If you want to buy new you're looking at an RX 460/560 or a Geforce 1050.

Anything Radeon Pro or Quadro is going to have you spending more than you need to unless you're getting a great deal on a used one.

Broose
Oct 28, 2007
I have a question and google hasn't really been much help beyond the obvious:

What parts of a computer would make a video game load faster?

I ask cause I'm playing one of those games right now that has so many god drat loading screens that are like 15-30 seconds long even though it is on a SSD (860? EVO SATA 3). Everyone says put it on a SSD (and I read that there isn't much difference between sata 3 and nvme. Is that true?) but is there anything to be done to make it even quicker? What makes my video games load so drat (relatively) slow?

Sniep
Mar 28, 2004

All I needed was that fatty blunt...



King of Breakfast

Broose posted:

I have a question and google hasn't really been much help beyond the obvious:

What parts of a computer would make a video game load faster?

I ask cause I'm playing one of those games right now that has so many god drat loading screens that are like 15-30 seconds long even though it is on a SSD (860? EVO SATA 3). Everyone says put it on a SSD (and I read that there isn't much difference between sata 3 and nvme. Is that true?) but is there anything to be done to make it even quicker? What makes my video games load so drat (relatively) slow?

You need to identify your bottleneck. If you're not in the first few in the lobby with the game and os both on SSD and modern build, something's wrong.

What's the rest of the specs? what happens when you bench it at https://www.userbenchmark.com/ ?

sb hermit
Dec 13, 2016





Sniep posted:

You need to identify your bottleneck. If you're not in the first few in the lobby with the game and os both on SSD and modern build, something's wrong.

What's the rest of the specs? what happens when you bench it at https://www.userbenchmark.com/ ?

I agree with this but... most importantly... tell us how much RAM you have

Broose
Oct 28, 2007
I meant it more has a hypothetical, rather than a troubleshoot. Just trying to learn more about bottlenecks of game loading I suppose? I mean what makes a game load slow-ish compared to the fast SSD? Why wouldn't a NVMe ssd be tons better? The ram? The CPU? GPU? I can take a guess, but I wouldn't know the specifics.

I don't think it really has any effect on the answer, but I guess we can use my PC as an example system. 16 GB DDR3-1600, i5 3570 @ 3.4GHz, some gtx 970 4GB gpu, and a samsung 860 evo.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



MeKeV posted:

Whats the best way of choosing a graphics card (identifying if one can) run three monitors at 1080, while on a budget.
Or would something external be a better way to go?

I'm looking at a new build (none gaming) and although I'm on 2 screens currently, I'd like to set up with the possibility of a third somewhere down the line.

So far I've only noted the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, at about £170 as an option, though I'm not 100% certain the three outputs can all be used at once. edit It's OK with 3 screens at 4k @ 60hz

edit2 found the output sliders on parts picker. Finding cards with min 3 outputs is a start, then I can look at their specs in detail when I find one in stock and cheap.

Any graphics card with the outputs will run desktop stuff no problem; I had up to all 5 outputs on my 1070 occupied (including an Oculus Rift) at one point before dropping a couple displays after getting a single UHD panel that sufficed for all my secondary stuff. The only strain on the GPU would be gaming, which you aren't interested in. At this point, look for pretty much any graphics card that has the specific outputs you want.

Note that you can use an active converter to go from DP to an HDMI display, but not the other way around. Conversely, the base video signal is shared between HDMI and DVI so those are compatible with passive adapters. A lot of the really cheap non-gaming graphics cards have VGA (analog) outputs unfortunately, so you may have to go with a higher-end (gaming) one like a 1050 to get something with enough of the right outputs.

Broose posted:

I have a question and google hasn't really been much help beyond the obvious:

What parts of a computer would make a video game load faster?

I ask cause I'm playing one of those games right now that has so many god drat loading screens that are like 15-30 seconds long even though it is on a SSD (860? EVO SATA 3). Everyone says put it on a SSD (and I read that there isn't much difference between sata 3 and nvme. Is that true?) but is there anything to be done to make it even quicker? What makes my video games load so drat (relatively) slow?

You'd have to run Task Manager and look for the bottleneck; this is much easier if you have more than one display and can have it running on the secondary. Have the CPU tab open, showing individual threads. Look for anything at 100% utilization; this could be across the entire CPU, or one or two threads if the game in question isn't heavily multithreaded. The storage device might also be the bottleneck, even if it's an SSD, so keep an eye on that to see if that's going to 100% utilization. NVMe SSDs are indeed faster than SATA ones, by the way, but not in a capacity meaningful to the average user.

The other components are less likely to be the bottleneck; if you have insufficient RAM, for example, the OS will page out to local storage, so you can note how much memory is in use. If this is a multiplayer game, your Internet connection could also be the culprit if the game waits for data from the server.

What game(s) exactly are you having this issue with?

Sniep
Mar 28, 2004

All I needed was that fatty blunt...



King of Breakfast
I mean check your temps, too, quite often system's thermals get messed up due to paste drying out and loose contacts between surfaces causing chips to crisp and self throttle. You really gotta take a look into what's happening on the system.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



That too, but that should be obvious in terms of observable fan speed, noise, and heat output. The CPU would also likely be pegged and shown in Task Manager, or MSI Afterburner, or whatever other hardware monitor you want to use. It could certainly also be the case with the GPU, although I think that's less of a concern here since the issue is level load times (which will have more to do with transferring data than rendering everything in 3D all at once.)

EssOEss
Oct 23, 2006
128-bit approved
What game is this? Some games are just made by idiots and load slow as molasses by design.

ufarn
May 30, 2009
Is there a next big thing coming up in HDD (mass) storage, or is it still the usual "just buy WD, make sure it's 7200 RPM" mantra from the last ten years?

I'm on AM4 so no Optane for me.

future ghost
Dec 5, 2005

:byetankie:
Gun Saliva
Filling up HDDs with exotic gasses for higher densities and vastly increased SSD sizes mostly. If you don't need to buy now then SSDs should get even cheaper by Q2. If you're going for no more than a TB I'd aim for SSD storage, otherwise buy a WD or Hitachi (owned by WD) drive for more capacity.

ufarn
May 30, 2009
Oh yeah, I think I was trying to remember the MAMR hype.

There's also QLC for SSDs which sounds like a performance trade-off for more storage space.

Are current HDDs on HAMR? E: Looks like Seagate is going for HAMR while WD want to go move towards MAMR.

ufarn fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jan 21, 2019

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib

ufarn posted:

Is there a next big thing coming up in HDD (mass) storage, or is it still the usual "just buy WD, make sure it's 7200 RPM" mantra from the last ten years?

I'm on AM4 so no Optane for me.

Brands don't matter. The best way of judging a drive's quality is how long the manufacturer's warranty is.

Also, I wouldn't put a 7200 RPM drive into a desktop - they tend to be noticeably louder than drives spinning slower. And if speed is a concern, a HDD is the wrong product anyways.

With high capacity drives, you should be on the lookout for drives with shingled magnetic recording (SMR) - with these drives, bits are written on top of each other (like shingles on a roof). That means that, even if only a single bit is changed, a whole section has to be rewritten. With these drives, writes tend to be extremely slow and they have to reorganize newly written data for hours or even days at a time. They're a bad choice for most applications, but fine if you just need a dumping ground for data that won't change.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply