[X] My Assistant

Oh that! That GPU uses a Tahiti LE chip. The chip packs more performance than Tatihi. But the trade off is more heat & power consumption. That would explain the noisy fan. It has to work extra hard to keep the temperature down. Well, either that or Powercolor's cooler is lousy in the first place.

actually, it's less performance then a tahiti. Some of it's shaders are disabled and it has less memory bandwith. It does beat pitcarins though and for the price i paid (242 after MIR + bioshock inf and tomb raider), it's a great deal.

i am tempted to start playing with headphones it is so noisy ><

i am tempted to start playing with headphones it is so noisy ><

Maybe you could get another GPU Fan, or get a better Tower fans.

Bigger fans need to spin less in order to move the same wind as a smaller fan, so they make less noise.

Yes, and I managed to mine 31 BTC! (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Yeah, I wish... (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)

OMG, how did you mine 31 BTC ? care to share the titbits of it ? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I failed to install BTC client miner in my server (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/cry.gif) (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/cry.gif)

And the rest is only my laptop which is not enough power to mine one (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Hopefully if possible I want to donate too to this community >,<

---------------------------------------------

Thinking of buying a desktop PC set ( my laptop is kinda old now and my server can't handle graphics ... )

OMG, how did you mine 31 BTC ? care to share the titbits of it ? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I failed to install BTC client miner in my server (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/cry.gif) (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/cry.gif)

And the rest is only my laptop which is not enough power to mine one (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Hopefully if possible I want to donate too to this community >,<

---------------------------------------------

Thinking of buying a desktop PC set ( my laptop is kinda old now and my server can't handle graphics ... )

No, no, no... You misunderstand. Read the second sentence. I assumed you're making a light joke. So I replied with a joke. If I had that much BTC, I'd have the Catgirl aura under my profile. Maybe I'll consider again of making donation to EH next year. If you still remember my PM to you, 31 BTC is the amount that I've been scammed.

must... resist in tweaking my vid card.. don't want to void my warranty....

must... resist in tweaking my vid card.. don't want to void my warranty....

Tweak, how? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

Goodbye, old hard drive. You've been a wonderful ally.

Tweak, how? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

by taking off the stock cooler and putting a corsair h50 on it instead (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

by taking off the stock cooler and putting a corsair h50 on it instead (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Well, in that case go ahead. If you're daring enough to change the cooler, I guess it's because you know what you're doing... Wait a minute, isn't H50 is CPU cooler?

Why is it that the C Standard (C99+) still uses the insecure scanf() (besides history/comparability)?

Well, in that case go ahead. If you're daring enough to change the cooler, I guess it's because you know what you're doing... Wait a minute, isn't H50 is CPU cooler?

Done it myself a couple of time though I did waste a HD5850 one time because I took of the "Chip cooler" which overheated them about a year later with my modified bigass old school GPU cooler.

It's basically like changing a CPU cooler but you have to be a bit more careful with the cooling parts.

Also would recommend buying an actual water cooling system since Corsairs Coolers isn't exactly a "WOW! MY HAND FROZE FROM THESE TEMPS!".



This post has been edited by GanGun : Apr 7 2013, 05:22

Why is it that the C Standard (C99+) still uses the insecure scanf() (besides history/comparability)?

Because everyone (GNU, IBM, HP, and Sun) ignored C99 and kept saying that everything shall be C89 compatile, then no one cared much about the content of newer any C standards...

Because everyone (GNU, IBM, HP, and Sun) ignored C99 and kept saying that everything shall be C89 compatile, then no one cared much about the content of newer any C standards...

Like I always have said about GNU...
CURSE YOU STALLMAN!

And to the rest of them, it's is pretty obvious, you just say "What a bunch of idiots!".

This post has been edited by GanGun : Apr 8 2013, 03:17

Poor Stallman. He's a great guy, unless you try talking to him for more than 15 minutes. (although, he's very good at writing emails)

(IMG:[i.imm.io] http://i.imm.io/12u03.jpeg)

Now I need to find something to do for the next...I dunno...three hours?

(IMG:[i.imm.io] http://i.imm.io/12u03.jpeg)

Now I need to find something to do for the next...I dunno...three hours?

That feel, brah.

(IMG:[i.imm.io] http://i.imm.io/12u03.jpeg)

Now I need to find something to do for the next...I dunno...three hours?

Read this, while you wait.
I have lots of experience maintaining pc's and this man made the most amazing post ever, which really improved performance after i tried it.

Some cleaning tools i use before i do a defrag are;
CCleaner with addon for more cleaning options.
RegCleaner, really old software but still useful and simple.
jv16 Powertools, mostly for junk files and temp data + registry, all manually checked of course.
Revo Uninstaller Pro for soft you don't need or didn't completely get removed.

I use some other stuff too but aren't really worth mentioning.

CODE

http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-disk-de-fragmenter.htm

by DesElms on 7. August 2011 - 19:05  (#77096)

Though I come to a different conclusion than does he, I generally agree with Warwick's overall: "It is a pity to see so much heat and so little light being generated!"

Let me see if I can make my 35 years of professional IT experience pay off a little, here...

I'm old enough to remember old DOS days (I go back way before that, but only DOS days are relevant to this discussion), and FAT (rather than NTFS), and the defragger in Norton Utilities, and DR-DOS, etc. There were several, actually, which all did a more or less magnificent job because, in the end, FAT32 defragging is childsplay compared to NTFS defragging; and defraggers, back then, were much more needed because FAT disk layout schemes defrag more, more easily, faster, and with far greater negative (in terms of slowing things down) consequences, than do NTFS schemes (though, don't get me wrong, NTFS defragments just fine, too, thankyouverymuch).

Finding a good -- and by that I mean a TRULY good -- NTFS defragger has always been a challenge because, unlike with FAT defragging, there are far more things to consider, approaches to the task, differences of opinion as to what matters and what doesn't, etc. The typical end-user who doesn't realize how vastly different can be the defragging choices will just go with what looks good, or is most polished, or which a lot of people talk about...

...all with little regard to whether the tool is actually DOING anything particularly useful. Consequently, there's a lot of wacky recommendations based on nothing but lore floating around out there; and the thing that's bad about that is that such lore is usually based, in largest measure, on the popularity of the tool, which, in turn, depends a lot on how well it's marketed, and often not how well it actually works. And, sadly, unlike during old DOS and FAT32 days when pretty much all defraggers were okay because there was pretty much only one way to defrag which actually made any difference, there are many NTFS defraggers out there which are largely ineffective... though sometimes very pretty to watch on the screen as they shuffle around their little squares.

I've always said that (especially) with NTFS defraggers, pretty much the only way to determine if one was better than another was good, old-fashioned, head-to-head testing in a controlled environment where in the exact same machine, with a freshly-restore image of exactly the same amount of defragmentation is used for each test so it would really be an apples-to-apples comparison.

In 2007, a fellow named Donn Edwards (who's a respected member of the SpamCop organization) did just that. And he did it well... so well that defragger makers emailed him and asked for more details; and for his suggestions for making their products better. Consequently, he repeated the tests in 2009 to see if anyone had improved anything.

I don't mean to suggest that we should all just accept his results prima facie, but I mention him and his tests because more than learning what are his specific product recommendations, I learned how the defragmentation process actually works, and how the best practices actually involve a multi-part task, if done correctly; and how the different tools out there each approach them differently; and how one approach for one part of the overall task does not necessarily apply well to other parts of it. It was all really quite eye-opening for me...

...and if everyone around here will allow me, I'd like to now share my triple-net, final, bottom line recommendations based on all of that; and also on my subsequent reading and learning and trying to figure out the best combinations of tools to by-golly get the best possible job done.

Speeding-up a machine with an NTFS-formatted drive requires more than one step (and tool). In short...

The first step is two-fold: First, there's getting all the junk files off of the drive... temp files and whatever else doesn't belong there; and, secondly, there's stripping out of the registry that sometimes thousands of no-longer-valid, orphaned, etc. entries in it. Many hail CCleaner as the tool of choice for this; and while CCleaner is, indeed, good, there are temp and other folders which it simply ignores (and which it shouldn't). That said, what CCleaner DOES do, it does well, so I still recommend it; but I always recommend using, after it, Comodo System Cleaner... which, agreed, can be dangers if misused. Of course, as with ComboFix for removing malware (and how dangerous it can be), the best tools of this sort are always analogous to gently using steel wool on Teflon.

The second step is to put the registry into one big contiguous block. Some think that that means "defragging" just the registry, such as the used-to-be-freeware Auslogics Registry Defragger does; but a little and obscure freeware tool named NTRegOpt does it far better because it simply builds a whole new copy of the registry in contiguous blocks and files in one big spot on the hard drive, then it creates an execute-on-reboot command to tell Windows to use the new and rebuilt registry, and not the old fragmented one, on reboot. Of course that still puts the registry on not necessarily the best (in terms of speed) part of the drive, but at least it's all defragged and in one big place, as it should be, as a next step in the process.

The third step is to do essentially the same thing to the PAGE file... where memory paging/swapping, etc. occurs. When that file gets its parts all scattered around the drive, things can REALLY slow down. The best tool for that, I've found, is Sysinternals's free little PAGE DEFRAG utility. It's unbelievably effective.

The fourth and final step, then, is the overall defrag... the part which is the subject of this Gizmo article. And figuring out the best tool out there for that is what Donn Edwards's testing was all about. From his work, I came to a simple, bottom line conclusion...

...and that's that [commercial product removed] is just about the best all-round (but, sadly, for our purposes, here, commercial) defragger on the planet; with [commercial product removed] very close behind. However, this place is all about freeware, so since, of the two of them, only Puran offers a freeware version of its defragger, that's my freeware recommendation.

Oh, don't get me wrong, there are other freeware tools which come close in some ways; but Puran's overall approach to defragging, even without considering its interesting little "intelligent optimizer" (PIOZR) technique/feature, uses pretty much the same overall best NTFS defragmenting practices as does [commercial product removed]. And so, even if PIOZR is turned off, Puran does just about the best overall defragmenting job of all the freeware possibilities out there.

However, when PIOZR is factored-in, Puran puts pretty much everything else (among the freeware competitors) out there to shame. Seriously.

PIOZR, basically, just puts all the most needed things out nearest the outer edges of the physical drive platters, where any disk drive's performance numbers are the best. Anyone who's ever filled a very large modern-day drive such that only about 15 percent of its overall space is available can attest that anything physically located more toward the center (spindle) area of the physical platters are accessed the most slowly. So, putting things which Windows accesses very, very frequently (such as the registry, the page file, enough space for certain temp files and cookies, pretty much the entire contents of the System32 folder, etc.) can REALLY speed things up.

When the overall defragger (Puran, in this case) is able to deal with both the registry and the page file each as one big contiguous unit, the defragging process is sped-up a little (and Puran can more easily figure out how much space to allocate for it out near the edges of the platter) than if they were all fragged all over the place... hence the reason for my steps two and three, above.

By implementing this little pseudo-suite of tools, in the way I have above described it, I have been able to not merely speed-up, but VASTLY speed-up, even the seemingly slowest machines (which haven't been defragged in a while); and in my own testing, steps one through three really make step four more effective.

One additional cool feature of Puran is that it can do boot-time mini-defrags... sort of ongoing "maintenence" defrags. However, there's a law of diminishing returns to that sort of thing. Eventually, because boot-up defragging doesn't include what steps one through three does, the whole thing really needs to be occasionally done manually. Still, though, until those diminishing returns maximize, boot-up defragging can really help... and the freeware version of Puran, unlike most other freeware defraggers, does that.

Anyway, that's what I've learned; it's how I do things on my own machine; and it's how I advise my clients...

...all of whom seem very happy.

Here, just FYI, is Donn Edwards's defragger info page...

http://www.fact-reviews.com/defrag/Defragmentation.aspx

Hope that helps!

[Moderator's note : Mentions of commercial software removed. Please keep it to freeware]

Read this, while you wait.
I have lots of experience maintaining pc's and this man made the most amazing post ever, which really improved performance after i tried it.

Some cleaning tools i use before i do a defrag are;
CCleaner with addon for more cleaning options.
RegCleaner, really old software but still useful and simple.
jv16 Powertools, mostly for junk files and temp data + registry, all manually checked of course.
Revo Uninstaller Pro for soft you don't need or didn't completely get removed.

I use some other stuff too but aren't really worth mentioning.

Yeah, I use cleaners too, obviously. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/happy.gif) But still thanks for the thought. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Poor Stallman. He's a great guy, unless you try talking to him for more than 15 minutes. (although, he's very good at writing emails)

Yes a bit too much I would say..
(IMG:[images.encyclopediadramatica.se] https://images.encyclopediadramatica.se/3/30/Naivestallman.jpg)

Poor beardyman.

Yes a bit too much I would say..

I loled so much (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) , encyclopedia dramatica FTW. The best part is that it's completely plausible.

I should be whiteknighting Richard a little, I'm part of the FSF and wander savannah for a few hours a week so (in theory) he is my boss 2-3h/week. But nah, I won't whiteknight, he really is a big kid with a bunch of exceptional skills. And he do not need my whiteknighting.