On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 10:21:05AM +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 01:47 -0500, Javier Perez wrote:
Hi. I am using Fedora 35 and everything is working fine in general.
But I was checking out my hardware and I realized that It is from 2013. My CPU is 4th generation intel and I am using the nvidia-470 drivers for my video card. Motherboard uses the H87 chipset.
I just wonder if this combination will become obsolete anytime soon and should I worry about it...
Well in one sense it is already obsolescent tech. It attained that status a couple of months or maybe *days* after it left the production line. But in another sense, it is NOT obsolete. It still works and does *exactly* what is was designed to do and within its specifications. Of course you can do 'better' than that today. Faster etc.
My desktop has an Asus P8 series motherboard. The manual is copyright dated June 2011. I installed an Nvidia Geforce 9500GT in the predecessor motherboard and moved it over to this one when I upgraded about 4 years ago. (It uses the nvidia-3xx series drivers! and drives a 30" Dell monitor I bought in early 2007).
Has a 240G SSD for Fedora, and 2 500G nvme ssd's for storage (both in adapters as the MB has no M.2 slots). The second 500G nvme is recent, *because I got tired of listening to the hard drive hum!* The Thermaltake closed-system water cooler is basically silent and the core temps are generally about 35C. If I power test the system, I get 60C.
So this is not useless tech. To get anything faster I would need to step up to a faster CPU and MB and RAM... for not a lot of change.
What you have seems to meet your requirements so why are you worried?
My setup works like a charm and usually has an uptime measured in weeks.
Geoff
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 23:35 -0500, R. G. Newbury wrote:
To get anything faster I would need to step up to a faster CPU and MB and RAM... for not a lot of change.
For the average user, who just emails, browses the web, and does a bit of typing, they could double their CPU speed (and other things) and not notice any tangible difference. Most of the time the computer is idling and waiting for you. You'd really have to do a lot more than just make the computer a twice as fast to see a significant improvement. If everything is currently nice and responsive, you've probably got the system you already need.
If you were a heavy graphics gamer, video editor, or anything that required intensive processing work, then you would notice that things go quicker (e.g. if something used to take 30 minutes to render, you're going to appreciate it now taking 15 minutes).
So, one way to decide whether to upgrade any hardware is to consider what you do with the computer. If you do anything visually intensive, a better graphics card might be a worthwhile investment, without changing anything else, but if your existing one isn't slow or otherwise insufficient, it's probably not worth it. For some people, simply getting a nicer monitor is a big improvement, even if they don't buy a better graphics card.
If your computer ever gets into the running low on RAM stage, then that's something you can quite cheaply improve.
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 23:35 -0500, R. G. Newbury wrote:
Has a 240G SSD for Fedora, and 2 500G nvme ssd's for storage (both in adapters as the MB has no M.2 slots).
Somewhat OT, but do you notice a difference between the SSD and the NVMe+adapter combos? I don't have M.2 slots either and wondered if it made sense for me (I have a good SATA3 SSD already).
poc
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:00:47PM +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 23:35 -0500, R. G. Newbury wrote:
Has a 240G SSD for Fedora, and 2 500G nvme ssd's for storage (both in adapters as the MB has no M.2 slots).
Somewhat OT, but do you notice a difference between the SSD and the NVMe+adapter combos? I don't have M.2 slots either and wondered if it made sense for me (I have a good SATA3 SSD already).
I'm working on a new microserver that has 2 NVME sticks on a PCIe adapter card (0.5 TB and 1.0 TB) and a Crucial 1.0 TB SSD (SATA 3).
Using the simple hdparm -t buffered read test (not the -T cached read) I get about 3000MB/sec with both NVME sticks and about 550MB/sec from the SSD.
On Wed, 2022-03-09 at 03:06 -0500, Jon LaBadie wrote:
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:00:47PM +0000, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 23:35 -0500, R. G. Newbury wrote:
Has a 240G SSD for Fedora, and 2 500G nvme ssd's for storage (both in adapters as the MB has no M.2 slots).
Somewhat OT, but do you notice a difference between the SSD and the NVMe+adapter combos? I don't have M.2 slots either and wondered if it made sense for me (I have a good SATA3 SSD already).
I'm working on a new microserver that has 2 NVME sticks on a PCIe adapter card (0.5 TB and 1.0 TB) and a Crucial 1.0 TB SSD (SATA 3).
Using the simple hdparm -t buffered read test (not the -T cached read) I get about 3000MB/sec with both NVME sticks and about 550MB/sec from the SSD.
Thanks, that's useful.
poc
-
Jon LaBadie -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
R. G. Newbury -
Tim