Author Topic: Intel's i5  (Read 3235 times)

SlaughterALL

  • Guest
Intel's i5
« on: 3 April 2012, 04:45:15 »
Hi guys!

So my laptop runs a Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 (at the time of purchase, it was one of the best dual core CPUs).
My friend's newly bought laptop runs an i5 (forgot the numbers that specify the chip =/) I've tested his computer and have to say it's pretty crappy (CPU/monitor-wise). It seems to "stall" at simple tasks (like opening programs,etc) at times. Even my old CPU doesn't do that. His computer (specs-wise) is better than mine in almost every way: faster/bigger HDD, better GPU (not relevant, but still), more (and faster) RAM, Windows 7 to my Vista, and the i5 SHOULD be better than my old Core 2 Duo....(his monitor - 1600*900 is WAY crapper than my 1920*1200, that's the only category my computer soundly wins in).

 I am confident that the i-series Intel processors are great, but why does this one seem so terrible? Are only the desktop i-series processors good? Or do I need a laptop version of an i7 to really see a jump in performance? I know each crop of CPUs only increases performance by 10-20% from the previous generation but I see no difference when I compare it to how fast my CPU was when it was new (and I run Vista for god's sake!).

I plan to buy a new PC soon (desktop or laptop, not 100% sure of which I'll get) so I would like people's opinion's on these processors. Should I just get a laptop/desktop with an i7, or try out the i5? I've heard a LOT of good stuff about the i5 2500(K) - but that's for desktops.

So, opinions? Suggestions? Oh, and I dislike AMD. My father bought himself an AMD pre-built rig about 1 year ago before I could convince him otherwise. Like I predicted,
the computer is sluggish. My friend's above Intel laptop boots in <30s, and shuts down in 14s (I timed it just to see) whereas my father's PC takes minutes, even when it was brand new. It even takes 3 seconds to freaking bring up a right click menu on desktop FFS.....I'm not fully against AMD, some of their processors were pretty good (my father had a computer about 5 years ago that was excellent and had an AMD chip in it - an Athlon 64 if I'm not mistaken (I've also heard a lot of good stuff about some of their other older dual cores). But the most recent CPUs *cough* Bulldozer chips*cough* from them suck. (Their GPUs are great though). Sorry for the rant, just wanted to clear things up.


Omega

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Professional bug writer
    • View Profile
    • Personal site
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #1 on: 3 April 2012, 06:15:55 »
Firstly, you should note there's more than one kind of i5. The i5 is a series of processors, usually mid range, ranging from the 45nm Lynnfield processors to the 32nm Sandy Bridge processors. There's also some weaker "low power" versions. However, they're all pretty midrange, and should easily outdo a Core 2 Duo. Most the computer has other miscellaneous issues.

As for AMD, I'm not much of a fan either. My old laptop had an AMD processor, and it sucked pretty bad. I'm hoping to use an i7-3820 in a computer I hope to build in these upcoming months; it seems like a promising CPU for its price, being the cheapest Sandy Bridge-e chip available, yet slightly better than the i7-2600.
Edit the MegaGlest wiki: http://docs.megaglest.org/

My personal projects: http://github.com/KatrinaHoffert

SlaughterALL

  • Guest
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #2 on: 3 April 2012, 15:17:41 »
Thanks for the reply. I do know that the i5s are a series, but like you pointed out any one of them should beat my core 2 duo. That's what bugs me - like I said, the computer stalls more than it should, as if the CPU is "thinking" at times. Really annoying. I'll probably go with an i7 as well when I get the $ =)

-Archmage-

  • Moderator
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 5,887
  • Make it so.
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #3 on: 3 April 2012, 21:45:50 »
Firstly, processors have little to nothing to do with boot-speeds. That's all dependent on the drive speed and the operating system speed, RAM can also have effect if you don't have enough or it's very slow.
I've seen single-cores boot as fast as 6-cores, so trust me on this.

Secondly, AMD has a lot more bang for your buck, you just have to buy the right thing...
Take a look at the insane prices: I5, I7, I7Extreme, Phenom II (4-6 cores)
Notice: Intel I5's just start coming in at $180(!) That's a good bit more than I payed for my 6-core.
Right now, Newegg only has a low end 6-core Phenom in stock, on other sites you can find more powerful ones.

I highly recommend a Phenom 4-core with clock speeds 3GHz+. You will save money that will be better spent buying a graphics card. I know quite a few high level gamers with Phenoms, they are very happy, as am I.

By the way, I'm a custom-builder, I also build for other people, and I highly recommend building your own pc over buying an OEM one.
If you need any advice on other hardware, I can help. :)

Have you use a quality defragger yet? Please post the fragmentation rate of your HDD. If it's badly fragmented, that would cause noticeable stalling. Also, if you've overclocked anything I suggest you revert it to stock speeds. Heat can also cause stalls.

I have been payed to optimize peoples computers. No modern CPU is going to be the cause of a right-click lag.
Egypt Remastered!

Proof: Owner of glest@mail.com

-Archmage-

  • Moderator
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 5,887
  • Make it so.
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #4 on: 3 April 2012, 22:20:38 »
Oh this is a biggy: APUs from AMD
APU=CPU+GPU

A6-3670K in action BF3:
(click to show/hide)

A6-3500 in action MW3:
(click to show/hide)
Egypt Remastered!

Proof: Owner of glest@mail.com

SlaughterALL

  • Guest
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #5 on: 1 May 2012, 15:10:00 »
Hey Archmage. Yea, what you say is true. However, I think I neglected to mention my laptop, the one I was talking about, also used to boot up in ~20 seconds, running Vista and a 5400rpm HDD (same amount RAM too). The main difference between then and now is I've had 3-4 years to install/uninstall 100s of program, files,etc and just generally mess up my PC.
I don't think I would consider a phenom CPU. My friend has one, but I'd rather spend far more an get myself an i7. That should keep me for at least 5-8 years (and I'll overclock it after 5 years to add to its lifespan.)
Oh, I guess I must not have mentioned it here. I definitely will build my own PC (if I buy a desktop unit, which I'm leaning toward).

I tried using Window's defragger and before that Defraggler. While I like CCleaner very much, Defraggler didn't do anything. In fact, the defragmentation % increased after I ran it through the program. LOL. I belive its in the low 30s now. I realize that's bad, but none of the defragmenters did anything. Anyone care to recommend a different de-fragmentation program?

No offence, but if you refer to my original post and how I explained about my Dad's 6-core AMD processor, you'll see why I'm hesitant to buy an AMD CPU.
I agree Intel is more expensive, but when I do replace this laptop, I plan to keep the replacement for a long time. Heck, the only reason I need to replace this laptop is because of the blown GPU (my gaming performance is shit now). Otherwise, 3-4 years later, this laptop is still excellent. The monitor alone (1920*1200) would cost me a couple of hundred dollars to buy now (damn monitor makers being cheap and mostly producing 16:9), doesn't exist for laptops (except for Apple's extremely overpriced Macbook Pro 17" - I can get a HELL of a lot more for their base price).

Oh, also, the CPU I'm running right now, the Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, was around $300 when sold.
http://ark.intel.com/products/33917/Intel-Core2-Duo-Processor-T9300-(6M-Cache-2_50-GHz-800-MHz-FSB)
http://cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+T9300+%40+2.50GHz

As I said, I've been VERY happy with this CPU and that's why I'll probably go for something in the same price range. Those APUs do look quite good though =)

I have to disagree with that last sentence. My dad's 6-core PC DOES lag from right clicks. Sad. It's less than a year old and he's not exactly a heavy user (read: he filled up a fair portion of the drive but he doesn't install/un-install programs or create files,etc regularly, or anything else that would fragment a HDD much.)

Coldfusionstorm

  • Golem
  • ******
  • Posts: 868
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #6 on: 8 July 2012, 14:16:37 »
It lags from right clicks yes, is it the CPU's fault? no. It's obvious that something is wrong with your fathers PC, It's properly too late but you should/shouldve have return/returned it. If you think it is AMDs processor alone that is at fault well......you should properly not build a custom pc yourself, a cheap pc from a local pc-store somewhere should be good. Just be sure there is some kind of service on it.

Custom building is not allways cheaper. Even if you get the part's at first for a good price.

it boils down to efficiency, who can built a pc the most effecient and have the best PC-part provider.
Find this best store and i can guarantee you that doing a custom build will not save you money.(and yes they exists.)
WiP Game developer.
I do danish translations.
"i break stuff"

titi

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Airship
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,240
    • View Profile
    • http://www.titusgames.de
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #7 on: 17 July 2012, 15:12:23 »
I think different  8) . If you built a custom PC you always get the best things. Only problem is, it gets more and more complicated to build a custom PC with all those different CPU Slots and memory types out there. But if you know what you do you get a LOT for your money this way.
What I say about CPUs is: better buy a medium CPU or slower, same for Mainboard. But spend some money for the graphics card! Its worth it! Medium gfx cards are enough, even used ones from ebay or so ...
BUt look at the differrence to slow or onboard graphic cards! they are sometimes 100x faster or more! You nowhere get so much power as you get with a good gfx card. But there is no need to buy those 400$ cards, even mid range is good.

The idea of SlaughterALL to buy a Core i7 to have a good computer for 6 years or so is a very bad idea in my opinion. Better buy slower CPUs but buy a new PC all 2years ( or at least parts of it ) You will have so much more fun as you have a up to date PC all the time.

If you want something cheap and fast at the moment do this:
Buy a AMD-X2 (AM3 slot) Processor(boxed version!) with good core speed Or if you want a bit more a Phenom2 black edition ( with open multiplyer)
Buy a Mainboard with UCC support which can handle the 3,4 ghz Phenom2 X4 or better the X6
Buy a extra CPU fan whcih can handle bigger cpus ... Arctic Cooling ...
Buy 8GB of ram ( its very cheap for this kind of CPU )
Go to ebay and get a Geforce 250 GTS
Use a Powersupply which can handle all this

=> Have fun
The trick is:
with UCC you can unlock all cores of the AMD Processorand they work in 95% of the cases without any problems
with UCC unlock the cache on the CPU, this is very important
=> the result is you have the fastest AMD-CPU available :D without paying the price

in euro you can get all this for those prices:
CPU 60 euro
Mainboard 40 euro
Memory 40 euro
geforce 250 gts used from ebay 45 euro
Powersupply and tower, starting from 30 euro
Harddisk (still very expensive ... ) 2TB 100 euro
DVD-writer 15 euro
CPU-Fan 4 euro

=>344 Euro and you have a well balanced really powerful mid range computer which can easily compete with the fastest notebooks available...
Try Megaglest! Improved Engine / New factions / New tilesets / New maps / New scenarios

Omega

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Professional bug writer
    • View Profile
    • Personal site
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #8 on: 18 July 2012, 04:29:07 »
I have to agree with Titi. If a custom built PC is more expensive than a prebuilt one, you're doing something seriously wrong. The only limitation to custom building should be your own skill (I wouldn't expect a first time builder to put together a rig with two graphics cards in SLI with water cooling, for example), but a fairly "normal" computer (air cooled, no hard drives in RAID, single graphics card, etc) should be no more difficult than LEGOs with a good tutorial on building a computer (Newegg TV on Youtube, specifically).

Of course, I can't recommend an AMD CPU for anything but the cheapest builds. Intel is almost always better than AMD in pretty much every other case. Graphics wise, Nvidea and AMD are usually very close, although Nvidea normally releases new cards first, with AMD not releasing their card until they have something that can beat its Nvidea rival.

On your build, though, Titi, you could save a buck by cutting the Hard drive size down to something more reasonable (500 GB - 1TB), since I can't fathom spending more on a Hard drive than on either the graphics card or CPU (seriously, the CPU and graphics in my current build come to over $500, while the hard drive is a mere $90 1 TB drive -- with 660 GB free). Hard drive space is also easy to expand, as you could use RAID 0 to "combine" drives, while you can only combine graphics cards of the same kind (and seriously, multiple graphics cards is a mess, heatwise and spacewise). CPU fan? If we're not overclocking (as would be expected for someone only spending 300-and-something on a computer), the stock cooler should be more than enough. For memory, if we're going for a budget build, 4GB is plenty and won't cost more than $30.

Personally,  I'd say something more along the lines of...
CPU: Intel Celeron C530 @ 2.4 GHz = $45
GPU: Gigabyte Radeon HD 7750 = $110
MB: Gigabyte GA-H61M = $54
Memory: 4GB of whatever brand = $25
HD: Quick Newegg search found several 500 GB drives at $70 from reputable brands (just make sure it's 7200 RPM)
Optical drive: That sleek Asus one that literally everyone buys = $20
Case: We're going cheap, grab one with a built in PSU, like the Rosewill R218 @ 450W = $50

That's a total of $374 or 304 euros at current exchange rates. However, the Sandy Bridge processor offers a much better architecture over AMD, it's not all about clock speeds (although a $210 Ivy bridge i5 would do much, much better), and gaming wise, the graphics would be a major increase (seriously, the GTX 200 series is ancient). Of course, that'd also be another nice thing to upgrade: swap it for an MSI Nvidea GTX-560 Ti for about $270. Expensive, but the performance jump would be massive. A 200 series won't be able to play modern games at anything over the lowest settings. But for a budget build, the Radeon HD 7750 is a great buy, especially factory overclocked models (seriously, don't bother with stock cards, ever). The 7750 has 1 GB of memory and supports Direct X 11. I'd use the same DVD burner in a budget build as a high end rig: Asus's is fantastic, and Blu-ray isn't really much of an advantage in computers, at the moment. Springing an additional $20 could net a 1 TB HDD, and I'd recommend that, although it's not too hard to expand hard drive space by setting up RAID 0 to combine the drives in the future (although a third drive to use RAID 5 would allow a more secure setup, as your data would be backed up in the case of one of those drives failing).

There's no reason to buy 8 GB or RAM on a budget build. 4 GB is plenty, although going under is a bad idea (although RAM is cheap). The stock fan is fine if not overclocking, although the $30 Coolermaster 212+ is the king of CPU coolers for over clocking. Since we're going to assume that we're building a gaming rig, the graphics card is a lot more important than the CPU, as most games are fairly easy on the CPU. An SSD is hardly something to put into a budget build, but current prices are around a buck a gigabyte, and even a 128 GB SSD would give your system some serious clout, especially on startup and loading times. The read and write of an SSD can be ten times that of a mechanical drive, and they're more durable (no moving parts).

Of course, if we're doing gaming, you'll also need Windows, which will run you back an extra $100 (the Home Premium will do; the professional version is only necessary if using more than 32 GB of RAM, and the Ultimate version is just a rip off). Still, $370 ($470 with the OS) for a computer capable of gaming? Last time I saw pre-built computers at Best Buy, you'd need to spend at least $600-700 for that kind of capabilities, and even then there's the lack of choice in your components.
Edit the MegaGlest wiki: http://docs.megaglest.org/

My personal projects: http://github.com/KatrinaHoffert

titi

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Airship
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,240
    • View Profile
    • http://www.titusgames.de
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #9 on: 18 July 2012, 08:22:47 »
@Omega: I think you did not get the point here with the CPU: The extra fan is needed because your CPU will heat up more if you start to use all 4 cores on a X2. And I suggested the boxed version ( with fan included ) because it turned out that these CPUs are of higher quality and all their cores typically work well.

So the CPU I am talking about will run as Phenom 2 X4 3,4 ghz!! You cannot compare this to a low budget Celeron! This beast willl be a lot faster and will be close to the i5 Performance( But a lot cheaper )! Nvidias UCC feature is the secret ;-) . Only thing on the downside is , it will consume some power ....

here are the passmark results for those two CPUs: ( from http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php )
Intel Celeron G530 @ 2.40GHz      2275
AMD Phenom II X4 965              4200

You see, its nearly twice as fast as the celeron you suggested. ( look here too: http://www.guru3d.com/article/phenom-ii-x4-965-be-revision-c3-review-test/15 )

About the graphics you are right a 560 is a lot faster, but did you look at performance comparisons for those cards? Its not that clear and a 250 GTS is still quite good and for example faster than a Geforce 540. The point is to get the best for the price.
http://www.hwcompare.com/11045/geforce-gts-250-1gb-vs-geforce-gtx-560/
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php:
GeForce GTS 250   1075   125
GeForce GTX 560   2716   29

So the gtx560 is maybe 2-3 as fast as a 250 but thats not the world comapred to differences of onboard gfx cards to these real cards where you often see factors like 100x or more!
« Last Edit: 18 July 2012, 09:04:09 by titi »
Try Megaglest! Improved Engine / New factions / New tilesets / New maps / New scenarios

John.d.h

  • Moderator
  • Airship
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,757
  • I have to go now. My planet needs me.
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #10 on: 18 July 2012, 08:54:01 »
Well, on the plus side, since we're talking about a custom build in the first place, you can also swap/upgrade parts later as they reach obsolescence or as your demands change.  4GB of RAM not enough anymore?  Upgrade to 8GB.  The same goes for storage space, as most people don't need nearly as much as they have.  Unless you need absurd amounts of storage space for media projects or a library of high-definition movies, I can't imagine needing more than 250GB in this day and age.  For example, even set up for dual-booting, I'm only using about 75GB out of my 300.  I could make a conscious effort to clutter up my drive with as much crap as I could, and still wouldn't come close to filling it.  Also, the single best performance enhancement you can put on your computer may just be a solid state drive.  They don't usually hold a whole lot, but you have to consider whether or not you really need that much anyway, and there's normally nothing stopping you from installing your OS on the SSD and your data on an HDD for the best of both worlds.

ElimiNator

  • Airship
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,391
  • The MegaGlest Moder.
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #11 on: 18 July 2012, 15:46:25 »
I have a 1 TB drive with only 200 GB free.
Get the Vbros': Packs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5!

Coldfusionstorm

  • Golem
  • ******
  • Posts: 868
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #12 on: 18 July 2012, 16:04:12 »
1TB, 40 Gig's free, and that's after a cleanup.
WiP Game developer.
I do danish translations.
"i break stuff"

John.d.h

  • Moderator
  • Airship
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,757
  • I have to go now. My planet needs me.
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #13 on: 18 July 2012, 19:36:56 »
Right.  It really depends on the individual, so buy whatever you would actually use.  You may need 1TB, but most people don't.  If you do need that much, by all means go for it.

Omega

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Professional bug writer
    • View Profile
    • Personal site
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #14 on: 18 July 2012, 21:56:54 »
@Omega: I think you did not get the point here with the CPU: The extra fan is needed because your CPU will heat up more if you start to use all 4 cores on a X2. And I suggested the boxed version ( with fan included ) because it turned out that these CPUs are of higher quality and all their cores typically work well.

So the CPU I am talking about will run as Phenom 2 X4 3,4 ghz!! You cannot compare this to a low budget Celeron! This beast willl be a lot faster and will be close to the i5 Performance( But a lot cheaper )! Nvidias UCC feature is the secret ;-) . Only thing on the downside is , it will consume some power ....

here are the passmark results for those two CPUs: ( from http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php )
Intel Celeron G530 @ 2.40GHz      2275
AMD Phenom II X4 965              4200
But that's also a $110 CPU. I was under the presumption we were shooting for the "45 euro" mark (the Celeron I mentioned was only $42). My intel equivalent is the i3-2120 @ 3.30GHz, which scores a 4220 at the site you listed for the same price as the X4 965, but is "next generation" (32 nm architecture versus 42 nm).

As for the graphics cards, yeah, the GTS 250 has a fair bit of bang for its buck, but it's still very old and I can't recommend it for modern gaming (bearing in mind that Glest's graphical capabilities are more along the lines of that of a five to ten year old game. I doubt the GTS 250 would handle The Witcher 2 or Crysis too well.

Also, the single best performance enhancement you can put on your computer may just be a solid state drive.  They don't usually hold a whole lot, but you have to consider whether or not you really need that much anyway, and there's normally nothing stopping you from installing your OS on the SSD and your data on an HDD for the best of both worlds.
I agree. Just don't use it for regular storage (just put the OS and program files there, keep your personal folders on a mechanical drive). The only disadvantage is that Windows usually would require a complete reinstallation, which means OEM customers would have to call Microsoft to reset their Windows product key for the new drive (Linux certainly wins there). If you buy an SSD, my advice is to look for high read speeds and low access times. Writing isn't as common as reading, and the major boost to loading speed would be insane. I'd hope you don't depend on those tips that loading screens usually display, as a good SSD will load the game so fast you won't have time to read the text.

And yeah, hard drives depend on the person. Myself, I've never come close to 500 GB (which is the hard drive capacity on my laptop), even with a number of massive games installed. For example, The Witcher 2 uses 14 GB, Mass Effect 2 is 11.4, Crysis uses 6GB, Skyrim uses 11.7... (Mega)Glest(AE) uses a mere gigabyte in comparison (although seriously, I would not want to have to download Cryis. I hope optical discs survive until pretty much everyone is browsing on gigabit connections). Even with all those games, 30 GB of music, and a document's folder totaling 12 GB (mostly ), my drive totals 270 GB. So the folks with 800 or 960 GB of drive space used, what are you even using that for?
« Last Edit: 18 July 2012, 22:15:06 by Omega »
Edit the MegaGlest wiki: http://docs.megaglest.org/

My personal projects: http://github.com/KatrinaHoffert

Coldfusionstorm

  • Golem
  • ******
  • Posts: 868
    • View Profile
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #15 on: 19 July 2012, 09:12:07 »
Omega im sorry but that's plain wrong. Write speed's ARE important, and wich SSD you get arnt unimportant either.

I can personally recommend the OZC agility drive, and im very sastified with it, but you might think differently.
http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-agility-3-sata-iii-2-5-ssd.html

On a related note, what speed's are other people here getting when  moving stuff from harddrive to harddrive?.(please provide harddisk specs / link's if possible).
WiP Game developer.
I do danish translations.
"i break stuff"

Omega

  • MegaGlest Team
  • Dragon
  • ********
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Professional bug writer
    • View Profile
    • Personal site
Re: Intel's i5
« Reply #16 on: 19 July 2012, 22:24:40 »
Omega im sorry but that's plain wrong. Write speed's ARE important, and wich SSD you get arnt unimportant either.

I can personally recommend the OZC agility drive, and im very sastified with it, but you might think differently.
http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-agility-3-sata-iii-2-5-ssd.html
I never said write speeds aren't important, just that read speeds are far more so. Writing to the disc is generally only done when you save a file or are copying/moving a file. On the other hand, opening a file, starting up a program, loading MegaGlest, starting your OS, etc... they all are heavily read dependent. Most SSDs (well, hard drives in general, actually) have a higher read speed than write speed. When playing a game, you don't generally do a lot of writing to the disc, but will do a lot of reading. A loading screen could be cut to a tenth of the time with a good SSD. Write speed is good, and it's the most noticeable and easiest to recognize (read speed generally would need a benchmark to measure, whereas copying a file would easily tell you the write speed).

And true, the type does matter, but there IS a lot of variety. The Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe, for example, offers read and write speeds of over 500 MB/s for a 120 GB drive at a price of only $110. The 240 GB Mushkin Chronos Deluxe is only $200, well below a dollar a gigabyte. The Samsung 830 256 GB ($270) and the Plextor M3 Pro 128 GB ($180) offer extreme performance at a slightly higher price, as well.  And of course, the OCZ Agility 3 series, as you mentioned, is also fantastic.

On a related note, what speed's are other people here getting when  moving stuff from harddrive to harddrive?.(please provide harddisk specs / link's if possible).
Testing my Samsung Spinpoint F3 1TB (mechanical) drive, I copied a 1.15 GB video file in 5.5 seconds, which is an average speed of 209 MB/s. Windows' copy/paste dialogue claimed 283 MB/s at one point, but I don't trust it's accuracy (it once claimed to copy a file at a speed of 900 MB/s... I wish). As far as a pure mechanical 7200 RPM drive goes, it's pretty fast. The price is an iffy, as it's currently claiming a regular price of $140, with Newegg currently offering it at $100, but I've seen it as low as $80 a month ago and it was $60 a year back. http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152185
Edit the MegaGlest wiki: http://docs.megaglest.org/

My personal projects: http://github.com/KatrinaHoffert

 

anything