Old 01-06-2019, 09:04 PM   #41
viscofisy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Dalriada
Posts: 13,294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
The SSD is the biggest computer hardware performance increase in the last 10 years. (While CPU speed has plateaued in pro level machines.)
CPU speed or capability (whichever way you want to measure it) has increased significantly over the last 10 years.

10 years ago the high end home DAW chip was probably the i7 920.

Today, maybe the i7 8700k.


https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare...-920/3098vs834

_
viscofisy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 12:08 AM   #42
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
If NI etc. make Linux VST versions of their plugins, it's easy to imagine lots of people moving to Linux.
NI doesn't have any interest in developing Linux versions of their portfolio, tho.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 12:20 AM   #43
Dex
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 250
Default

One area where you might see an improvement in real time performance with an SSD is if you’re using a lot of vsti libraries that use on the fly sample streaming from disk. Kontakt and Play are the main ones I’m aware of that do this.

Even then I agree with others that your issues would be best addressed with more cpu power.
Dex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 12:26 AM   #44
Mage
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 68
Default

Let me ignore the performance aspect for a moment. I will answer your question in an imaginary world where SSD and HDD are similar in that regard.

One of the last things I want least when I work with a DAW is noise.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 03:59 AM   #45
Tubeguy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 400
Default

SSDs are pretty fast but I've had two immediate failures past year with SSDs. Never with HD except once where it took several days to die, giving me time to save data. I don't trust SSD. Keep that in mind if you use SSD and backup all the time.
Tubeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 05:34 AM   #46
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,343
Default

I've had SSDs for over 3 years now (Samsung 850 and 860 Evo, 7 of them, plus one 850 Evo NVMe!) and never a problem. Which ones did fail on you?
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 06:47 AM   #47
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Softsynth View Post
You know about the Meltdown and Spectre updates that reduced CPU performance?
Inspectre will show the updates that Intel and Microsoft enabled to protect your computer against advanced hackers that actually slow your PC down. Older CPUs like yours and mine were hit hardest by these updates.

Inspectre allows you to disable these updates, but remember to enable them when you've finished or need to go online.
https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm



They vary hugely.
If you don't want to discuss which VSTs that's fine, but with 100 tracks I wouldn't be surprised if turning off some FX in VSTis or streamlining the amount of voices/polyphony, sound quality modes and so on within the most CPU hungry could help significantly. That's assuming you haven't done all that already, which I guess you probably have.
My cpu score with Meltdown protection 8458, without 8545. meh
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 06:55 AM   #48
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,597
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeguy View Post
SSDs are pretty fast but I've had two immediate failures past year with SSDs. Never with HD except once where it took several days to die, giving me time to save data. I don't trust SSD. Keep that in mind if you use SSD and backup all the time.
That's the biggest difference: HD's often give warning when failing and there's always a chance of data recovery when they fail.

SSD's fail without warning and zero chance of data recovery.

No problem at all, if you're religious about backups.
__________________
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity” Albert Einstein
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 07:22 AM   #49
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
That's the biggest difference: HD's often give warning when failing and there's always a chance of data recovery when they fail.

SSD's fail without warning and zero chance of data recovery.

No problem at all, if you're religious about backups.
That's a huge negative for sure.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 07:29 AM   #50
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,941
Default

Only if you dont mirror your disk regularly. Reminds me I havent done mine for a month.

And I am eagerly awaiting the promised drop in SSD files everyone online is talking about to replace the system disk in my main studio box.
__________________
Brexit Schmexit. Lets have a violent revolution instead. Bagsy the first go with a nuke! (Here, Moggy Moggy...)
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 07:34 AM   #51
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 24,766
Default

I think the fear of SSDs is overrated these days. I've had one in use for over 5 years as a daily-driver OS disk, no problems at all. Of the HDD failures I've had in the past, only a handful allowed me to recover before final failure - the rest just outright died.

If one has any type of backup procedure, which they should regardless of medium, it's really a non-issue and the performance gain is real. Since I have one HDD remaining in my main system, every time it gets used, I notice the speed difference over the SSDs.
__________________
If it requires a null test to find it, it is by definition minuscule.
karbomusic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 07:54 AM   #52
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Can you monitor the health of an SSD like you can a HDD ?
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 09:00 AM   #53
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by toleolu View Post
Is cell stress (at least that's what they used to call it) no longer an issue with SSD's, or was that never really an issue to begin with?
It never was a real problem.

But, even modern budget SSDs measure lifespan at around 200 TB Written (for 1 TB sizes). You'll probably upgrade for other reasoins long before it matters. If you're on a 10 year update cycle or something...then it might be an issue. But SSDs are more than an order of magnitude cheaper than they were a decade ago. You can get a decent 1TB drive for <$150 and a top end one for <$300.

I've never had a hard drive that lasted as long as the SSDs I've been using. But, if you care about warranty/support, they tend to come with similar terms (e.g., 3 years for consumer, 5 years for pro/enterprise).

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Once I change out my DEV drive, I'll be 100% SSD - everything is faster on SSD and I've had less failures with them than HDD at this point:
I'm about to build a storage server that's all-SSD. Spinning rust won't be used for anything except off-site backups within the next couple months. And my experience has been the same...unless you actually need many TB of storage or are on a really tight budget, HDDs don't really make much sense anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Thanks for the great info. It sounds like you have the OS on your SSD and you use that same drive for your Reaper Project. Is that right ?

Would it be even better to have 2 SSDs, one for OS and one for the project ?
It's fine to just use one. SSDs don't really have a seek time, so serially accessing blocks stored all across the disk isn't a problem like it is with hard drives.

Having more than 1 is more about organization or wanting a much faster/nicer one for the OS drive (e.g., 512GB 970 pro NVMe) and a slower one for bulk storage (e.g., WD Blue 2TB)....kind of like how people used to do small SSDs for boot and big hard drives for bulk storage...except now it's relatively economical (and better) to use different classes of SSDs for both...assuming you're not happy with just a big one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by serr View Post
My experience is the opposite. (Using SSD's since 2009 here.)
You absolutely want your OS drive to be the SSD. The free space on this drive will be your high performance audio work space. You'd have much more bang for the buck with OS/apps on the SSD and then still running audio from a HDD actually. You might not see any performance improvement just using a SSD as a recording drive but with the OS still on a HDD.

Everyone wants to talk about ram. (Probably because it's the only computer term many people ever learn?) Installing a SSD for OS/apps is a much bigger performance increase. And not just wasting it as a data drive but actually using it for OS/apps.

That computer that already works well will finally be able to show you what it's really got!
Agreed. Wholeheartedly. I'm pretty sure I got my first SSD a few years before that. And, I haven't booted spinning rust since then. IMHO, there's no reason not to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Yeah, I run lots of vsts and vstis that eat up cpu.
That could be your real problem. The i980x is almost a decade old. While the changes haven't been huge in that time, it's still a long time. Apart from CPU improvements, you're also fighting thermal paste degrading (both b/t the IHS and the cooler and between the die and IHS) and other age-related "problems".

An SSD will be better. Period. But, I'm not convinced it'll solve the problem as well as building a modern computer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
Can you monitor the health of an SSD like you can a HDD ?
Yes. They do the same SMART monitoring that every other disk does.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 09:14 AM   #54
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

I don't have a degrading paste problem because I just upgraded to a BeQuiet case and new powersupply and cpu fan with new paste. The cpu is not overheating and it is damn fast. CPU Benchmark rates it 8772 which is pretty damn fast even by todays standards.

If they have SMART monitoring, do you get warning before death ?
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 10:59 AM   #55
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
I don't have a degrading paste problem because I just upgraded to a BeQuiet case and new powersupply and cpu fan with new paste. The cpu is not overheating and it is damn fast. CPU Benchmark rates it 8772 which is pretty damn fast even by todays standards.

If they have SMART monitoring, do you get warning before death ?
If you set up the SMART software to give you a warning, yes. Same as hard drives. Hardware supporting a thing doesn't necessarily mean you're using it.

What CPU benchmark? If you're talking about geekbench, a modern desktop CPU should be around 23k.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 11:07 AM   #56
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

I used to PassMark CPU benchmarking tool and it shows average CPU of today at about six and a half thousand.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 12:18 PM   #57
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,343
Default

Are you sure? Newer decent CPUs are above the 15k range.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/desktop.html
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 01:04 PM   #58
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Yeah it was like this screen capture I just pulled off Google. It said the model average is in the mid 6000

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/9...oramce_tst.JPG

When I bought the CPU many years ago it was definitely hot shit it was a thousand bucks for just the CPU so I can see why it's still a little above average even though current CPUs are benchmarking upwards of thirty thousand for the highest priced
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 01:11 PM   #59
msundh
Human being with feelings
 
msundh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,567
Default

Rather 9
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_loo...3.47GHz&id=867
__________________
Win10 64bit, Core i7 16GB, Focurite 18i8, Schecter Telecaster, Fender Japan Squire Stratocaster, Yamaha AC3R
https://soundcloud.com/mikaelsundh
msundh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 01:14 PM   #60
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Mine is an i980x and benchmarks just below 9000
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 01:50 PM   #61
msundh
Human being with feelings
 
msundh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,567
Default

How should you interpreter these numbers?
Is 15000 100% better than 7500 when it comes to DAWs?
__________________
Win10 64bit, Core i7 16GB, Focurite 18i8, Schecter Telecaster, Fender Japan Squire Stratocaster, Yamaha AC3R
https://soundcloud.com/mikaelsundh
msundh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 02:04 PM   #62
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

I assume it means it can do things twice as fast assuming no bottlenecks of ram or HD.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 02:28 PM   #63
JamesPeters
Human being with feelings
 
JamesPeters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Near a big lake
Posts: 2,668
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
NI doesn't have any interest in developing Linux versions of their portfolio, tho.
Maybe if someone they know--someone who is involved with testing their products--tells them that Reaper has a native linux version that uses native Linux VST and works great...maybe that would help?

Seriously it's only a matter of making Linux VST versions at this point. They already have Windows and OSX VST versions, so how much more trouble could Linux VST be. I know that's not necessarily trivial, but it's probably relatively easy for them.

As for "Linux being ready for serious audio production": it is. There have been 2 threads already on these forums, one with the OP saying "Reaper isn't ready for Linux" and the other OP saying "Linux isn't ready for serious audio production", but both those people really meant "I don't want to have to use WINE in Linux to use my NI plugins/libraries" (and some other plugins that don't have Linux versions). Linux is ready. Reaper is ready. What's it going to take for other companies to follow? If they expect an immediate market of users in Linux, well maybe they'll have to make Linux VST versions to gradually get sales from Linux users. I'd say we're getting closer to a tipping point, of enough people annoyed with Windows jumping ship to Linux, where NI might care if they thought about it long-term. They're at least partly responsible for people not switching to Linux for audio. It's not intentionally "their fault" but maybe it's worth their thinking about.

As for SSD: I've been using a couple for 8 years with no problems, constantly writing/overwriting data (they're only 256 GB). I only recently replaced one (in my desktop, since it gets more use) with a new/larger/faster one since 8 years is actually the longest I've used any drive on any computer and I didn't want to push my luck. Plus the price is low enough now that it wasn't worth worrying about.
__________________
http://petersamplification.com
Using REAPER for Linux
JamesPeters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 03:56 PM   #64
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
Maybe if someone they know--someone who is involved with testing their products--tells them that Reaper has a native linux version that uses native Linux VST and works great...maybe that would help?
I did, not gonna happen

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
Seriously it's only a matter of making Linux VST versions at this point. They already have Windows and OSX VST versions, so how much more trouble could Linux VST be. I know that's not necessarily trivial, but it's probably relatively easy for them.
Considering they have their own internal toolkits for all sorts of stuff, and old and not so flexible codebases, it is absolutely untrivial and far from easy to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
What's it going to take for other companies to follow?
Obviously, bigger userbase on Linux (it's probably less than 1% of all audio DAWs in the whole world, my rough estimate). Makes no sense to waste $$$ and manhours on 1% of potential new users. So it won't happen. The tipping point is not even on the horizon. It's also not really the fault of NI or any of the software vendors for not properly supporting Linux (rare ones do) - it's the audio interface vendors who are mostly to blame, as far as I'm concerned.

Last edited by EvilDragon; 01-07-2019 at 04:04 PM.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 04:13 PM   #65
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Softsynth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 5,530
Default

I suppose support for an operating system is a numbers game. NI know that they will get returns on software development for Windows and Mac.
NI have so many products to support they would have to test all the current products, I guess it doesn't make sense for them under a cost benefit analysis.

Smaller developers like U-HE or Moddart only have a handful of products. It could be advantageous for smaller (but still significant) developers to support every possible platform, being the biggest fish in a small-ish pond...
Maybe if the Linux platform grows significantly NI will take it seriously too. Best not to hold your breath, unless some catastrophic security issues mess up the major Op.Systems (unlikely) I don't see there being a major shift to Linux.
The really small developers may struggle to justify Linux support also.

Last edited by Softsynth; 01-07-2019 at 04:42 PM. Reason: Knights of NI!
Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2019, 01:44 AM   #66
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,597
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesPeters View Post
Seriously it's only a matter of making Linux VST versions at this point. They already have Windows and OSX VST versions, so how much more trouble could Linux VST be. I know that's not necessarily trivial, but it's probably relatively easy for them.
The problem isn't in compiling the VST's. It's support. Linux comes in many flavours. It's next to impossible to find people (for support jobs) that are well versed in multiple Linux versions AND audio.

Very different from fi server applications, where Linux is abundant and everything is much more standardised. Server apps also have nearly no external hardware.

All these companies look at, is ROI. And then it comes to number of potential customers vs support cost.
__________________
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity” Albert Einstein
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2019, 01:58 AM   #67
Mage
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 68
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
That's the biggest difference: HD's often give warning when failing and there's always a chance of data recovery when they fail.

SSD's fail without warning and zero chance of data recovery.

No problem at all, if you're religious about backups.
Hard drives fail a lot without telling you. A vast majority of the errors remain unknown because people won’t notice it if a few pixels of their family photo album or porn collection are wrong. Most of the data of most of the users belong to media files. If you are using a file system that checksums every block (for example, ZFS), and you do it for a few years, you will see how often HDDs return corrupted data without feeling guilty at least.

For fun stuff, such as music, I use Google Drive. It’s not a real backup but nothing is. For work, I make several checksummed copies of my files. I don’t have and never bought a pen drive. It’s easier, cheaper, and faster to delete files than putting them on a pen drive.

If you want to read back your data, make regular and automated backups, regardless of what kind of storage you use.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2019, 07:21 PM   #68
batcat
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 50
Default

Long time storage without any data use is the one area where I still see traditional HDD have an advantage over the modern SSD.
Unlike HHD technology, SSD requires somewhat "frequent" usage to be reliable from what I've read on computer forums.
I remember one test showing failures in the memory "sections" of SSD after about a year of being turned off, not being used at all.
So I wouldn't use an SSD drive for important data stored away for several years. I would access that drive at least twice a year to feel safe.

Last edited by batcat; 01-08-2019 at 07:30 PM.
batcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 06:56 AM   #69
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by msundh View Post
How should you interpreter these numbers?
Is 15000 100% better than 7500 when it comes to DAWs?
Most benchmark scores do not scale linearly, unless it's measuring something like time to complete or number of somethings. You can tell better/worse, not necessarily how much by comparing numbers.

DAWBench is, AFAIK, the only one directly related to audio work. It actually does scale linearly for what it measures.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
It's also not really the fault of NI or any of the software vendors for not properly supporting Linux (rare ones do) - it's the audio interface vendors who are mostly to blame, as far as I'm concerned.
Enh. Linux audio support is honestly pretty decent, depending on the interface. Class compliant devices work at least as transparently as they do on OS X or Windows.

Hardware vendors that like to add a whole bunch of features that require more specific software or drivers...yeah, that can be a problem. But, you can get away with class compliant hardware. You can't get away with not having the plugins you need.

Linux itself is plenty ready for prime time when it comes to AV workloads. The software is just not available.

I praise Reaper for what they're doing. I look forward to being able to do what I do on linux. But, even if I dropped 50-grand switching all my processing to hardware, I still wouldn't switch at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by batcat View Post
Long time storage without any data use is the one area where I still see traditional HDD have an advantage over the modern SSD.
Unlike HHD technology, SSD requires somewhat "frequent" usage to be reliable from what I've read on computer forums.
I remember one test showing failures in the memory "sections" of SSD after about a year of being turned off, not being used at all.
So I wouldn't use an SSD drive for important data stored away for several years. I would access that drive at least twice a year to feel safe.
Hard drives still have problems sitting unused.

The lubrication on all the moving parts will settle and degrade over the years. It's better for them to run 24/7 than to spin up once or twice a year.

If you specifically want cold storage, you still want tape. The problem is that it's so freaking expensive, it doesn't actually make sense unless you're storing > about 100TB of data.

My upcoming storage server is going to be all server-grade hardware (except the drives...enterprise SSDs are still insanely expensive and don't give much longer life), all-flash, and include an upgrade to 10Gb/s networking for storage traffic. The whole project is still only 80% of the cost of a good tape drive without media or supporting hardware.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 06:58 AM   #70
JSMastering
Human being with feelings
 
JSMastering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mage View Post
Hard drives fail a lot without telling you. A vast majority of the errors remain unknown because people won’t notice it if a few pixels of their family photo album or porn collection are wrong. Most of the data of most of the users belong to media files. If you are using a file system that checksums every block (for example, ZFS), and you do it for a few years, you will see how often HDDs return corrupted data without feeling guilty at least.

For fun stuff, such as music, I use Google Drive. It’s not a real backup but nothing is. For work, I make several checksummed copies of my files. I don’t have and never bought a pen drive. It’s easier, cheaper, and faster to delete files than putting them on a pen drive.

If you want to read back your data, make regular and automated backups, regardless of what kind of storage you use.
I use dropbox as part of my backup strategy. I'm not really happy trusting someone else's computer (there's no such thing as a cloud, just servers you don't control), but they give you a lot of functionality and peace of mind for $100/year.

ZFS is one of the big draws for my project. I haven't finished testing, but I'm excited about booting my studio machine off iSCSI backed by ZFS. Support for actually modern file systems is one of the big things missing from OS X and Windows.
JSMastering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 12:44 PM   #71
Mage
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 68
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSMastering View Post
I use dropbox as part of my backup strategy. I'm not really happy trusting someone else's computer (there's no such thing as a cloud, just servers you don't control), but they give you a lot of functionality and peace of mind for $100/year.

ZFS is one of the big draws for my project. I haven't finished testing, but I'm excited about booting my studio machine off iSCSI backed by ZFS. Support for actually modern file systems is one of the big things missing from OS X and Windows.
It’s true that official ZFS support has been removed from MacOS. The OpenZFS works on Mac. The only reason I’m not using it is that Google Drive was not willing to use my ZFS partition. It thought it was a network drive or something like that.

I used to have Dropbox but it corrupted some of my files. There were a few files that had different MD5 checksums than they had on another machine. That was when I Switched to Google Drive.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 02:57 PM   #72
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,597
Default

There's never been OFFICIAL ZFS support in OSX. Just experimental.

And why wouldn't APFS not be a "modern" file system?
__________________
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity” Albert Einstein
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 03:04 PM   #73
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,597
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSMastering View Post
The lubrication on all the moving parts will settle and degrade over the years. It's better for them to run 24/7 than to spin up once or twice a year.
There's no liquid lubrication whatsoever in modern drives. Where it's needed, it's PFTE or another solid. The lifetime of PFTE is measured in centuries.

Any liquid lubrication would ruin the harddrive. It's not a tape recorder.

Also, note that batcat was talking about SSD's.
__________________
“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity” Albert Einstein
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 09:35 PM   #74
Tubeguy
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilDragon View Post
I've had SSDs for over 3 years now (Samsung 850 and 860 Evo, 7 of them, plus one 850 Evo NVMe!) and never a problem. Which ones did fail on you?
Sandisk 120gb, hoped it was a good brand. Two of them. Got them couple of months apart so likely not from same batch. Got them replaced and so far no problems but I no longer thrust them.
On the other hand I have a few 10 year old HDs I use for backups etc, they still work like a dream and not loosing any data even when stored for a year without usage.
Tubeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2019, 10:12 PM   #75
cutnpaste
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 391
Default

Every product has failures, but you can avoid the bad products by looking at what past customers have to say. I research what I buy sometimes off and on for a couple weeks and keep notes on my findings before I make the decision to buy.
cutnpaste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2019, 03:11 AM   #76
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 23,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeguy View Post
Sandisk 120gb, hoped it was a good brand. Two of them. Got them couple of months apart so likely not from same batch. Got them replaced and so far no problems but I no longer thrust them.
On the other hand I have a few 10 year old HDs I use for backups etc, they still work like a dream and not loosing any data even when stored for a year without usage.
Yep, just go with Samsung. Their Pro range has a 10 year warranty - which means they're confident about longevity of their drives. EVO range has 5 years of warranty in most cases, IIRC. Which is still very good.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2019, 06:27 PM   #77
Philbo King
Human being with feelings
 
Philbo King's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,558
Default

If your motherboard is old enough, you might be faced with the old 3 GB/sec SATA hard drive interface speed (the new one is 6 GB/sec.) It'd be a shame to sink $$ into an SSD that is throttled by your motherboard HD transfer rate.

That said, I'm in the same boat. My system is from 2010, has the 3TB rate, and I added an SSD for drive C: several months ago. It does boot up faster. I can't say it helped too much with audio apps, but that might be bottlenecked elsewhere. It's fast enough to to 40-50 track audio projects easily. Kinda chokes on video though.
__________________
Tangent Studio - Philbo King
www.soundclick.com/philboking - stream music
www.facebook.com/philboking - gigs and news
Philbo King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2019, 07:23 PM   #78
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 8,278
Default

Well... you're still doing 250MB/s with SATA II. Still a pretty big leap from the 80MB/s with a HDD! Worth the upgrade without question even with SATA II. Depending on the video work, you might notice the increase to the full 500MB/s potential of the SSD with SATA III. You'd have to be editing actual HD video.
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2019, 10:39 PM   #79
XITE-1/4LIVE
Human being with feelings
 
XITE-1/4LIVE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere Between 120 and 150 BPM
Posts: 7,669
Default

Only two things made audio applications get big boosts in the last 10 years, the i7 Quads and SSDs.
Everything else benchmarks really good but doesn’t compare to the jolt of Bloomfield CPUs nad SSDs.

Bloomfield’s got a boost with the i7 4790k, and only since then the i7 7700k.
We keep seeing the same Cores with new chipsets more Cores, nothing big enough to make me drop money.

I did buy several NVMe M.2 devices and unless you need to load samples from Omnisphere, streaming apps don’t benefit from NVMe M.2s.

AMD Matisse CPUs will make Intel actually compete again or lose more market share.
2020 we’ll see some great stuff but in all honesty I’m still using brand new i7 4790k s I bought cheap 2 years ago and no sense fixing something that already works.

More Cores more ram, etc.
Don’t need it, probably fun buying new stuff but when the dust settles in 2020 I’ll buy whatever CPU has the fastest single core performance, the biggest cheapest SSD and cheapest slow RAM.

My gaming PCs are a different story though.

I’m at CES right now and CPUs and hardware not a big deal, new boards, yeh no biggie, 5G and foldable smart phones like Flex Pai are all the shizzle.r marketed Optane M2 second stage RAM shit is boring and dds more pipes to the sink to screw things up.
__________________
.
XITE-1/4LIVE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 03:50 AM   #80
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC USA
Posts: 7,306
Default

Cheaper memory is nice too. I just upped my ddr3 memory from 6 to 12 GB for $35 for 3 2gb sticks.

Did the world stop development on cheap, reliable, long term, offline storage? Blank DVDs were the last cheap way to store offline, then bluray and then nothing. Those aren't even long term if I'm correct. I don't want a cloud, I want my own physical storage.
Coachz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.