You have some bargaining ahead of you:
Controller: Areca ARC 1680iX-8 $ 700
Battery Backup Module: Areca ARC 6120 BBM: $ 120
Disks: Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB, 9 x $ 70 = $ 630
Total: $ 1,450
OS: 1 F3 on mobo for OS, programs and static pagefile.
Raid3: 8 x F3 for projects, media, previews, media cache and exports.
If you have a NAS for backup and are diligent about making back-ups on a regular basis, use 8 x raid3, else use 7 x raid3 + 1 hot spare.
In this setup you are already over budget, so the most economical approach is to use an F3 for OS instead of a Velociraptor. With your memory it is not likely the pagefile will be used often and with the low fill rate on the F3 there is hardly any performance difference anyway.
1 person found this helpful
That is the one. Sorry for my mixup. I figured with the $ sign in the topic, US prices were meant, so I looked up Newegg prices this morning.
No mixup, Newegg prices are fine.
When would it make sense to put 4GB of memory in the Areca controller?
1 person found this helpful
2 GB makes a lot of sense, but the 4 GB stick is way more expensive, IIRC about 5 times. In general for random access 4 GB is great, but for video, which is largely seqential, far less important.
Cool! http://www.areca.com.tw/products/pcietosas1680series.htm makes it seem that the 8-model doesn't support memory upgrades (only 12/16/24). In the scheme but also below where it says "one 240-pin DDR2-533 DIMM socket with default 512MB of SDRAM with ECC protection, upgrade to 4GB (ARC-1680ix-12/16/24)"
The datasheet confirms this.
Also, are we looking at some kind of exotic memory type, or could this simply do? http://geizhals.at/eu/a260329.html
AFAIK the 8 port version can not be upgraded to 2 or 4 GB, unless something changed in the past year. That was the reason I wanted the 12/16/24 version, but the price difference is significant.
The only sticks that I know that work are the KVR667D2E5/2G or the KVR667D2E4/4G, around € 50 versus € 265.
Ok, gotta call work tomorrow and see how much they want to spend.
Now I have you here I have a question that's flagrantly off-topic. CPU for live Windows Media encoding and Flash encoding, would you go with the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T, I7 930 or two Xeon E5520? Value for money matters here, because I might be building several of them.
i7-930. Easily overclocked and far faster and cheaper than dual E5520's. AMD can not give you similar performance.
You wouldn't know of any benchmarks comparing the dual E5520's with i7-920/930 and/or the Phenom X6?
You can find interesting comparisons between the i7-920/930/9xx and dual X55xx/W5590 and Phenom X4 systems in the PPBM4 Benchmark
If you make the assumption (that is highly optimistic and not realistic) that the Phenom X6 is 50% faster than the X4, the best score would be around 60 - 70 seconds.
I have looked in that scheme, but I find it somehow compromised (when looking at just CPU horse power) because of no common testbed.
Prophet i7 Martin takes 9,7 to complete the Encode MPEG test. It's a stock 930.
Now GregsNewComputer takes 34,2, also with a stock 930.
You have to look further than just the CPU to explain these differences, like Prophet is running CS5 with MPE on, using an SSD and Greg is running 4.1 with conventional disks. The yellow background in the first two columns and in the App Version is there to make is easy to pick out the CS5 results and the CS4 results.
Hi, I have a dual cpu xeon x5550 @2.66, my i7-920 OC to 4.2 works as good. the price difference is not worth it. I would recomend the new 980x that will out perform most dual xeon on stock ghz.