Hardware Discussion Thread

[NaturalViolence]

Again: It it a reference design? Take this from a man who installed an aftermarket HSF on his GTX 260 that didn't fit via dremeling (and burned my hand pretty bad in the process). This is very important.

Edit:
@Shonumi
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/bay-trail-celeron-j1750-performance,3614.html

Take these results and reduce them by 15% (both cpu and gpu). Your NUC is going to be using an N2810 celeron which is basically the same SoC as this but with lower clock rates. It's still going to be considerably slower than a T3400. Compared to a atom D2700 it is 0%-30% faster depending on the application. Usually around 10-15%. They're using a super low power mobile SoC. That's why it is so slow. Your T3400 is still probably going to be at least 50% faster. If you downclock the T3400 to 1GHz the atom will certainly destroy it at that speed.

[DatKid20]

(10-14-2013, 05:30 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: Again: It it a reference design? Take this from a man who installed an aftermarket HSF on his GTX 260 that didn't fit via dremeling (and burned my hand pretty bad in the process). This is very important.

I really have no idea. I can take a picture of it and upload it here though.

Spoiler: (Show Spoiler)

[NaturalViolence]

The mattress could really use a cover/sheet.

That's a reference card. It should work.

[DatKid20]

(10-14-2013, 10:26 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: The mattress could really use a cover/sheet.

That's a reference card. It should work.

It has one. It's just not on.

Awesome. I have plans to watercool my system and i wanted to make sure i didn't need to get another gpu when i wanted to watercool my entire system.

[Shonumi]

NaturalViolence Wrote:Take these results and reduce them by 15% (both cpu and gpu). Your NUC is going to be using an N2810 celeron which is basically the same SoC as this but with lower clock rates. It's still going to be considerably slower than a T3400. Compared to a atom D2700 it is 0%-30% faster depending on the application. Usually around 10-15%. They're using a super low power mobile SoC. That's why it is so slow. Your T3400 is still probably going to be at least 50% faster. If you downclock the T3400 to 1GHz the atom will certainly destroy it at that speed.

Hey, that's all I care about. The T3400 @ 1GHz already destroys every ARM CPU I have in my house, it plays everything I want in an emu console (NES to N64, more or less), so that's good to hear You don't need to remind me that low-power mobile SoC's aren't going to be that fast, it just needs to be fast enough, and it looks like it will. I'll be running a 64-bit OS on this Bay Trail system, which the T3400 is not, so hopefully that adds some extra performance cushioning just as a precaution. Thanks for the info NV.

[DatKid20]

What?

[garrlker]

It's that much not because of quality(or it'd obviously be cheaper) but because of resources used making it.... er that's my theory. It's the theory keeping me cool on the fact that many old cpus still sell for 100s of dollars on ebay when you can get much more performance for cheaper.

[NaturalViolence]

I think his image was meant to be a wtf reaction to why DDR sdram is listed in the most popular recommendations section of the site. As in why would first generation DDR ram be popular? I mean he did circle it, that's kind of a dead giveaway. I don't think he even noticed or cared about the price.

[garrlker]

Ah, my bad.

[Steel01]

*pokes head in after twitching at incorrect hardware description*

That's not ddr. PC133 still only triggered once per clock cycle. First gen ddr was still clocked at 133, but since it triggers on both rising and falling edges, it was labelled as 266MHz. [/engineeringrant]

But yes, why in the world is that labelled popular? Unless someone ordered few thousand for legacy systems...

Steel01