Search found 26 matches
- Tue Nov 20, 2012 3:49 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
- Replies: 36
- Views: 47765
Re: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
In the last half hour or so, I've tried my USB 2.0 Windows 7 installation flash drive on USB 3.0 ports on several newer boards... and discovered they all work. So... my original comment in the article was based on limited info; I've retracted the comment. Sorry for any confusion. Nice to see it wor...
- Tue Nov 20, 2012 3:37 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
- Replies: 36
- Views: 47765
Re: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
In order to comply with USB 3.0, a port (and hence its controller) MUST be capable of operating in full accordance with the USB 2.0 spec - which obviously includes the driver. Got a reference for that? Well, it's mentioned repeatedly throughout the spec (http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_30_sp...
- Tue Nov 20, 2012 3:17 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
- Replies: 36
- Views: 47765
Re: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
But the USB controller will have been acting as a USB 2.0 device throughout. It will be using the parallel High-Speed bus (the "USB 2.0" part of the USB 3.0 link). Superspeed is not part of the picture here. In order to comply with USB 3.0, a port (and hence its controller) MUST be capable of operat...
- Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:45 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
- Replies: 36
- Views: 47765
Re: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
Well, no, of course it doesn't - but I fail to see what that has to do with anything. Why on Earth would a USB 3.0 device have a USB 2.0 driver?Olaf van der Spek wrote: USB3 controllers support USB2 devices, but that doesn't imply USB3 controllers can be 'driven' by USB2 drivers.
- Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:04 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
- Replies: 36
- Views: 47765
Re: Intel Next Unit of Computing Kit DC3217BY
"The tickle here is that only-USB 3.0 would mean there's no easy way to install most operating systems, as native USB 3.0 support is found only in Windows 8."
USB 3.0 is backward compatible with USB 2.0, so that shouldn't really matter.
USB 3.0 is backward compatible with USB 2.0, so that shouldn't really matter.
- Fri May 13, 2011 3:49 pm
- Forum: Cases and Damping
- Topic: PaQ (Powerful and Quiet) case
- Replies: 5
- Views: 3495
Re: PaQ (Powerful and Quiet) case
Hi,
The designer of the PaQ case, Peter Cyriax, fell ill a couple of years ago. Not only did he design this excellent case, but was a tireless contributor to both the SPCR (username: PCY) and SOS (Peter C) forums.
The designer of the PaQ case, Peter Cyriax, fell ill a couple of years ago. Not only did he design this excellent case, but was a tireless contributor to both the SPCR (username: PCY) and SOS (Peter C) forums.
- Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:25 am
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 3295
Re: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
Then I shall never use it again!fumino wrote:googlefu has failed you.
- Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:37 am
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 3295
Re: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
As far as I can ascertain, the Mugen 2 is not compatible with LGA1155. I don't know where you got this from. There is a known problem with some specific motherboards e.g. Asus P8P67 Deluxe, but there is a solution http://www.scythe-eu.com/forum/mainboard-compatibility/764-mugen-2-mugen-2-rev-b-comp...
- Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:58 am
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
- Replies: 9
- Views: 3295
Re: Will this quiet system run cool enough?
As far as I can ascertain, the Mugen 2 is not compatible with LGA1155.
- Wed Apr 06, 2011 12:44 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
Obviously it's your decision, but as I said before, even with the Winmate rather than the PICO, and even with the 5670 (AMD TDP for reference card = 64W) rather than the 9800, you'll have basically zero (or less!) headroom.
Personally, I wouldn't even consider doing this.
Personally, I wouldn't even consider doing this.
- Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:03 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
The specific method doesn't really matter. Split two cables using whatever. It's not rocket science but it takes a bit of skill. As I said it takes a bit of tweaking to make the most of the picoPSU as the power draw approaches "normal" where a regular ATX PSU also could be considered. Going into th...
- Tue Apr 05, 2011 3:24 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
I was thinking more about the actual physical details: cables, connectors etc. I'd really appreciate it if you could run me through your method.Vicotnik wrote: I split incoming +12v, feeding ATX 4-Pin 12V power connector and the picoPSU in parallel.
- Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:38 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
The quote in my post above is mistakenly attributed to Ashex rather than Vicotnik. Apologies.
- Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:35 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
Ditch the graphics card and you don't have a problem.
Interesting. Have you actually done this in practice? If so, how?Ashex wrote: It's possible to feed stuff that needs 12v directly from the brick, bypassing the picoPSU
- Tue Apr 05, 2011 1:12 pm
- Forum: System Advice / Troubleshooting
- Topic: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
- Replies: 91
- Views: 28181
Re: Low power Sandy Bridge Mini-ITX build
Don't forget that although the PICO XT-160 is rated for a total output of 160 Watts, it's only rated for 8A on the 12V line. 8 x 12 = 96W. Then remember that virtually everything in the build you specify - CPU, GPU and mobo/memory - will be running off that 12V line. For these SFF builds, I personal...
- Mon Feb 28, 2011 1:00 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: HDPLEX H10 Fanless microATX Case
- Replies: 26
- Views: 17787
Re: HDPLEX H10 Fanless microATX Case
The caption beneath the first photo on page 2 reads: Like most fanless cases, a series of aluminum fins stick out at the sides to dissipate heat. They are 5.0 cm thick at the base and 3.1 cm at the tip. I think that should be 0.5cm and 0.31cm Or rather mm, rather than cm. Quite so. Thank you.
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:25 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: HDPLEX H10 Fanless microATX Case
- Replies: 26
- Views: 17787
Re: HDPLEX H10 Fanless microATX Case
The caption beneath the first photo on page 2 reads:
Like most fanless cases, a series of aluminum fins stick out at the sides to dissipate heat. They are 5.0 cm thick at the base and 3.1 cm at the tip.
I think that should be 0.5cm and 0.31cm
Like most fanless cases, a series of aluminum fins stick out at the sides to dissipate heat. They are 5.0 cm thick at the base and 3.1 cm at the tip.
I think that should be 0.5cm and 0.31cm
- Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:48 pm
- Forum: Quiet Prebuilt, SFF and Barebones Systems
- Topic: Puget Serenity SPCR Edition v.2
- Replies: 50
- Views: 36754
[quote="MikeC"]Johnsy -- That 55C temp you cite is surely for the operating environment -- not for specific chip temps on the board. You're right, of course. (Interestingly, every server/workstation board I'm aware of - single and dual CPU alike, whether Intel, Supermicro or Tyan - calls for a rathe...
- Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:35 am
- Forum: Quiet Prebuilt, SFF and Barebones Systems
- Topic: Puget Serenity SPCR Edition v.2
- Replies: 50
- Views: 36754
Re: Have to disagree
Surely an increase in mainboard temp. of more than 25% at idle (38C v 30C) and of more than 55% (55C v 35C) under Prime95 is huge? Erm... you do realise that the Centigrade/Celsius temperature scale has a quasi-arbitrary zero-point? You can't sensibly make arguments about percentage rises in temper...
- Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:04 am
- Forum: Quiet Prebuilt, SFF and Barebones Systems
- Topic: Puget Serenity SPCR Edition v.2
- Replies: 50
- Views: 36754
Re: Have to disagree
I wasn't suggesting that the machine was dangerously undercooled. That's what it sounded like to me... Here's my original post in it's entirety: Huge rises in several key temperatures compared to the original, making this machine simply the "or" in the eternal either/or of thermal/acoustic performa...
- Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:50 am
- Forum: Quiet Prebuilt, SFF and Barebones Systems
- Topic: Puget Serenity SPCR Edition v.2
- Replies: 50
- Views: 36754
Re: Have to disagree
Huge rises in several key temperatures compared to the original, making this machine simply the "or" in the eternal either/or of thermal/acoustic performance. Not really. The earlier sample was too conservative, wasting thermal headroom. The new version is closer to the limits... but who runs Prime...
- Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:14 pm
- Forum: Quiet Prebuilt, SFF and Barebones Systems
- Topic: Puget Serenity SPCR Edition v.2
- Replies: 50
- Views: 36754
Have to disagree
Huge rises in several key temperatures compared to the original, making this machine simply the "or" in the eternal either/or of thermal/acoustic performance.
- Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:06 am
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: Zalman CNPS10X Flex CPU Cooler
- Replies: 9
- Views: 18568
In the 2010 Heatsink Test Platform thread, someone points out that only two memory DIMMs are being used on a triple-channel capable platform. If the photo of the Zalman CNPS Flex installed on the motherboard is correct, those two DIMMs are both on channel A, giving single channel performance. Person...
- Thu Jan 28, 2010 8:38 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: SPCR's 2010 CPU Heatsink Test Platform
- Replies: 123
- Views: 132566
Can C/W from one test be used to predict HS behavior with a hotter or cooler CPU If it can't, then what's it for? and to what range And there, I think, is the rub. I personally have always valued C/W figures, but the testing on the new platform has caused me to consider more closely something I pre...
- Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:32 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: SPCR's 2010 CPU Heatsink Test Platform
- Replies: 123
- Views: 132566
How exact does it need to be? Taking a set of reasonable notional values for the i7, along with the measured temp. rise at 7V, shows that the lower the load actually is , the worse any derived coefficient will be. 42/86 = 0.48 42/100 = 0.42 42/110 = 0.38 42/120 = 0.35 42/130 = 0.32 (All in deg.C/W) ...
- Thu Jan 28, 2010 5:18 pm
- Forum: SPCR Article Discussion
- Topic: SPCR's 2010 CPU Heatsink Test Platform
- Replies: 123
- Views: 132566
heat/power coefficient
The biggest casualty of the new platform is the notion that a universalized cooling coefficient (deg.C/W) can be derived for a specific heatsink employing a specific fan at a specific speed. Take the Megahalems for example. With a heat source of ~78W (D950), we get a coefficient of 0.22 deg.C/W when...