Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux? |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
 |
|
03-24-2006, 09:55 PM
|
#2
|
LQ Veteran
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Boise, ID
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 6,642
Rep:
|
My take: I wish I had your wallet. More seriously, the only real mis-match I see is that your proposed mobo supports DDR 400 (PC 3200) RAM, but you've selected DDR 433 (PC 3500) RAM. Ideally, and for optimal performance, they should match, as there's no particular advantage to installig faster RAM than the mobo can support.
If you want a killer keyboard, I personally would recommend the totally old-school IBM Model M from the mid-80's or 90's. My baby is on this page, and I've got to say that the feel of a buckling spring keyboard is unique, and makes any other keyboard totally unsatisfying. They just seem flimsy, weak, and lame in comparison. Seriously, as the propaganda on the website says, the keyboard is probably the most under-appreciated components of any system, but it's the one that gets more physical use than anything else. Get yourself a real keyboard, you won't be disappointed,
|
|
|
03-24-2006, 10:28 PM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 30
Rep:
|
I'm not trying to plug Dull--er, Dell--here, but in my opinion, a good solid keyboard is the Dell model RT7D20. And for mice, I like the IBM model 96F9275. With only two buttons, no scroll wheel, a fairly generic shape, and an age of at least eight years (I got it with a used PC in 1998), it's slightly antique, but I like it well enough that I used it until yesterday, when it died--and I quickly went to EBay and found a duplicate. Don't get the Compaq #26-622 scroll mouse. I borrowed it from my brother, and it's lousy.
They don't build computers like they used to. A relative gave me this EMachines PC in 2003, and it's now falling apart. Before that, the AST someone gave me in 1998 (built in 1994) is sitting in my closet, but still ran when I tested it a few months ago. I had a Tandy 1000, bought in 1987, before that; it was in working order when I disposed of it in 2004.
Last edited by ashokanfarewell; 03-24-2006 at 10:33 PM.
|
|
|
03-24-2006, 10:30 PM
|
#4
|
Member
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: MA
Distribution: Ubuntu 7.10
Posts: 558
Rep:
|
hardware looks nice. And if i wanted a really nice keyboard i would go for the Optimus. It is still a prototype but it might be worth the wait. Not sure how well it will work with linux though
|
|
|
03-24-2006, 10:40 PM
|
#5
|
Member
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 30
Rep:
|
Are there any current computer brands that use one of these "buckling spring" keyboards?
After seeing that picture, I know what you're talking about, and I love those, too. I think the last time I used one was in my high school computer lab in the mid-nineties. The keys make a nice loud metallic clicking sound.
Damn, I wish I had thought of looking for one of those at EBay instead of buying this one. It's one of those common black Dell keyboards with a curved upper edge and circular caps/scroll/num lock indicators on the right; it is solid and has nice sturdy legs, but it not as noisy as your old-school model. I'm anti-consumerism, so I wouldn't run out and buy a different keyboard unless this one broke.
I hate to admit this (because of the side I was on in the Holy War), but the keyboard I have typed the fastest on was a Macintosh keyboard (model # unknown). I swear, my typing speed once went as high as 95 WPM on it (admittedly using two fingers, because I'm handicapped), and my average on it was approx. 67 WPM.
And in case you wonder why I would type on a Macintrash if I hate them, it was for a high school typing class.
Last edited by ashokanfarewell; 03-24-2006 at 10:55 PM.
|
|
|
03-30-2006, 07:18 PM
|
#6
|
LQ Newbie
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 19
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by pleasehelp
BTW where the **** to get this card?
BFG Tech Geforce 7900GTX BFGR
It's the only part i can't seem to find everyone is out of it :-(
|
I have a 7800GTX and believe me, its more than enough to handle anything you could throw at it.
I used to have a 6600GT but after extreme overclocking and benchmarking it died (I got the GPU up to 116C....yeah, thats pretty hot!)
But back to your post, it seems you're building a Windows gaming rig so I think you'll find better answers in a general gaming forum rather than around here with Linux folk. From personal experience, most distros don't even recognize anything higher than a 6800GT.
As for mouse and keyboard......
Keyboards are overrated, they're all the same to me.
I have a Logitech MX700 mouse which is perfect for my hand, although I recommend the Logitech MX1000...it is by far the most comfortable mouse your hand will ever touch.
As for speakers.....
Forget about computer speakers and find yourself some good ol' stereo equipment from the late 70s. You can pick up a receiver and some big speakers for very little money. Who wants 2.5" satellites when you can have 10" satellites? lol
Note: most receivers from 70s/80s only support 2.0 sound, maybe 4.0 if its a good one. If you want true 5.1 or higher then you'll have to buy a newer receiver....but you should still stick to the old school speakers because they make great end tables 
|
|
|
03-30-2006, 09:03 PM
|
#7
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042
Rep: 
|
The best sound card is Audiotrak Prodigy 7.1 or their LT version. It equals the performance of Lynx Studio Technology's LynxTWO which is very high quality. The Audiotrak Prodigy 7.1
I STRONGLY recommend buying ECC memory because using dual processor systems share the memory. If one part of the data in memory is written at the wrong location, a crash will occur. People that only use single processor system do not know this until after that use a multiple processor system. You could by registered or parity memory too but you do not need to, but ECC memory definitely need to be used.
These days NEC products suck. Buy a Plextor drive with 3D sensor.
Partsexpress and Adire Audio sells DIY loudspeakers and subwoofers that are much better than you can buy in any store.
I suggest putting the hard drives in RAID-1 instead of RAID-0 because it will make Linux programs load quicker and one hard drive can fail with out losing data.
Quote:
...I see is that your proposed mobo supports DDR 400 (PC 3200) RAM, but you've selected DDR 433 (PC 3500) RAM. Ideally, and for optimal performance, they should match, as there's no particular advantage to installig faster RAM than the mobo can support.
|
Wrong. 433 MHz is actually 400 MHz and 400 MHz memory is 333 MHz because of the quality of manufacturing. A system can easily handle it. The reason why they state DDR400 is because if they state DDR433, end users would think they can overclock with out voiding the warrenty. I bet your memory chips on the video card is slightly faster than what it is going it.
|
|
|
03-30-2006, 09:50 PM
|
#8
|
Member
Registered: Jul 2005
Location: Rhinelander Wi.
Distribution: FC6 F7 F8
Posts: 94
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamoneya
hardware looks nice. And if i wanted a really nice keyboard i would go for the Optimus. It is still a prototype but it might be worth the wait. Not sure how well it will work with linux though
|
Acording to the website. "It will be OS-independent (at least it’s going to be able to work in some default state with any OS)" and "It will be an open-source keyboard, SDK will be available." now the big question when it comes out is the price tag.
|
|
|
03-31-2006, 01:19 AM
|
#9
|
LQ Veteran
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Boise, ID
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 6,642
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro
Wrong. 433 MHz is actually 400 MHz and 400 MHz memory is 333 MHz because of the quality of manufacturing.
|
What is your basis for making this statement? Please post links to articles from authorative, reputable sources that support this assertion. Thanks
|
|
|
04-01-2006, 04:46 PM
|
#10
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042
Rep: 
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.W.
What is your basis for making this statement? Please post links to articles from authorative, reputable sources that support this assertion. Thanks
|
When I was in high school (1997), my dad is thinking buying a new computer using PII processor. The engineer at work told my dad that 8 nanosecond memory should be used instead 10 nanosecond when using a front side bus of 100 MHz.
My electronic books said to use transistors that are at least two times faster than the switch on-off frequency in the circuit. The reason is because the circuit can and will oscillate which creates an unreliable circuit during use.
You live in California, so you have more resources than me. I suggest calling engineers at Intel, AMD, and other companies to make your skepticism change.
The formula for time to hertz is the inverse.
1/t = t^-1 = hertz
1/f = f^-1 = time
(8 X 10^-9)^-1 = 125000000 hertz
(10 X 10^-9)^-1 = 100000000 hertz
|
|
|
04-02-2006, 04:04 AM
|
#11
|
LQ Veteran
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Boise, ID
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 6,642
Rep:
|
Nine year old hearsay isn't what I'd consider to be a reliable, authoritative source of information.
The accusation you've made in this thread basically is that RAM manufacturers routinely engage in false advertising and/or fraud, by claiming better performance specs for their products than they are capable of delivering (eg, that a DDR433 stick is actually only DDR400) That's a pretty serious charge, and if you're going to make statements like that (or if you expect people to take you seriously) then you need to be able to back them up. So far you haven't done that, and regardless of where I live or where you live, if you have access to Google, then you've got exactly the same amount of resources as me. So again, if you can cite information from reputable sources that support your claim, I'll stand corrected, but otherwise, there seem to be no actual facts that support your comment that "433 is actually 400, and 400 is actually 333", and consequently, there's no reason to view it with anything other than heavy skepticism if not dismissal.
Personally, I suppose that there may be some shady companies out there who could be claiming better-than-actual performance for their products, but I think it's reasonable to say that RAM purchased from well respected, quality manufacturers (eg Kingston among others) will perform at the advertised performance level.
My original point that the CPU's FSB and the RAM speed should be matched to what the mobo can support remains unchanged.
|
|
|
04-02-2006, 04:41 PM
|
#12
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042
Rep: 
|
Memory manufacture like Kingston does not matter. Kingston uses memory chips from other memory manufactures. Crucial makes their own memory chips.
Quote:
Nine year old hearsay isn't what I'd consider to be a reliable, authoritative source of information.
|
I was 17 years old you damn fool. In my previous post I said an engineer said to my dad to select 8 nanosecond RAM instead of 10 nanoseconds when using 100 MHz. The reason why is because of voltage regulation, power filteration, heat, and quality of manufacturing the chips. Their ability to handle their rated speed is harder as the memory chips age.
If pleasehelp already built the computer and compared DDR400 with DDR433, the DDR433 will have more hit states than wait states compared to DDR400.
The reason why I said to access the companies around you is because most companies are around you while I have to call long distance.
Using the internet to gather this information can not be done because it is rarely talked about. Also only engineers know this. Any electronic book you get in the library or a book store will tell you to pick transistors that are at least equal or faster than the rated clock of the circuit.
|
|
|
04-02-2006, 06:52 PM
|
#13
|
LQ Veteran
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Boise, ID
Distribution: Mint
Posts: 6,642
Rep:
|
Take it easy, champ.
The reason I'm calling you on it is because you specifically stated that "433 MHz is actually 400 MHz and 400 MHz memory is 333 MHz". That's not something I've ever heard before, and quite frankly doesn't make a lot of sense, at least not to me. However, it's entirely possible that I just plain missed any news about this information, and if so, I'd sure like to know about it. So I'm simply asking that you provide some kind of documentation that supports your assertion. Is that really so unreasonable?
Seeing though as how you haven't done that yet, and that you're now claiming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro
Using the internet to gather this information can not be done because it is rarely talked about. Also only engineers know this.
|
only increases my skepticism. Just about every category of equipment gets benchmarked, and RAM is no exception, but I've never seen anything that supports your statement. It's sort of like if someone posted that "Intel 3.2Gz CPU's really only run at 1.4Gz" -- would you accept that as being accurate just because someone said so? I doubt it, and that's the scenario here. You're spouting off about technical issues but without any backing documentation, so as they say in poker, it's time to put up or shut up.
|
|
|
04-02-2006, 07:11 PM
|
#14
|
Member
Registered: Jan 2005
Location: MA
Distribution: Ubuntu 7.10
Posts: 558
Rep:
|
just because kingston may buy their chips from someone else doesnt mean they just take the manufactures specs and go with it. They will test the chips themselves and benchmark them. So the difference between making components or buying them from a supplier is largely irrelevant. Kingston is still a reliable brand their chip speed is accurate.
|
|
|
04-04-2006, 02:00 AM
|
#15
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042
Rep: 
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 AM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|