"Martin Eastburn" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

Snag


You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards' you
expect.

I have a modern extensive motherboard in my PC. While it is only a
64 bit machine, I hope for a bigger one someday but this might be my
last.

Motherboards are designed almost entirely in the R.O.C.

A DDR3 motherboard is modern.
An i7 six core cpu running over 3.6 GHz isn't old.

Alienware

Martin

I've worked with corporate intranets that tolerated computers as old
as Win 98SE, kept to run irreplaceable old custom software, by not
allowing them access to the external Internet. Even if they aren't
networked it's easy to store and transfer files on a 2TB portable
drive.

I backup the 2TB WD Passport Ultra onto a pair of AC-powered 2TB
drives. All three can run simultaneously on a USB3 ExpressCard in my
old laptop.
-jsw

On Friday, July 25, 2014 9:54:50 PM UTC-4, Martin Eastburn wrote:
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:

wrote:

SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards' you expect.

Printed circuit boards are the modern standard over 3.6 GHz (older than 2012). The question is how would you separate what's modern and what isn't from that? Use a pair of scissors?

(if, in some cases, you could even see the device you're trying to use in refurbishing)

On 7/26/2014 10:10 AM, wrote:
On Friday, July 25, 2014 9:54:50 PM UTC-4, Martin Eastburn wrote:
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:

wrote:

SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards' you expect.

Printed circuit boards are the modern standard over 3.6 GHz (older than 2012). The question is how would you separate what's modern and what isn't from that? Use a pair of scissors?

(if, in some cases, you could even see the device you're trying to use in refurbishing)

To add to my expense I have two - yes two : NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 video
boards and liquid cooling. My fans are in idle most of the time. I run
one monitor in landscape, the other in portrait.

One for multiple pages up at a time and the other - looking at a whole
letter in large font.

Martin

On 7/25/2014 8:56 PM, jon_banquer wrote:
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 6:09:01 AM UTC-7, Karl Townsend wrote:
I'm looking for a new motherboard and haven't really kept up with

computer technology for several years now.



If I can re-use the CPU, I will save the cost of this part PLUS greedy

greedy M$oft won't make me pay for ANOTHER win 7 OS disk. I don't want

to reuse it if I'm being penny wise and pound foolish. Belarc says its

a 3.60 gigahertz AMD FX-4100 Quad-Core. The current MB manual says its

an AM3+ socket.



OK, I'm looking for a file storage and internet surfer machine, don't

need blazing speed, or a lot of memory. So I went to Newegg for MBs,

selected AM3+ socket, FX type processor, and started looking for ones

with lots of SATA and other slots. I came up with these tentative

results: http://tinyurl.com/nofnueh I made some selections to narrow

the field that aren't really needed.



Any suggestions? Am I on the right track to re use this CPU? If we're

good to go with one of these, I'll want to double check if the memory

I have is compatible, Belarc says I got 2 each 4 meg sticks. The

existing MB manual says DDR3. Not sure how to double check the memory

speed.



Karl

History based CAD like SolidWorks, Solid Edge, Autodesk Inventor, etc. doesn't make full or proper use of multi-core CPU technology. This is a result of the geometry kernels they are based on. To get the best performance from these kinds of CAD products you need the fastest and most powerful CPU that you can afford.

When it comes to CAM, usually the more cores the better. Surfacing toolpath can take a lot of time to process and most surfacing toolpath now allows the use of multi-core technology. The same applies to solid cut part simulation. More info provided on request.

But with multi-tasking going on, your CAD might be in one core and
printing or uploading in another. You won't have to swap out cores to
process another job that might be from the CAD or just the computer.

Martin

On Saturday, July 26, 2014 9:16:29 PM UTC-7, Martin Eastburn wrote:
On 7/25/2014 8:56 PM, jon_banquer wrote:

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 6:09:01 AM UTC-7, Karl Townsend wrote:

I'm looking for a new motherboard and haven't really kept up with



computer technology for several years now.







If I can re-use the CPU, I will save the cost of this part PLUS greedy



greedy M$oft won't make me pay for ANOTHER win 7 OS disk. I don't want



to reuse it if I'm being penny wise and pound foolish. Belarc says its



a 3.60 gigahertz AMD FX-4100 Quad-Core. The current MB manual says its



an AM3+ socket.







OK, I'm looking for a file storage and internet surfer machine, don't



need blazing speed, or a lot of memory. So I went to Newegg for MBs,



selected AM3+ socket, FX type processor, and started looking for ones



with lots of SATA and other slots. I came up with these tentative



results: http://tinyurl.com/nofnueh I made some selections to narrow



the field that aren't really needed.







Any suggestions? Am I on the right track to re use this CPU? If we're



good to go with one of these, I'll want to double check if the memory



I have is compatible, Belarc says I got 2 each 4 meg sticks. The



existing MB manual says DDR3. Not sure how to double check the memory



speed.







Karl



History based CAD like SolidWorks, Solid Edge, Autodesk Inventor, etc. doesn't make full or proper use of multi-core CPU technology. This is a result of the geometry kernels they are based on. To get the best performance from these kinds of CAD products you need the fastest and most powerful CPU that you can afford.



When it comes to CAM, usually the more cores the better. Surfacing toolpath can take a lot of time to process and most surfacing toolpath now allows the use of multi-core technology. The same applies to solid cut part simulation. More info provided on request.



But with multi-tasking going on, your CAD might be in one core and

printing or uploading in another. You won't have to swap out cores to

process another job that might be from the CAD or just the computer.



Martin

True but most CAD power users feel that the best performance from their history based solid modeling system is the most important thing they can have.

Users like this (I'm one of them) would rather have the fastest CAD and are willing to sacrifice just about everything else to get it.

On 2014-07-26, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Martin Eastburn" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

Snag


You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards' you
expect.

I have a modern extensive motherboard in my PC. While it is only a
64 bit machine, I hope for a bigger one someday but this might be my
last.

[ ... ]

I've worked with corporate intranets that tolerated computers as old
as Win 98SE, kept to run irreplaceable old custom software, by not
allowing them access to the external Internet. Even if they aren't
networked it's easy to store and transfer files on a 2TB portable
drive.

Does in 98SE even know what to do with a 2 TB drive -- portable
or non?

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | (KV4PH) Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 27 Jul 2014 05:07:21 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

On 2014-07-26, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Martin Eastburn" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

Snag


You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards' you
expect.

I have a modern extensive motherboard in my PC. While it is only a
64 bit machine, I hope for a bigger one someday but this might be my
last.

[ ... ]

I've worked with corporate intranets that tolerated computers as old
as Win 98SE, kept to run irreplaceable old custom software, by not
allowing them access to the external Internet. Even if they aren't
networked it's easy to store and transfer files on a 2TB portable
drive.

Does in 98SE even know what to do with a 2 TB drive -- portable
or non?

Enjoy,
DoN.

Yes, with the proper drivers or software.

Gunner

--
"Living in the United States now is like being a Tampon.
We're in a great place, just at a bad time."

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
On 2014-07-26, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Martin Eastburn" wrote in message
...
On 7/25/2014 4:44 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:30:57 AM UTC-4, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
SNIP

None of this addresses modern motherboards

Snag


You will have to define what 'modern' is and what 'motherboards'
you
expect.

I have a modern extensive motherboard in my PC. While it is only
a
64 bit machine, I hope for a bigger one someday but this might be
my
last.

[ ... ]

I've worked with corporate intranets that tolerated computers as
old
as Win 98SE, kept to run irreplaceable old custom software, by not
allowing them access to the external Internet. Even if they aren't
networked it's easy to store and transfer files on a 2TB portable
drive.

Does in 98SE even know what to do with a 2 TB drive -- portable
or non?

Enjoy,
DoN.

98SE is an example of what is tolerable if the program on it can't be
updated.

Older versions of Win2000 and XP don't see over 137GB, nor are the
computers built for them likely to gain from or even accept a USB3
card. OTOH their software won't generate job files larger than their
drive's capacity so you can transfer their output on a flash drive.

I just opened and read a 32GB Sandisk flash drive on a still-useful
computer from the 1990's running Win2000.
-jsw

On 7/26/2014 11:40 PM, jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, July 26, 2014 9:16:29 PM UTC-7, Martin Eastburn wrote:
On 7/25/2014 8:56 PM, jon_banquer wrote:

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 6:09:01 AM UTC-7, Karl Townsend wrote:

I'm looking for a new motherboard and haven't really kept up with



computer technology for several years now.







If I can re-use the CPU, I will save the cost of this part PLUS greedy



greedy M$oft won't make me pay for ANOTHER win 7 OS disk. I don't want



to reuse it if I'm being penny wise and pound foolish. Belarc says its



a 3.60 gigahertz AMD FX-4100 Quad-Core. The current MB manual says its



an AM3+ socket.







OK, I'm looking for a file storage and internet surfer machine, don't



need blazing speed, or a lot of memory. So I went to Newegg for MBs,



selected AM3+ socket, FX type processor, and started looking for ones



with lots of SATA and other slots. I came up with these tentative



results: http://tinyurl.com/nofnueh I made some selections to narrow



the field that aren't really needed.







Any suggestions? Am I on the right track to re use this CPU? If we're



good to go with one of these, I'll want to double check if the memory



I have is compatible, Belarc says I got 2 each 4 meg sticks. The



existing MB manual says DDR3. Not sure how to double check the memory



speed.







Karl



History based CAD like SolidWorks, Solid Edge, Autodesk Inventor, etc. doesn't make full or proper use of multi-core CPU technology. This is a result of the geometry kernels they are based on. To get the best performance from these kinds of CAD products you need the fastest and most powerful CPU that you can afford.



When it comes to CAM, usually the more cores the better. Surfacing toolpath can take a lot of time to process and most surfacing toolpath now allows the use of multi-core technology. The same applies to solid cut part simulation. More info provided on request.



But with multi-tasking going on, your CAD might be in one core and

printing or uploading in another. You won't have to swap out cores to

process another job that might be from the CAD or just the computer.



Martin

True but most CAD power users feel that the best performance from their history based solid modeling system is the most important thing they can have.

Users like this (I'm one of them) would rather have the fastest CAD and are willing to sacrifice just about everything else to get it.




Granted, I use a number of CAD and CAM packages myself. That is why I
upped the memory so my VM isn't on a disk and isn't virtual.

Trying to get 3D shading is fun on small machines.

Martin