Pio's new (lol) projects

[pio]

1 hour ago, UltraMega said:

Damn 4.8ghz, that's really impressive for that CPU. I wonder how it benches at that clock speed.

 

Anything in particular I should run on it before I put Mint on there for testing?  I've got quite a few games on there with Win10 right now already.

Debating on going Linux on my main rig for a while now, and this FX rig performs closely enough....might as well give it a try there first.

EDIT:
Also, I've submitted a request to return the Radeon 9800XT since I bought it less than 30 days ago.  Really bummed out about that one, especially since I left the seller a good rating already because I was so excited for it.  Le sigh.  Let's see if he accepts the return or not.  It gives a display, but its artifacting even on BIOS, and on desktop its completely unusable due to it.  I guess I could try to bake it, but for $175 of paypal credit's money......I think he can take the return. It was, actually, advertised as a fully functional card.  If I was actually taking a gamble on it, 1, I wouldn't have paid $175 for it, and 2, I wouldn't have found a listing that said in working condition.

Edited August 7, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[UltraMega]

8 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

 

Anything in particular I should run on it before I put Mint on there for testing?  I've got quite a few games on there with Win10 right now already.

Debating on going Linux on my main rig for a while now, and this FX rig performs closely enough....might as well give it a try there first.

EDIT:
Also, I've submitted a request to return the Radeon 9800XT since I bought it less than 30 days ago.  Really bummed out about that one, especially since I left the seller a good rating already because I was so excited for it.  Le sigh.  Let's see if he accepts the return or not.  It gives a display, but its artifacting even on BIOS, and on desktop its completely unusable due to it.  I guess I could try to bake it, but for $175 of paypal credit's money......I think he can take the return. It was, actually, advertised as a fully functional card.  If I was actually taking a gamble on it, 1, I wouldn't have paid $175 for it, and 2, I wouldn't have found a listing that said in working condition.

Just something that will test. The CPU and give it a comparable score. 3d mark could work, or even just cpuz. 

 

Side note, is it smokey up there for you? Very smokey here in CA. 

[pio]

6 hours ago, UltraMega said:

Just something that will test. The CPU and give it a comparable score. 3d mark could work, or even just cpuz. 

 

Side note, is it smokey up there for you? Very smokey here in CA. 

I'll run Cinebench on her tonight.  I can do a couple 3dmark runs too, not sure which ones I have but I can do that before I linux swap it.  Games, I'd run, but really there's not much to say.  I was playing RDR2 on it last night at 1080p / dead center preset settings.  Cyberpunk was playing smoothly on low I think it was? (My Ryzen rig's settings at 1080p).  I already knew BeamNG.drive played fine on it on High / 1080p seeing as how it was doing medium with the 7970 installed.

And yes, it has been pretty bad up here.  WA State is also on fire, yet again.  2 days ago on my drive home it looked like it was snowing. -_-  Of course, per the usual lately in our state, we're being told one reason why but its actually another reason all together as to why these fires are happening.  Yay.  At least this year, the bigger fires were started by lightning.  Too much dry fuel in our forests the last couple years.  That's what happens after 10 years of no logging.  If the forests aren't managed, they burn easy.

[pio]

So per the request of UltraMega, I went ahead and ran some benchmarks on this old FX 8 core / R9 290x.  Unsurprisingly, it does better than my sig rig in games since the test bench is 1080p.  I mean seriously, I'm amazed at how good RDR2 and Crysis Remastered look, just WOW.  Definitely means I need to save up $2000 ish for a 6900XT now.

Anyway, enough chit chat, onto the results!  Apologies for double posting.  Trying to keep actual information separated from conversations.

Screenshots and CPU benchmarks (Cinebench / 3dMark):

Spoiler

Here we have CPUz screenshots showing my clock speeds and timings.  Yes, its pretty clear I don't care too much about this old FX 8350, but it DID run stable here 12+ hours P95 and didn't overheat.  I call that a win.  If it breaks, I'll buy a 5 gigglehurtz FX 9950 and call it a day, they're cheap now.  Whatever.  This rig runs fantastically at these settings!!!!

 

Here, we have Cinebench single threaded.  Not doing well here, but who expected it to honestly?

 

Next up is Cinebench multithreaded.  It's beating a 4 core Ryzen 2600.  I call that a win here for the famously "lame" FX 8 core.  I have a Ryzen 2600 rig set to 4 cores (boosts higher / stock cooler).  I also have my main Ryzen 3600 rig.  Honestly, this FX is absolutely no conceivable difference in games from my Ryzen rigs.  So this result makes sense.

 

Next up I ran 3DMark CPU Profile.  I don't do 3DMark runs normally anymore, so these results are all for you guys.  The way I figure it, if the rig does what I need it to, no need to 3DMark it.

 

And here's Firestrike.  Same thing as above, results are just because it was asked for.

 

And the same with Time Spy.  All these runs were using whatever the default settings were.  No "extreme" or "ultra" options used.

 

Here's where things got a little interesting since I use Unigine a lot.  Here, we have Heaven.  100% maxed out, 8x AA, Ultra, the works, at 1080p.

 

Even better results from Valley.  Same settings, 100% maxed at 1080p.

 

And then, I just had to give it a go.  Superposition at "1080p High".  I've never ran this bench at this setting before on my RX 580's, usually stuck to "Medium".  And well......WOW!

 

But then of course, I couldn't stop at just basic benchmarking.  I had to show you guys how well it plays games too!!!  I only ran 2, but they're the highest possible graphics / most extreme on a system games I had installed on here.  Don't believe me?  Check out the results for yourself!!!

Games benchmarks:

Spoiler

Here we have RDR2 or "Pony Riding Simulator 2".  This run, I was originally trying to go at the dead center "balanced" option since that's what my main rig plays it at.  The results were so good, I decided.....can I max it?  Turns out, I absolutely CAN!!!  Framerate dipped just a tad bit, but overall for a 3rd person open world type game, +30 FPS minimums is fine with me, and well...just check it out!!!  This game is absolutely BEAUTIFUL maxed out, and IMO totally worth not having 60 FPS.  This was just the maximum "preset" option.  No clue if there's more I could turn on, but framerate was getting kinda low here.  It plays at higher settings than my main rig though (at a lower resolution).  So, still very impressive to me.

 

 

And what benchmarking session would be complete without Crysis?  But not just any Crysis, I tried Crysis Remastered on here with RTX.  No, the R9 290x isn't technically RTX capable, but it does it!!  I think a lot of these titles with RTX features use DX version of RTX?  I dunno, been out of the loop for awhile.  It looks absolutely fantastic, and similar performance to the OG Crysis on a rig from that era (see my Phenomenon benches earlier).  I can easily turn RTX down to "performance", still have RTX, but enjoy 45-60 FPS instead of 30's.  Again....another title this FX rig beats my main rig at (main rig at a higher resolution though).
(Note:  The first run there were a few very huge FPS dips at the very beginning due to loading still)
(Note 2:  Yes, I just noticed I forgot to clear MSPaint before I pasted Crysis results in.  My bad.  Not redoing it. :P)

Sorry for not doing other games.  I mean, these 2 alone absolutely blew me away with their performance as it was.  Overall, this FX rig is definitely a keeper though.

Edited August 8, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[ENTERPRISE]

9 minutes ago, pioneerisloud said:

So per the request of UltraMega, I went ahead and ran some benchmarks on this old FX 8 core / R9 290x.  Unsurprisingly, it does better than my sig rig in games since the test bench is 1080p.  I mean seriously, I'm amazed at how good RDR2 and Crysis Remastered look, just WOW.  Definitely means I need to save up $2000 ish for a 6900XT now.

Anyway, enough chit chat, onto the results!  Apologies for double posting.  Trying to keep actual information separated from conversations.

Screenshots and CPU benchmarks (Cinebench / 3dMark):

  Hide contents

Here we have CPUz screenshots showing my clock speeds and timings.  Yes, its pretty clear I don't care too much about this old FX 8350, but it DID run stable here 12+ hours P95 and didn't overheat.  I call that a win.  If it breaks, I'll buy a 5 gigglehurtz FX 9950 and call it a day, they're cheap now.  Whatever.  This rig runs fantastically at these settings!!!!

 

Here, we have Cinebench single threaded.  Not doing well here, but who expected it to honestly?

 

Next up is Cinebench multithreaded.  It's beating a 4 core Ryzen 2600.  I call that a win here for the famously "lame" FX 8 core.  I have a Ryzen 2600 rig set to 4 cores (boosts higher / stock cooler).  I also have my main Ryzen 3600 rig.  Honestly, this FX is absolutely no conceivable difference in games from my Ryzen rigs.  So this result makes sense.

 

Next up I ran 3DMark CPU Profile.  I don't do 3DMark runs normally anymore, so these results are all for you guys.  The way I figure it, if the rig does what I need it to, no need to 3DMark it.

 

And here's Firestrike.  Same thing as above, results are just because it was asked for.

 

And the same with Time Spy.  All these runs were using whatever the default settings were.  No "extreme" or "ultra" options used.

 

Here's where things got a little interesting since I use Unigine a lot.  Here, we have Heaven.  100% maxed out, 8x AA, Ultra, the works, at 1080p.

 

Even better results from Valley.  Same settings, 100% maxed at 1080p.

 

And then, I just had to give it a go.  Superposition at "1080p High".  I've never ran this bench at this setting before on my RX 580's, usually stuck to "Medium".  And well......WOW!

 

But then of course, I couldn't stop at just basic benchmarking.  I had to show you guys how well it plays games too!!!  I only ran 2, but they're the highest possible graphics / most extreme on a system games I had installed on here.  Don't believe me?  Check out the results for yourself!!!

Games benchmarks:

  Hide contents

Here we have RDR2 or "Pony Riding Simulator 2".  This run, I was originally trying to go at the dead center "balanced" option since that's what my main rig plays it at.  The results were so good, I decided.....can I max it?  Turns out, I absolutely CAN!!!  Framerate dipped just a tad bit, but overall for a 3rd person open world type game, +30 FPS minimums is fine with me, and well...just check it out!!!  This game is absolutely BEAUTIFUL maxed out, and IMO totally worth not having 60 FPS.  This was just the maximum "preset" option.  No clue if there's more I could turn on, but framerate was getting kinda low here.  It plays at higher settings than my main rig though (at a lower resolution).  So, still very impressive to me.

 

 

And what benchmarking session would be complete without Crysis?  But not just any Crysis, I tried Crysis Remastered on here with RTX.  No, the R9 290x isn't technically RTX capable, but it does it!!  I think a lot of these titles with RTX features use DX version of RTX?  I dunno, been out of the loop for awhile.  It looks absolutely fantastic, and similar performance to the OG Crysis on a rig from that era (see my Phenomenon benches earlier).  I can easily turn RTX down to "performance", still have RTX, but enjoy 45-60 FPS instead of 30's.  Again....another title this FX rig beats my main rig at (main rig at a higher resolution though).
(Note:  The first run there were a few very huge FPS dips at the very beginning due to loading still)
(Note 2:  Yes, I just noticed I forgot to clear MSPaint before I pasted Crysis results in.  My bad.  Not redoing it. :P)

Sorry for not doing other games.  I mean, these 2 alone absolutely blew me away with their performance as it was.  Overall, this FX rig is definitely a keeper though.

This is promising for me. I just bought a used rig from the company I work for which has the FX 9590 for my little brothers first proper PC. I figured it would still be a decent performer for general and gaming use. This just goes to prove it lol. 

 

The rig comes with a Quadro P2000. Not a bad card, but he is not going to be doing heavy gaming, so it should suffice. 

[pio]

46 minutes ago, ENTERPRISE said:

This is promising for me. I just bought a used rig from the company I work for which has the FX 9590 for my little brothers first proper PC. I figured it would still be a decent performer for general and gaming use. This just goes to prove it lol. 

 

The rig comes with a Quadro P2000. Not a bad card, but he is not going to be doing heavy gaming, so it should suffice. 

I mean I way overpaid for most of this junk.....

But yeah, I'd pair it with any modern mid-range card or past gen high end card like an RX 580, R9 290x, GTX 1660Ti or whatever is equal, 1070Ti, or even an old 980Ti.  The more VRAM the better these days of course.  Find a deal on a used 1080 / 1080Ti even, and I'll bet it'll do just fine.  Maybe a tad bottlenecked, but I'll bet you'd see an increase.  8 threads is 8 threads, these (later) FX CPU's compared almost identically to Ivy Bridge back in the day.  Still absolutely usable and enjoyable today on a budget.

Other than BeamNG.drive (which is HIGHLY CPU heavy with AI spawned), I legitimately cannot tell a lick of difference between this FX rig and my sig rig in games.  General usability....meh, my NVME is obviously snappier than RAID0 BX500's, but its a close race.

EDIT:  I missed the "he's not going to be doing heavy gaming".  Yeah, it'll do great. 

Edited August 8, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[ENTERPRISE]

4 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

I mean I way overpaid for most of this junk.....

But yeah, I'd pair it with any modern mid-range card or past gen high end card like an RX 580, R9 290x, GTX 1660Ti or whatever is equal, 1070Ti, or even an old 980Ti.  The more VRAM the better these days of course.  Find a deal on a used 1080 / 1080Ti even, and I'll bet it'll do just fine.  Maybe a tad bottlenecked, but I'll bet you'd see an increase.  8 threads is 8 threads, these (later) FX CPU's compared almost identically to Ivy Bridge back in the day.  Still absolutely usable and enjoyable today on a budget.

Other than BeamNG.drive (which is HIGHLY CPU heavy with AI spawned), I legitimately cannot tell a lick of difference between this FX rig and my sig rig in games.  General usability....meh, my NVME is obviously snappier than RAID0 BX500's, but its a close race.

EDIT:  I missed the "he's not going to be doing heavy gaming".  Yeah, it'll do great. 

Yeah, I mean if he was into "Real" gaming then for sure I would pick up a more appropriate GPU but for his activities I think this will do fine but before I give it to him I better double check.

 

The later FX CPU's were not complete junkers by any means and paired up with a semi decent GPU and SSD/NVME...You are still in a good position.

[pio]

14 hours ago, ENTERPRISE said:

Yeah, I mean if he was into "Real" gaming then for sure I would pick up a more appropriate GPU but for his activities I think this will do fine but before I give it to him I better double check.

 

The later FX CPU's were not complete junkers by any means and paired up with a semi decent GPU and SSD/NVME...You are still in a good position.

Agreed completely.  A good SSD setup will get just about ANY rig made in the last 15 ish years (or longer) "usable" daily.  Gaming just needs whatever GPU you need for your resolution and games, and I'd say at least a "good" quad core to be happy with "most" games.  Obviously there's exceptions to those rules, but good general "minimum" requirements anyway.

On that note too, my own FX rig apparently is NOT going Linux and neither am I.  Apparently I cannot get 5120x1440 to work in Linux, something about the EDID not reporting correctly or something, I dunno.  Linux terminal confuses me coming from a DOS / Windows background.  So that kinda sucks.  Was looking forward to swapping my main rig to Linux Mint or Kubuntu.  Tried using the xandr (spelling?) tweaks to add in the resolution and refresh rate, but didn't seem to matter what I did, screen was garbled at any 32:9 resolution.  

[tictoc]

You should be able to at least force the resolution if it's not picked up automatically.  If you want to give it a go, I can help you out. 

 

I currently run the following triple monitor setup on my main machine: 1440x2560-3440x1440-2560x1440(165Hz).

 

[pio]

8 minutes ago, tictoc said:

You should be able to at least force the resolution if it's not picked up automatically.  If you want to give it a go, I can help you out. 

 

I currently run the following triple monitor setup on my main machine: 1440x2560-3440x1440-2560x1440(165Hz).

 

 

I did figure out its not a Linux specific issue, its a 290x issue apparently.  It won't run at native res in Windows either with my Ultrawide.  I ended up having to run 7680x2160 in eyefinity with the latest drivers in Windows.  I figured the 290x would be new enough to work out of the box with this screen.

Latest Windows drivers do not allow you to customize the eyefinity resolution, so whatever it picks up, is what you get apparently.  I'll be trying older drivers today, this res isn't going to work for gaming at all with an FX / 290x lol.  And my screen is 5120x1440 anyway, was hoping for just simple 3840x1080 actually on it lol.

So apparently, I'll need to figure out how to force the right resolution, in eyefinity, for Linux to work.

Edited August 9, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[tictoc]

Native res won't happen on a 290x, I thought you were talking about your RX 580. I think the native max single display resolution with a little hackery is something like 4096x1440.  Anything larger will need eyefinity, and it's been almost a decade since I ran a de-bezeled eyefinity setup.

 

If you are going to run the 290X in linux, you will want to force the amdgpu (kernel) driver.  That card will default to the radeon driver, and when I was running my 290s the kernel driver was more performant (and still is).

 

If you go down that rabbit hole, maybe start a thread, or just post to the thread I started in the OS form.

[pio]

7 hours ago, tictoc said:

Native res won't happen on a 290x, I thought you were talking about your RX 580. I think the native max single display resolution with a little hackery is something like 4096x1440.  Anything larger will need eyefinity, and it's been almost a decade since I ran a de-bezeled eyefinity setup.

 

If you are going to run the 290X in linux, you will want to force the amdgpu (kernel) driver.  That card will default to the radeon driver, and when I was running my 290s the kernel driver was more performant (and still is).

 

If you go down that rabbit hole, maybe start a thread, or just post to the thread I started in the OS form.

Yeah, eyefinity will be about my only hope with the 290x and Linux. Same with windows. Native res isn't required but it'd be nice to have 3840x1080. I'll play around with it more later, I'm sure eyefinity is possible on Linux. Still working out the bugs in windows now that I know it's a card limitation. 

EDIT:
Got the Thuban rig built this evening, and having issues with THAT one too, more serious issues.  *Grumbles.  The 7970 absolutely will not POST in this board.  Tried every PCIe slot, and even tried a GT310 installed as primary GPU and using the 7970 as secondary.  It just will not POST at all with the 7970 even present.  Tried swapping the BIOS switch around too.  I'll make a thread in the GPU section about it.  Maybe somebody else has had this problem.  I'll update with pictures once its functional.  Not any good taking beauty shots when the insides are a mess right now.

Edited August 10, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[UltraMega]

If you get a chance can you run the bench on CPUz? It's just a quick ~30 second test. 

[pio]

3 hours ago, UltraMega said:

If you get a chance can you run the bench on CPUz? It's just a quick ~30 second test. 

On the FX rig?  I can, yeah.  I'm kind of in between at the moment, got the Phenom II x6 going last night so was working on getting it stable.

[pio]

Update:

Side panel of the replacement rosewill case just returned from the metal shop. Still no word on plastic working for the cheiftec. I might have to find another cheiftec dragon or something. 

 

Anyway, here's the new updated side panel. Paint is coming next! Waiting for a day when it's not snowing ash. -_-

 

 

EDIT:
On the note of updates.  I decided to do another thing.  I was able to use my FX rig to an advantage this evening.  Had this old MSI RX 580 8GB Armor OC card laying around that I bricked over a year ago with a bad BIOS flash.  Never had a system on hand with enough space, PCIe slots, and a big enough PSU to try to flash it again.  I did think about using onboard GPU, but unfortunately my Ryzen 3600 lacks one.

So finally, this evening, I put in my old GT310 "just because it works" card in the top PCIe slot.  Put this RX 580 in the second slot with power hooked up.  Booted to DOS, bam....after 4 failed flashes finally found the right BIOS for the card!  Now that I found the right BIOS to the card, I flashed my slightly better overclock to it (1400 / 2050) with better fan profile (70*C instead of 75*C target temp).  So now, the card runs 1400 / 2050, its alive, and benchmarks exactly the same as every other 580 in the house now!   Here's a picture of the card in my FX system now.

 

Edited August 12, 2021 by pioneerisloud

[pio]

@UltraMega
This one's for you.  Ran the CPUz benchmark since I'm going to Mint on the FX rig now that I have an RX580 in it (don't feel like screwing with eyefinity just to get my monitor working).  Here's the results of the CPUz bench.  I chose a 2600k as the reference point CPU, figured it was the most fitting.  Results really aren't surprising.

 

About the same IPC as a stock 2600k core for core with the FX at 4.8GHz and the 2600k at stock.  When jumping to multithreaded though, the 4 modules / 8 "cores" approach does in fact seem to work better than the 2600k's HT though.

 

[BWG]

3 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

@UltraMega
This one's for you.  Ran the CPUz benchmark since I'm going to Mint on the FX rig now that I have an RX580 in it (don't feel like screwing with eyefinity just to get my monitor working).  Here's the results of the CPUz bench.  I chose a 2600k as the reference point CPU, figured it was the most fitting.  Results really aren't surprising.

 

About the same IPC as a stock 2600k core for core with the FX at 4.8GHz and the 2600k at stock.  When jumping to multithreaded though, the 4 modules / 8 "cores" approach does in fact seem to work better than the 2600k's HT though.

 

 

You make me want to get a 2600k to battle you in benchmarks.  

 

You do know AMD got sued over saying it has 8 cores, right?

[UltraMega]

4 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

@UltraMega
This one's for you.  Ran the CPUz benchmark since I'm going to Mint on the FX rig now that I have an RX580 in it (don't feel like screwing with eyefinity just to get my monitor working).  Here's the results of the CPUz bench.  I chose a 2600k as the reference point CPU, figured it was the most fitting.  Results really aren't surprising.

 

About the same IPC as a stock 2600k core for core with the FX at 4.8GHz and the 2600k at stock.  When jumping to multithreaded though, the 4 modules / 8 "cores" approach does in fact seem to work better than the 2600k's HT though.

 

I think you have to run it without a reference CPU and without checking any reference boxes to get a normal score. I didn't even know you could make it give you a reference percentage. 

 

Normally it will just be a number, like for example a 7700k would score about 520 in single threaded for cpuz. 

[pio]

10 hours ago, BWG said:

 

You make me want to get a 2600k to battle you in benchmarks.  

 

You do know AMD got sued over saying it has 8 cores, right?

Get one!  Let's have some fun!

No I did not know that AMD was sued over that.  I knew these weren't a proper full 8 cores though, knew that since before they were released lol.  These CPU's got so much bad press it was ridiculous and I honestly don't see why.  It's not THAT bad of a CPU.  It's certainly better than my Phenom II x6, and its not as good as my Ryzen 2600.  I mean it sits right where it should for performance.

 

8 hours ago, UltraMega said:

I think you have to run it without a reference CPU and without checking any reference boxes to get a normal score. I didn't even know you could make it give you a reference percentage. 

 

Normally it will just be a number, like for example a 7700k would score about 520 in single threaded for cpuz. 

Oops.  I did not know that, never used the CPUz benchmark before.  My bad.  Take a 2600k's results from online and do some math?  I've already put Linux Mint on it now.  I can run it again next time I go Windows on it.   

I was honestly curious if I can get by daily on Linux.  So far, Mint's not bad.  Only complaint (so far) is lack of MS OneDrive to sync pictures and stuff with my phone.  I can RDP into one of my many VM's though for that till I figure out an alternative (if I even need one).  I have NOT gotten to try out any games yet on it though, Steam is still downloading.  Nor have I attempted to install .exe games or .iso image games.  Either of those might break my experience here.  So far, I'm liking it though.

[schuck6566]

6 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

Get one!  Let's have some fun!
I was honestly curious if I can get by daily on Linux.  So far, Mint's not bad.  Only complaint (so far) is lack of MS OneDrive to sync pictures and stuff with my phone.  I can RDP into one of my many VM's though for that till I figure out an alternative (if I even need one).  I have NOT gotten to try out any games yet on it though, Steam is still downloading.  Nor have I attempted to install .exe games or .iso image games.  Either of those might break my experience here.  So far, I'm liking it though.

Don't know what phone you're using, but dropbox and google drive both work on mint.(or at least they did on the last editions)

[pio]

10 minutes ago, schuck6566 said:

Don't know what phone you're using, but dropbox and google drive both work on mint.(or at least they did on the last editions)

Android.  Problem is, I pay monthly for OneDrive for the 1TB access.  I'll work it out, I'd rather have my cloud storage locally on my own NAS anyway.  Once I get my OPNsense router sorted out, I planned on doing like an FTP or something I could upload to instead.  Too many projects and only so much concentration I can give lol.

[UltraMega]

1 hour ago, pioneerisloud said:

Android.  Problem is, I pay monthly for OneDrive for the 1TB access.  I'll work it out, I'd rather have my cloud storage locally on my own NAS anyway.  Once I get my OPNsense router sorted out, I planned on doing like an FTP or something I could upload to instead.  Too many projects and only so much concentration I can give lol.

maybe this will work: 

OneDrive Client for Linux

ABRAUNEGG.GITHUB.IO

---

A free Microsoft OneDrive Client for Linux, which supports OneDrive Personal, OneDrive for Business, OneDrive for Office365 and Sharepoint, and fully supports Azure National Cloud Deployments...

 

[pio]

Minor progress update:

So updates are going to be a tad slow right now for financial reasons.  Saving up to take that front panel down to the local plastics company in town, but they charge $150 / hour just to look at it.  So, definitely gotta save up to get that fixed.  Not buying another Chieftec Dragon as that'd be pointless since I have one.

In the meantime, I DO have the remaining bits on order for the Thuban / Phenom II x6 rig with the HD7970 in it.  I broke the retention bracket on the board, so have another of those on the way.  It was working kind of, but then I broke that.  Needed a HDD so bought a 4TB spinner.  Also have a wifi card (Intel 7260) and sound card on the way for it as onboard sound was broken, so was a good excuse to buy a Xonar DG.

I also have EVERYTHING here to do my Socket 939 build.  The only thing I'm waiting for on that is a clear day to paint the case.  It's still "raining ash" around here, so not going to paint it in those conditions.

Otherwise, I'm done buying stuff for a little while, as I need to get that case repaired before I continue.  Once the case is repaired, I'll be ordering what's left on the two Socket A rigs HOPEFULLY before Christmas, but we'll see.  Then a K6 rig maybe, depending on availability, early next year.  And these will all be done!

[ENTERPRISE]

Out of interest, are you going to be rocking any Opteron rigs ? They were 939 right ?

[pio]

9 hours ago, ENTERPRISE said:

Out of interest, are you going to be rocking any Opteron rigs ? They were 939 right ?

I do have an Opteron, yes.   It's also part of my surprise on the 939 rig.  Just waiting for a clear enough day to paint it.

EDIT:
I have now officially started the painting process.  Took a few pictures, but I'll share all of them in an update post when its completed.  Smoke started blowing back our way this evening, so it might have to wait for another clear enough day.

Edited August 17, 2021 by pioneerisloud