Search Results

Search found 1298 results on 52 pages for 'ssd'.

Page 50/52 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • PHP-FPM stops responding and dies [migrated]

    - by user12361
    I'm running Drupal 6 with Nginx 1.5.1 and PHP-FPM (PHP 5.3.26) on a 1GB single core VPS with 3GB of swap space on SSD storage. I just switched from shared hosting to this unmanaged VPS because my site was getting too heavy, so I'm still learning the ropes. I have moderately high traffic, I don't really monitor it closely but Google Adsense usually record close to 30K page views/day. I usually have 50 to 80 authenticated users logged in and a few hundred more anonymous users hitting the Boost static HTML cache at any given moment. The problem I'm having is that PHP-FPM frequently stops responding, resulting in Nginx 502 or 504 errors. I swear I have read every page on the internet about this issue, which seems fairly common, and I've tried endless combinations of configurations, and I can't find a good solution. After restarting Nginx and PHP-FPM, the site runs really fast for a while, and then without warning it simply stops responding. I get a white screen while the browser waits on the server, and after about 30 seconds to a minute it throws an Nginx 502 or 504 error. Sometimes it runs well for 2 minutes, sometimes 5 minutes, sometimes 5 hours, but it always ends up hanging. When I find the server in this state, there is still plenty of free memory (500MB or more) and no major CPU usage, the control and worker PHP-FPM processes are still present, and the server is still pingable and usable via SSH. A reload of PHP-FPM via the init script revives it again. The hangups don't seem to correspond to the amount of traffic, because I observed this behavior consistently when I was testing this configuration on a development VPS with no traffic at all. I've been constantly tweaking the settings, but I can't definitively eliminate the problem. I set Nginx workers to just 1. In the PHP-FPM config I have tried all three of the process managers. "Dynamic" is definitely the least reliable, consistently hanging up after only a few minutes. "Static" also has been unreliable and unpredictable. The least buggy has been "ondemand", but even that is failing me, sometimes after as much as 12 to 24 hours. But I can't leave the server unattended because PHP-FPM dies and never comes back on its own. I tried adjusting the pm.max_children value from as low as 3 to as high as 50, doesn't make a lot of difference, but I currently have it at 10. Same thing for the spare servers values. I also have set pm.max_requests anywhere from 30 to unlimited, and it doesn't seem to make a difference. According to the logs, the PHP-FPM processes are not exiting with SIGSEGV or SIGBUS, but rather with SIGTERM. I get a lot of lines like: WARNING: [pool www] child 3739, script '/var/www/drupal6/index.php' (request: "GET /index.php") execution timed out (38.739494 sec), terminating and: WARNING: [pool www] child 3738 exited on signal 15 (SIGTERM) after 50.004380 seconds from start I actually found several articles that recommend doing a graceful reload of PHP-FPM via cron every few minutes or hours to circumvent this issue. So that's what I did, "/etc/init.d/php-fpm reload" every 5 minutes. So far, it's keeping the lights on. But it feels like a dreadful hack. Is PHP-FPM really that unreliable? Is there anything else I can do? Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • The best computer ever

    - by Jeff
    (This is a repost from my personal blog… wow… I need to write more technical stuff!) About three years and three months ago, I bought a 17" MacBook Pro, and it turned out to be the best computer I've ever owned. You might think that every computer with better specs is automatically better than the last, but that hasn't been my experience. My first one was a Sony, back in the Pentium III days, and it cost an astonishing $2,500. That was even more ridiculous in 1999 dollars. It had a dial-up modem, and a CD-ROM, built-in! It may have even played DVD's. A few years later I bought an HP, and it ended up being a pile of shit. The power connector inside came loose from the board, and on occasion would even short. In 2005, I bought a Dell, and it wasn't bad. It had a really high resolution screen (complete with dead pixels, a problem in those days), and it was the first laptop I felt I could do real work on. When 2006 rolled around, Apple started making computers with Intel CPU's, and I bought the very first one the week it came out. I used Boot Camp to run Windows. I still have it in its box somewhere, and I used it for three years. The current 17" was new in 2009. The goodness was largely rooted in having a big screen with lots of dots. This computer has been the source of hundreds of blog posts, tens of thousands of lines of code, video and photo editing, and of course, a whole lot of Web surfing. It connected to corpnet at Microsoft, WiFi in Hawaii and has presented many a deck. It has traveled with me tens of thousands of miles. Last year, I put a solid state drive in it, and it was like getting a new computer. I can boot up a Windows 7 VM in about 19 seconds. Having 8 gigs of RAM has always been fantastic. Everything about it has been fast and fun. When new, the battery (when not using VM's) could get as much as 10 hours. I can still do 7 without much trouble. After 460 charge cycles, the battery health is still between 85 and 90%. The only real negative has been the size and weight. It's only an inch thick, but naturally it's pretty big with a 17" screen. You don't get battery life like that without a huge battery, either, so it's heavy. It was never a deal breaker, but sometimes a long haul across a large airport, you know you're carrying it. Today, Apple announced a new, thinner and lighter 15" laptop, with twice the RAM and CPU cores, and four times the screen resolution. It basically handles my size and weight issues while retaining the resolution, and it still costs less than my 17" did. So I ordered one. Three years is an excellent run, but I kind of budgeted for a new workhorse this year anyway. So if you're interested in a 17" MacBook Pro with a Core 2 Duo 2.66 GHz CPU, 8 gigs of RAM and a 320 gig hard drive (sorry, I'm keeping the SSD), I have one to sell. They've apparently discontinued the 17", which is going to piss off the video community. It's in excellent condition, with a few minor scratches, but I take care of my stuff.

    Read the article

  • What hash algorithms are paralellizable? Optimizing the hashing of large files utilizing on mult-co

    - by DanO
    I'm interested in optimizing the hashing of some large files (optimizing wall clock time). The I/O has been optimized well enough already and the I/O device (local SSD) is only tapped at about 25% of capacity, while one of the CPU cores is completely maxed-out. I have more cores available, and in the future will likely have even more cores. So far I've only been able to tap into more cores if I happen to need multiple hashes of the same file, say an MD5 AND a SHA256 at the same time. I can use the same I/O stream to feed two or more hash algorithms, and I get the faster algorithms done for free (as far as wall clock time). As I understand most hash algorithms, each new bit changes the entire result, and it is inherently challenging/impossible to do in parallel. Are any of the mainstream hash algorithms parallelizable? Are there any non-mainstream hashes that are parallelizable (and that have at least a sample implementation available)? As future CPUs will trend toward more cores and a leveling off in clock speed, is there any way to improve the performance of file hashing? (other than liquid nitrogen cooled overclocking?) or is it inherently non-parallelizable?

    Read the article

  • Accessing data entered into multiple Django forms and generating them onto a new URL

    - by pedjk
    I have a projects page where users can start up new projects. Each project has two forms. The two forms are: class ProjectForm(forms.Form): Title = forms.CharField(max_length=100, widget=_hfill) class SsdForm(forms.Form): Status = forms.ModelChoiceField(queryset=P.ProjectStatus.objects.all()) With their respective models as follows: class Project(DeleteFlagModel): Title = models.CharField(max_length=100) class Ssd(models.Model): Status = models.ForeignKey(ProjectStatus) Now when a user fills out these two forms, the data is saved into the database. What I want to do is access this data and generate it onto a new URL. So I want to get the "Title" and the "Status" from these two forms and then show them on a new page for that one project. I don't want the "Title" and "Status" from all the projects to show up, just for one project at a time. If this makes sense, how would I do this? I'm very new to Django and Python (though I've read the Django tutorials) so I need as much help as possible. Thanks in advance Edit: The ProjectStatus code is (under models): class ProjectStatus(models.Model): Name = models.CharField(max_length=30) def __unicode__(self): return self.Name

    Read the article

  • What hash algorithms are parallelizable? Optimizing the hashing of large files utilizing on multi-co

    - by DanO
    I'm interested in optimizing the hashing of some large files (optimizing wall clock time). The I/O has been optimized well enough already and the I/O device (local SSD) is only tapped at about 25% of capacity, while one of the CPU cores is completely maxed-out. I have more cores available, and in the future will likely have even more cores. So far I've only been able to tap into more cores if I happen to need multiple hashes of the same file, say an MD5 AND a SHA256 at the same time. I can use the same I/O stream to feed two or more hash algorithms, and I get the faster algorithms done for free (as far as wall clock time). As I understand most hash algorithms, each new bit changes the entire result, and it is inherently challenging/impossible to do in parallel. Are any of the mainstream hash algorithms parallelizable? Are there any non-mainstream hashes that are parallelizable (and that have at least a sample implementation available)? As future CPUs will trend toward more cores and a leveling off in clock speed, is there any way to improve the performance of file hashing? (other than liquid nitrogen cooled overclocking?) or is it inherently non-parallelizable?

    Read the article

  • Developers: How does BitLocker affect performance?

    - by Chris
    I'm an ASP.NET / C# developer. I use VS2010 all the time. I am thinking of enabling BitLocker on my laptop to protect the contents, but I am concerned about performance degradation. Developers who use IDEs like Visual Studio are working on lots and lots of files at once. More than the usual office worker, I would think. So I was curious if there are other developers out there who develop with BitLocker enabled. How has the performance been? Is it noticeable? If so, is it bad? My laptop is a 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo with 4GB RAM and an Intel X25-M G2 SSD. It's pretty snappy but I want it to stay that way. If I hear some bad stories about BitLocker, I'll keep doing what I am doing now, which is keeping stuff RAR'ed with a password when I am not actively working on it, and then SDeleting it when I am done (but it's such a pain).

    Read the article

  • Optimize Duplicate Detection

    - by Dave Jarvis
    Background This is an optimization problem. Oracle Forms XML files have elements such as: <Trigger TriggerName="name" TriggerText="SELECT * FROM DUAL" ... /> Where the TriggerText is arbitrary SQL code. Each SQL statement has been extracted into uniquely named files such as: sql/module=DIAL_ACCESS+trigger=KEY-LISTVAL+filename=d_access.fmb.sql sql/module=REP_PAT_SEEN+trigger=KEY-LISTVAL+filename=rep_pat_seen.fmb.sql I wrote a script to generate a list of exact duplicates using a brute force approach. Problem There are 37,497 files to compare against each other; it takes 8 minutes to compare one file against all the others. Logically, if A = B and A = C, then there is no need to check if B = C. So the problem is: how do you eliminate the redundant comparisons? The script will complete in approximately 208 days. Script Source Code The comparison script is as follows: #!/bin/bash echo Loading directory ... for i in $(find sql/ -type f -name \*.sql); do echo Comparing $i ... for j in $(find sql/ -type f -name \*.sql); do if [ "$i" = "$j" ]; then continue; fi # Case insensitive compare, ignore spaces diff -IEbwBaq $i $j > /dev/null # 0 = no difference (i.e., duplicate code) if [ $? = 0 ]; then echo $i :: $j >> clones.txt fi done done Question How would you optimize the script so that checking for cloned code is a few orders of magnitude faster? System Constraints Using a quad-core CPU with an SSD; trying to avoid using cloud services if possible. The system is a Windows-based machine with Cygwin installed -- algorithms or solutions in other languages are welcome. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • New Computer Build Questions

    - by MJ
    I'm in the process of gathering parts and specs for a new machine. I wear many hats, so the machine needs to do a lot. I need at least 2 monitor support, if not three. I also play many online MMOs (wow, aion, war hammer, etc), along with some freelance programming projects. I already have a case which is very large, so it will fit anything. I have 2 other SATA HDs. They are more for storage and basic programs. I feel that the best improvement could be done with a solid state HD, true or not? I'm more of a software/programming guy, so ANY input at all on improving this system build would be appreciated. I have a few questions with this list. AMD or Intel? I don't know enough about either to choose what would best fit me. Thanks! **EDIT: Thanks for the input everyone! Here are some answers: I do a lot of programming and gaming, so I do need things for both. The newer video card covers the gaming aspect, as well as allowing me to have many monitors. (hopefully upgrade to dual 30' or more) I don't need any additional HDs at this time. I have a SATA 160g and 120g from my previous computer, and a NAS system with over 2TB of storage on the homenetwork. I just wanted a fast HD for OS/programs/games. With the memory. I have used G.SKILL before in 2 system builds. It's done excellent for me in them. Very stable. **EDIT2: Made some additional changes. Lowered the power supply down to 750, which saves me more $$. Also changed the SSD to 2 WD 650G HDs. Thinking of doing a CPU upgrade to the 3.4GHZ AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz System Specs - Budget:$1500 CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz MB: GIGABYTE GA-MA790GPT-UD3H AM3 AMD 790GX HDMI ATX Memory: G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 1066 Video: DIAMOND 5870PE51G Radeon HD 5870 (Cypress XT) 1GB 256-bit GD Power Supply: XCLIO GREATPOWER 1000W ATX12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready HD:Intel X25-M Mainstream SSDSA2MH080G2C1 2.5" 80GB SATA II MLC Changes: Power Supply: CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V HD: 2x Western Digital Caviar Blue WD6400AAKS 640GB CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition Deneb 3.4GHz

    Read the article

  • Why is Excel 2010/2013 taking 10 seconds open any file?

    - by jbkly
    I have a fast Windows 7 PC with two SSDs and 16GB of RAM, so I'm used to programs loading very fast. But recently, for no reason I can figure out, Excel has started taking way too long to open Excel files (of any size--even blank files). This is occurring with Excel 2010 and with Excel 2013 after I upgraded, hoping to solve the problem. Here a couple scenarios: If I start Excel directly, it opens almost instantly. No problem there. If I start Excel directly, and then open any Excel file (.xls or .xlsx), it loads almost instantly. Still no problem BUT if I attempt to open any Excel file directly, with Excel not running, it consistently takes 10-11 seconds for Excel to start. I get no error messages, just a spinning cursor for 10-11 seconds, and then the file opens. During the delay while Excel is trying to start, I'm not really seeing any discernible spike in CPU or memory usage, other than explorer.exe. This problem is only occurring with Excel, not Word or any other program I'm aware of. I've searched around quite a bit on this question and found various others who have experienced it, but the solutions that worked for them are not working for me. For a few people it was a problem with scanning network drives, but my problem is purely with local files; I have no network drives, and the problem persists even with all network connections disabled. Some people suggested worksheets with corrupted formulas or links, but I'm experiencing this with ANY Excel file: even blank worksheets. Others thought it was a problem with add-ins, but I have all Excel add-ins disabled (as far as I can tell). One person solved it by disabling a "clipboard manager" process that was running in the background, but I don't have that. I've disabled as many startup and background processes as I can, but the problem persists. I've run malware scans, disk cleanup, CCleaner, and installed Excel 2013. I've deleted temporary files, enabled SuperFetch, and edited registry keys. Still can't get rid of the problem. Any ideas? My system details: Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit, Excel 2013 32-bit, 16GB RAM, all programs installed on SSD.

    Read the article

  • How to correctly partition usb flash drive and which filesystem to choose considering wear leveling?

    - by random1
    Two problems. First one: how to partition the flash drive? I shouldn't need to do this, but I'm no longer sure if my partition is properly aligned since I was forced to delete and create a new partition table after gparted complained when I tried to format the drive from FAT to ext4. The naive answer would be to say "just use default and everything is going to be alright". However if you read the following links you'll know things are not that simple: https://lwn.net/Articles/428584/ and http://linux-howto-guide.blogspot.com/2009/10/increase-usb-flash-drive-write-speed.html Then there is also the issue of cylinders, heads and sectors. Currently I get this: $sfdisk -l -uM /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 30147 cylinders, 64 heads, 32 sectors/track Warning: The partition table looks like it was made for C/H/S=*/255/63 (instead of 30147/64/32). For this listing I'll assume that geometry. Units = mebibytes of 1048576 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End MiB #blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 30146 30146 30869504 83 Linux $fdisk -l /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 31.6 GB, 31611420672 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 3843 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00010c28 So from my current understanding I should align partitions at 4 MiB (currently it's at 1 MiB). But I still don't know how to set the heads and sectors properly for my device. Second problem: file system. From the benchmarks I saw ext4 provides the best performance, however there is the issue of wear leveling. How can I know that my Transcend JetFlash 700's microcontroller provides for wear leveling? Or will I just be killing my drive faster? I've seen a lot of posts on the web saying don't worry the newer drives already take care of that. But I've never seen a single piece of backed evidence of that and at some point people start mixing SSD with USB flash drives technology. The safe option would be to go for ext2, however a serious of tests that I performed showed horrible performance!!! These values are from a real scenario and not some synthetic test: 42 files: 3,429,415,284 bytes copied to flash drive original fat32: 15.1 MiB/s ext4 after new partition table: 10.2 MiB/s ext2 after new partition table: 1.9 MiB/s Please read the links that I posted above before answering. I would also be interested in answers backed up with some references because a lot is said and re-said but then it lacks facts. Thank you for the help.

    Read the article

  • Why do I have multiple drives in my backup system image?

    - by bebop
    I have a drive which has 2 partitions. One is where the OS is installed, the other is a data (but not libraries) drive. When I try and create a backup using the built in tool, it wants to include both partitions in the system image. Why does it do this? If I move the os to a separate drive will I be able to back up just this data? Edit: To be more clear. I have 4 disks in the machine. 1 disc has 2 partitions. These are c: and e:, the other disks are d: f: and h:. The OS is installed on c: and libraries are stored on h:. The libraries are already backed up using crashplan, but I want to create a system image so I can easily restore the machine, if it either dies or if I get a SSD drive. When I choose backup (either through the wizard or if I open it through control panel) and check (or click) create a system image it automatically adds both c: and e: to the list of drives that will be backed up, and I cannot change this, the checkboxes to unselect are greyed out. I would like to know why it automatically adds e: to the list (but not h:, where the libraries are) and if I can change some setting so whatever files it has on e: that it thinks need to be backed up as part of the system image are moved to c:. How can I determine what they are? Is it because c: and e: are partitions of the same disk? If I move c: tro a different disk will that mean I only have to back up c:? Thanks Edit 2: I have viewed all files including hidden and system ones on both drives and it seems that I have a suspicous hidden e:\boot\ folder. I think that I might have installed the OS as a VHD at first then installed a seperate version straight on the disk, having dual boot for a while, then used EasyBCD to remove the VHD boot and file. Might this be what is causing my issue? How might I go about removing this? is it safe to just delete the boot folder?

    Read the article

  • Slow Windows Explorer on Windows 7

    - by MadBoy
    I have Laptop with i7 (4 cores), 8GB ram and SSD OCZ Vertex 3 MaxIOPS which in testing that I did just now does 400mb/s+ read/write. However the responsiveness of Windows Explorer is far from being perfect. Opening up Computer, Documents, going into folders is very slow (1-5seconds). I don't have any viruses or spyware and I have tried changing properties to optimize view for General Items. I tried disabling Search Indexer but it made search in Outlook 2010 crawl and didn't bring any other effect. Even double clicking on file takes some time to open things up (like clicking a Word document). I don't have any drives mapped, my computer is not joined to domain. I have multiple VPN connections that I connect to but they all have disabled default gateways. I tried using CC Cleaner or some Windows 7 Tweaks app to disable some things. I am power user using Visual Studio, Tortoise SVN and other developer/administration apps. Any non obvious ideas? Edit: So I've been trying to pinpoint where the issue comes from and it seems that straight after reboot Windows Explorer opens very fast, when I load 3-4 programs (Royal TS, Visual Studio, Outlook) it's noticeably slower and the more programs I have it gets worse. After I start closing programs it starts working better and if I leave 2 open it's fast again. I tried doing some research with DiskMon and other programs from sysinternals but couldn't find anything suspicious. Below are stats during normal usage with a lots of programs open: - Ram usage with a lot of programs open and no swap file (i disabled it for testing): 6.95GB - CPU usage: 15%, none of the cores takes more then 50% (I have VS 2010 open x 4) HD Tune Pro: OCZ-VERTEX3 MI Benchmark Test capacity: full Read transfer rate Transfer Rate Minimum : 363.9 MB/s Transfer Rate Maximum : 505.5 MB/s Transfer Rate Average : Access Time : Burst Rate : CPU Usage : HD Tune Pro: OCZ-VERTEX3 MI File Benchmark Drive C: Transfer rate test File Size: 500 MB Sequential read 484102 KB/s Sequential write 444714 KB/s Random read 7779 IOPS Random write 16888 IOPS Random read (queue depth = 32) 73007 IOPS Random write (queue depth = 32) 69790 IOPS HD Tune Pro: OCZ-VERTEX3 MI Random Access Test capacity: full Read test Transfer size operations / sec avg. access time max. access time avg. speed 512 bytes 3260 IOPS 0.306 ms 2.106 ms 1.592 MB/s 4 KB 4161 IOPS 0.240 ms 2.006 ms 16.256 MB/s 64 KB 2382 IOPS 0.419 ms 2.367 ms 148.934 MB/s 1 MB 449 IOPS 2.225 ms 4.197 ms 449.407 MB/s Random 809 IOPS 1.235 ms 6.551 ms 410.527 MB/s HD Tune Pro: OCZ-VERTEX3 MI Extra Tests Test capacity: full Random seek 3975 IOPS 0.252 ms 1.941 MB/s Random seek 4 KB 4245 IOPS 0.236 ms 16.583 MB/s Butterfly seek 4086 IOPS 0.245 ms 1.995 MB/s Random seek / size 64 KB 3812 IOPS 0.262 ms 58.606 MB/s Random seek / size 8 MB 120 IOPS 8.348 ms 485.737 MB/s Sequential outer 4524 IOPS 0.221 ms 282.721 MB/s Sequential middle 4429 IOPS 0.226 ms 276.818 MB/s Sequential inner 5504 IOPS 0.182 ms 344.000 MB/s Burst rate 4472 IOPS 0.224 ms 279.475 MB/s

    Read the article

  • Lenovo Ideapad Y480 can't reinstall windows?

    - by elegantonyx
    Alright, so here's the deal... For a while, I wanted to mess with Linux. I don't know why, but I wanted to. So, what I did was use WUBI and install Ubuntu. Because of some unknown reason (Intel Rapid Start? Half the drivers being on a Lenovo-installed SSD [separate from the main hard drive]?) it wouldn't dual boot. So, I decided to use Linux Mint instead, and install it in a partition. Since Windows 7 Home Premium won't make partitions any more if you have a certain number already, I just shrank my system drive and left empty space for the installer to claim. When I installed Mint, it worked, but left my Windows 7 installation unable to boot and eventually it corrupted. I tried to use a system repair disc I burned earlier but it didn't find the Windows installation, so I assume the partition corrupted. I used this link:http://www.pcworld.com/article/248995/how_to_install_windows_7_without_the_disc.html to try and reinstall Windows. What happened was that originally it said that the partition I was trying to reinstall from had been locked down by the OEM (Lenovo). So, I went into GParted, wiped EVERYTHING, and selected 'Construct new Boot record' or whatever that function is, and now the error is: "Setup was unable to create a new system partition or locate an existing system partition. See the setup log files for more information." Does anyone know how to see the log files? Can anyone help? This system is a month old but the warranty only covers hardware failures, and I would need to pay around USD$60 for them to fix it. Please help. Any ideas? this is my main machine... Extra information: I have at my disposal: System Repair Disc (Burned myself) Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit SP1 installation disk (burned from the pcworld links) Gparted Live CD Linux Mint 13 live cd A system backup (from the morning before this catastrophe) made using the Windows Backup and Restore. I put it on an external drive...that should be safe for now.

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting major performance issue: Is culprit Intel RST, Hard drive, or something else?

    - by Sean Killeen
    The Setup I have the following components that come into play in this situation: ASUS P8Z68 V/PRO motherboard a RAID1 configuration (1x 1TB drive, 1 x 2TB drive -- I explain below), accelerated with an SSD using Intel's RST software, and 1 TB drive standing by as a spare. Core i7 2600k 32 GB RAM Windows 8.1 This box was designed to be beast, and until just recently, was very good at being just that. What's Happening The system has slowed to a crawl whenever it touches the disk. Things appear to work at normal speed when dealing with memory. For example, typing this is fine, but saving it to disk from notepad gave me a 5-7 second pause when clicking save. The disks appear to be at 100% all the time (e.g. the light on the disk access on the PC is solidly on -- not even any flashing) In ProcExp it appears that the disk is barely being utilized at all: Intel RST reports that everything is fine: Other Details Prior to this happening, RST had reported that my drives were failing (one went bad, one was throwing SMART events). This made sense; they were at the tail end of their warranty and the PC is on almost all the time. I RMA'd the drives via Seagate. In the meantime, I'd purchased a 2TB drive because I didn't realize that the 1TB drives were under warranty. I figured I'd replace the other 1 TB drive with another 2 TB when it died but then discovered the warranty. AFAIK, I haven't done any major updates since 8.1 and it worked fine after those. Question(s) How can I troubleshoot this? What is the best way to try to figure out why disks are being maxed out despite the OS reporting barely any disk usage and that everything is OK? Given the failures, etc. that I describe above, is it possible that the problem could be the I/O on the motherboard itself? If so, how would I even be able to diagnose it? I'm betting the drives that Seagate gave me are refurbished (didn't think to look; that's dumb). Is it possible that the same model drive, refurbished, could somehow cause this? In terms of how RAID1 works, is it possible that one drive is "falling behind" somehow, and that the RAID1 is constantly trying to fix the mirroring? If so, this seems like Intel RST would report on it, but I wanted to consider it as an option.

    Read the article

  • Preinstalled Windows 8 and Linux UEFI dual boot on a laptop

    - by itchy355
    I am trying to set up Windows 8 and Arch Linux on a new Sony Vaio E14 with preinstalled windows 8. So far: installed W8 to my new SSD (switched for the original HDD) using Recovery Media shrunk the W8 partition, deleted recovery partition, disabled swap confirmed W8 booting just fine On to Arch: disabled Secure Boot in bios confirmed W8 booting just fine Booted Arch off the CD and installed everything to 4th and 5th partition set up rEFInd for EFIstub kernel bootloader After that it got worse. I was unable to boot anything else than Windows 8 (although I was glad that they at least kept working just fine). Tried: creating EFI\refind\ and putting the .efi there (as per Arch manual overwriting EFI\boot\bootx64.efi overwriting EFI\Microsoft\Boot\bootmgr.efi overwriting EFI\Microsoft\Boot\bootmgfw.efi --- YAY rEFInd shown up! So far, so good. I've kept the whole W8 Boot\ directory in EFI\windows8 and set up a boot menuentry for it; and it booted just fine. But, upon restart, everything was wrong -- 'Operating system not found' instead of any bootloader (refind or w8). Booted back into Arch using the live CD to find out that the EFI partition had erroneous FAT table. fsck.vfat fixed it, and I've found that EFI\Microsoft\Boot was back to it's original state (all refind files deleted and replaced with W8 bootloaders). I've overwritten them again and got back to rEFInd showing up correctly and Arch being perfectly bootable. After that I've tried only renaming EFI\Microsoft\Boot\bootmgfw.efi to bootmgfw.001.efi (then copying refind's .efi to bootmgfw.efi and keeping EVERY OTHER file as it was), but with exactly the same result. Tried marking the GPT EFI partition as read-only, same result. Now I'm kinda out of luck. Arch boots fine, so does W8 but it destroys the EFI partition in the process. Thanks for any ideas, Googling brought me this far and I can't find any better. PS -- windows 8 MAYBE destroys the partition upon shutdown -- when I order a shutdown in W8, it takes unusually long (about half a minute instead of ~5 seconds). So in theory I could solve this by hard-resetting the laptop instead of a normal shutdown, but that's just not nice.

    Read the article

  • DVD Drive Failing on Windows 7

    - by Seth Spearman
    Hello, I have x64 Windows 7 running on an ASUS M50VM. The DVD drive works completely unreliably if not at all. But the story is not that simple so bear with me...here are the gory details. When I first got the machine it came with Windows XP and I upgraded it to Windows Vista X64 and the DVD worked fine. When Windows 7 RC2 came out I tried it on a Virtual Machine and I liked it so much that I upgraded the machine to Win7 RC1. The DVD worked fine. Of course, RC1 was going to start spontaneously rebooting, so when Windows 7 was released I DID A CLEAN INSTALL of Windows 7. Just to clarify...by clean install I mean I did a FORMAT of the HARD DRIVE and INSTALLED it from scratch. EVER since then the DVD mostly doesn't work. I can sometime read from disk but that will often hang. (Please see my description below of HANG for details.) CD or DVD writes ALWAYS fail with a HANG (I have done a successful write only one time.) Here is what I mean by HANG... *Explorer Window is unresponsive. *Any software accessing the DVD drive is unresponsive. *The DVD tray will not eject. *Using a paper clip will eject but the disk is usually spinning real hard. *Attempting to shut down windows will fail. I have waited as long as ten minutes but the whole OS seems to hang. I do a hard shutdown. *Sometimes accessing the DVD (when it does not cause a HANG) will still fail and the device will actually seem to disappear from the system until I reboot. A couple of other things. It is NOT a hardware failure. It is the Windows OS. I know this because I swapped out my DVD drive with a friend with the same model...his machine is fine (he is still running Vista X64) and my machine still fails. For what it is worth. I swapped out my primary disk with the INTEL 160GB SSD. EDIT Here is what System Information shows about my DVD drive Drive D: Description CD-ROM Drive Media Loaded No Media Type DVD Writer Name HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T50N ATA Device Manufacturer (Standard CD-ROM drives) Status OK Transfer Rate -1.00 kbytes/sec SCSI Target ID 0 PNP Device ID IDE\CDROMHL-DT-ST_DVDRAM_GSA-T50N________________RR04____\5&2B5B7F1D&0&1.0.0 Driver c:\windows\system32\drivers\cdrom.sys (6.1.7600.16385, 144.00 KB (147,456 bytes), 7/13/2009 7:19 PM) Any ideas? HELP! Seth B Spearman

    Read the article

  • Some apps very slow to load on Windows 7, copy & paste very slow.

    - by Mike
    Hello, I searched here and couldn't find a similar issue to mine but apologies if I missed it. I've searched the web and no one else seems to be having the same issue either. I'm running Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit on a pretty high spec. machine (well, apart from the graphics): Asus M4A79T Deluxe AMD Phenom II 965 black edition (quad core, 3.4GHz) 8GB Crucial Ballistix DDR 1333MHz RAM 80GB Intex X25 SSD for OS 500GB mechanical drive for data. ATi Radeon HD 4600 series PCI-e Be Quiet! 850W PSU I think those are all the relevant stats, if you need anything else let me know. I've updated chipset, graphics and various other drivers all to no avail, the problem remains. I have also unplugged and replugged every connection internally and cleaned the RAM edge connectors. The problems: Video LAN (VLC) and CDBurnerXP both take ages to load, I'm talking 30 seconds and 1 minute respectively which is really not right. Copy and paste from Open Office spread sheet into Fire Fox, for example, is really, really slow, I'll have pressed control V 5 or 6 times before it actually happens, if I copy and then wait 5 to 10 seconds or so it'll paste first time so it's definitely some sort of time lag. Command and Conquer - Generals: Zero Hour. When playing it'll run perfectly for about 10 or 20 seconds then it'll just pause for 3 or 4 then run for another 10 or 20 seconds and pause again and so on. I had the Task Manager open on my 2nd monitor whilst playing once and I noticed it was using about 25% of the CPU, pretty stable but when the pause came another task didn't shoot up to 100% like others on the web have been reporting (similar but not the same as my issue, often svchost.exe for them) but dropped to 2 or 3% usage then back up to 25% when it started playing properly again. Very odd! But it gets even odder... I had a BSOD and reboot last week, when it rebooted the problem had completely gone, I could play C&C to my heart's content and both the other apps loaded instantly, copy and paste worked instantly too. I did an AVG update earlier this week which required a reboot, rebooted and the problem's back. I don't think it's AVG related though, I think it was just coincidence that's the app that required a reboot. I think any reboot would have brought the issue back. A number of reboots later and it hasn't gone away again. If any one could make any suggestions as to the likely cause and solution to these issues I'd be most grateful, it's driving me nuts! Thanks, Mike....

    Read the article

  • DVD Drive Failing on Windows 7

    - by Seth Spearman
    I have x64 Windows 7 running on an ASUS M50VM. The DVD drive works completely unreliably if not at all. But the story is not that simple so bear with me...here are the gory details. When I first got the machine it came with Windows XP and I upgraded it to Windows Vista X64 and the DVD worked fine. When Windows 7 RC2 came out I tried it on a Virtual Machine and I liked it so much that I upgraded the machine to Win7 RC1. The DVD worked fine. Of course, RC1 was going to start spontaneously rebooting, so when Windows 7 was released I DID A CLEAN INSTALL of Windows 7. Just to clarify...by clean install I mean I did a FORMAT of the HARD DRIVE and INSTALLED it from scratch. EVER since then the DVD mostly doesn't work. I can sometime read from disk but that will often hang. (Please see my description below of HANG for details.) CD or DVD writes ALWAYS fail with a HANG (I have done a successful write only one time.) Here is what I mean by HANG... *Explorer Window is unresponsive. *Any software accessing the DVD drive is unresponsive. *The DVD tray will not eject. *Using a paper clip will eject but the disk is usually spinning real hard. *Attempting to shut down windows will fail. I have waited as long as ten minutes but the whole OS seems to hang. I do a hard shutdown. *Sometimes accessing the DVD (when it does not cause a HANG) will still fail and the device will actually seem to disappear from the system until I reboot. A couple of other things. It is NOT a hardware failure. It is the Windows OS. I know this because I swapped out my DVD drive with a friend with the same model...his machine is fine (he is still running Vista X64) and my machine still fails. For what it is worth. I swapped out my primary disk with the INTEL 160GB SSD. EDIT Here is what System Information shows about my DVD drive Drive D: Description CD-ROM Drive Media Loaded No Media Type DVD Writer Name HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T50N ATA Device Manufacturer (Standard CD-ROM drives) Status OK Transfer Rate -1.00 kbytes/sec SCSI Target ID 0 PNP Device ID IDE\CDROMHL-DT-ST_DVDRAM_GSA-T50N________________RR04____\5&2B5B7F1D&0&1.0.0 Driver c:\windows\system32\drivers\cdrom.sys (6.1.7600.16385, 144.00 KB (147,456 bytes), 7/13/2009 7:19 PM) Any ideas? HELP! Seth B Spearman

    Read the article

  • Add Mirror for volumes other than the last one in Windows 7 (disk "not up-to-date")

    - by rakslice
    I'm using Windows 7 x64 Ultimate. I have an existing 4TB disk with 3 NTFS volumes, a new 3TB blank disk, and I'm trying to mirror the volumes onto the new disk. My Windows install is on an SSD which is Disk 0. The 4TB disk with volumes is Disk 1, and the new blank disk is Disk 2. I can add a mirror successfully for the last volume, but when I try to add a mirror for the first volume I immediately get errors (see below). Is there something I special I need to do to add a mirror for a volume other than the last one? More info: I opened Disk Management, right-clicked on the first volume on the existing disk, went to Add Mirror, and selected the new disk. The first time I did this I was prompted to convert the new disk to a Dynamic Disk, which I approved. Subsequently I got a message: The operation failed to complete because the Disk Management console view is not up-to-date. Refresh the view by using the refresh task. If the problem persists close the Disk Management console, then restart Disk Management or restart the computer. I've refreshed disk management, restarted the computer, and converted the new disk to basic and back to dynamic, but I still get that error message. Looking around for suggestions of a workaround, I saw a suggestion to use the diskpart command line tool. Running diskpart from the Start Menu as Administrator, I did select volume 2 (the first volume I want to mirror) and then add disk 2 (the new disk), and received a somewhat similar error: Virtual Disk Service error: The disk's extent information is corrupted. DiskPart has referenced an object which is not up-to-date. Refresh the object by using the RESCAN command. If the problem persists exit DiskPart, then restart DiskPart or restart the computer. A rescan appears to be successful: DISKPART> select disk 2 Disk 2 is now the selected disk. DISKPART> rescan Please wait while DiskPart scans your configuration... DiskPart has finished scanning your configuration. but attempting to add the mirror again resulted in the same error. The only similar report I found online was this: http://www.sevenforums.com/hardware-devices/335780-unable-mirror-all-but-last-partition-drive.html Based on that I attempted to mirror the last volume on the disk to the new disk using diskpart, and that started successfully -- it is currently resynchronizing. More Background: In the course of dealing with a failing 3TB hard drive, I bought a replacement 4TB drive and installed it, then copied the partitions from the failing drive to it using Minitool Partition Wizard Home, and then removed the failing drive and was up and running again normally. Now I've received a warranty replacement for the failing drive, and installed it, and now I'm attempting to mirror my partitions to it.

    Read the article

  • Skyrim: Heavy Performance Issues after a couple of location changes

    - by Derija
    Okay, I've tried different solutions: ENB Series, removing certain mods, checking my FPS Rate, monitoring my resources, .ini tweaks. It's all just fine, I don't see what I'm missing. A couple of days ago, I bought Skyrim. Before I bought the game, I admit I had a pirated copy because my girlfriend actually wanted to buy me the game as a present, then said she didn't have enough money. Sick of waiting, I decided to buy the game by myself. The ridiculous part is, it worked better cracked than it does now uncracked. As the title suggests, after entering and leaving houses a couple of times, my performance obviously drops extremely. My build is just fine, Intel i5 quad core processor, NVIDIA GTX 560 Ti from Gigabyte, actually stock-OC, but manually downclocked to usual settings using appropriate Gigabyte software. This fixed the CTD issues I had before with both Skyrim and BF3. I have 4GB RAM. A website about Game Tweaks suggested that my HDD may be too slow. A screenshot of a Windows Performance Index sample with the subscription "This is likely to cause issues" showed the HDD with a performance index of 5.9, the exact same mine has, so I was playing with the thought to purchase an SSD instead, load games onto it that really need it like Skyrim, and hope it'd do the trick. Unfortunately, SSDs are likewise expensive, compared to "normal" HDDs... I'm really getting desperate about it. My save is gone because the patches made it impossible to load saves of the unpatched version and I already saved more than 80 times despite being only level 8, just because every time I interact with a door leading me to another location I'm scared the game will drop again. I can't even play for 30 mins straight anymore, it's just no fun at all. I've researched for a couple of days before I decided to post my question here. Any help is appreciated, I don't want to regret having bought the game... Since it actually is the best game I've played possibly for ever. Sincerely. P.S.: I don't think it's necessary to say, but still, of course I'm playing on PC. P.P.S.: After monitoring both my PC resources including CPU usage and HDD usage as well as the GPU usage, I don't see any changes even after the said event. P.P.P.S.: Original question posted here where I've been advised to ask here.

    Read the article

  • Crashes and freezes after fixing "BOOTMGR is missing" error

    - by Greg-J
    I came back from a 3-day weekend to a computer that was off. I leave my PC on 24/7, so this was odd. Turn it on to get the dreaded "BOOTMGR is missing" screen. Two attempts at Windows Recovery and it booted into Windows fine. After an hour or so, I get a frozen Chrome and my start bar disappears. Ctrl+Alt+Del brings up an error box telling me that Ctrl+Alt+Del failed to work properly. Clicking on any open application triggers an error (I can't recall the error now, but it essentially just said that the application couldn't be found running or something along those lines). I restart, and again, the same thing happens after a while of use. I turn it on, install the 47 updates I have or so, and then restart it. After a while of use (under an hour), it just freezes completely. My thoughts are: SSDs, RAM or PS. My system specs below: (RAID0) 2 x Crucial M4 CT128M4SSD2 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Desktop Memory Model CML16GX3M4A1600C9 CORSAIR HX Series HX750 750W ATX12V 2.3 / EPS12V 2.91 SLI Ready CrossFire Ready 80 PLUS GOLD Certified Modular Active 1 x ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z/GEN3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard 1 x Hitachi GST Deskstar 7K1000.C 0F10383 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive 1 x Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) LGA 1155 95W Quad-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD Graphics 1 x SAPPHIRE 21197-00-40G Radeon HD 7970 3GB 384-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFireX Support Video Card 1 x Noctua NH-D14 120mm & 140mm SSO CPU Cooler This is all crammed in a pretty small case (NZXT Vulcan) and has been running perfectly problem-free since January. The only thing out of the ordinary is that there is a fan in the case that is now making noise whereas the case has previously been completely silent. I have no reason to believe this is anything more then correlation, but felt it is worth mentioning. I believe it MAY be the SSDs simply because of the BOOTMGR error, but not sure how to test that theory. My belief that it may be the RAM is simply from experience with frozen machines. I haven't had the time to memtest it, but will. The PS being the culprit is something I've picked up by reading similar threads on various forums, and it seems plausible. I am unsure how to test this though. ANY insight whatsover would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Custom built machine has much higher power consumption than expected

    - by foraidt
    I built a machine according to the specs of a computer magazine (c't, Germany). According to the magazine, the power consumption should be at around 10W. I don't want to go into the specifics of the hardware but rather ask for general advice on where to look: I updated the BIOS/UEFI version to the latest version, installed all the recommended drivers and unplugged all hardware that's not necessary to boot into Windows. All that was left is the power supply, mainboard, cpu, cpu cooler and one SSD drive. But still I measured a power consumption of 50W, which is 40W more than it should be. I tried booting Linux Mint from a USB stick, so I don't think it's some Windows-related problem.. Where else could I look? Update 1 I dind't want the question to get closed for being too localized but if more details are necessary, here they are: The system is a desktop PC. The power consumption is measured using a Brennenstuhl PM 231 device, which was tested also by c't and they found it quite accurate. The PSU is an Enermax ETL300AWT, the mainboard Intel DH87RL (Socket 1150) and the CPU Intel G3220 (Haswell). Update 2 There is no online version of the article*. The most details I found can be read on its project page (in German, though...) (*)You can pay for downloadable PDFs, however. English translation of that project page Update 3 Regarding the sceptics: It may sound ridiculous but apparently 10W idle consumption is possible with Intel's Haswell architecture. As a kind of proof, there's an additional Blog article explicitly listing the steps needed to reduce the idle consumption to 10W. Additional hardware: I measured the consumption without the HDD, and as expected the usage dropped by around 10W. I have no chassis fans and the CPU fan is a "Scythe Mugen 4" model. It runs at around 600rpm so I think it won't draw much. When stripping off all my extra components I should be at 10W. But I'm not getting anywhere near that. I would be happy to see "just" 15W in the stripped down version but currently I'm not getting below 50W no matter which component I remove. As I see it this cannot be explained by the PSU being less efficient at lower consumption. I also waited half an hour or so (also checked that no Windows updates were running in the background) and the consumption dind't drop by more than a few watts.

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V causes boot loop/failure on a non-Gigabyte Win8 Pro system

    - by Nick
    Hardware: Intel i7 2600K (not overclocked, SLAT compatible, virt. features enabled in bios) Asus Maximus IV Extreme-Z (Z68) 16Gb RAM 256Gb SSD Other non-trivial working parts Adding Hyper-V is causing a boot loop resulting in an attempt at automatic repair by Windows 8 after the second or third loop: I'm trying to get the Windows Phone 8 SDK installed and I've narrowed down my troubles to the Hyper-V feature in Win8. This is required to run the WP8 emulator and there are no install options to omit this feature. My first attempt completely borked the OS as I did not have a recent restore point or system image, so I did a completely clean install and made plenty of backups/restore points. I skipped the SDK install and went straight for the windows feature add-on for Hyper-V. This confirmed that Hyper-V is the issue as the same behavior resulted. I cannot find any hint in the Event Logs. Cancelling automatic recovery causes the same behavior to repeat. I don't have any other VM products installed. My only recourse is to use a restore point, try something else, install it again, and see what happens. No luck so far. I'm on my 10th attempt here. Any help would be much appreciated. EDIT: I found a collection of tips here.. http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/wptools/thread/b06cc9f2-aa5e-4cb3-9df1-0c273e1dfd68 So i've been attempting various bios settings to resolve this issue with no luck. I've tried setting 'CPUID Limit' to disabled. This seems to work partly as Win8 boots but no USB devices work at all. I also attempted disabling the usb 3.0 controller as the msdn topic lists an issue with USB controllers on Gigabyte boards. This also doesn't work. The USB devices light up but no input is received by the OS. All of my other bios CPU settings are in line with the info in the post. I'm totally stumped. Bios screenshots: http://i.imgur.com/yKN5u.png http://i.imgur.com/Y9wI4.png http://i.imgur.com/F6EuO.png

    Read the article

  • Baseline / Benchmark Physical and virtual server performance

    - by EyeonTech
    I am setting up a new server and there are some options. I want to perform some benchmarks and I need your help in determining the best tools and if possible run pre-configured benchmarks designed for SQL servers on Windows Server 2008/2012. Step 1. Run a performance monitor on the current Live SQL server (Windows Server 2008 Virtual machine running on ESXi. New server Hardware rundown: Intel® Server System R1304BTLSHBN - 1U Rack, LGA1155 http://ark.intel.com/products/53559/Intel-Server-System-R1304BTLSHBN Intel Xeon E3-1270V2 2x Intel SSD 330 Series 240GB 2.5in SATA 6Gb/s 25nm 1x WD 2TB WD2002FAEX 2TB 64M SATA3 CAVIAR BLACK 4x 8GB 1333MHz DDR3 ECC CL9 DIMM There are several options for configurations and I want to benchmark some of them and share the results. Option 1. Configure 2x SSDs at RAID 0. Install Windows Server 2008 directly to the 2TB WD Caviar HDD. Store Database files on the RAID 0 Volume. Benchmark the OS direct on the hardware as an SQL Server. Store SQL Backup databases on the 2TB WD Caviar HDD. Option 2. Configure 2x SSDs at RAID 0. Install Windows Server 2012 directly to the 2TB WD Caviar HDD. Install Hyper-V. Install the SQL Server (Server 2008) as a virtual machine. Store the Virtual Hard Disks on the SSDs. Option 3. Configure 2x SSDs at RAID 0. Install VMWare ESXi on a partition of the 2TB WD Caviar HDD. Install the SQL Server (Server 2008) as a virtual machine. Store the Virtual Hard Disks on the SSDs. I have a few tools in mind from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc768530(v=bts.10).aspx. Any tools with pre-configured test would be fantastic. Specifically if there are pre-configured perfmon sets avaliable. Any opinions on the setup to gain the best results is welcome. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Network use of Gaming PC

    - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt
    Background After YEARS of waiting, I built the custom gaming PC of my dreams: Intel i7 - 975 Extreme Edition 3.3ghz (overclocked to 4.0) ATI Radeon 5970 2gb Corsair 256 gb SSD Drive 2 TB Sata II 3.0 7200rpm data drive 12 GB Kingston Hyper-X (1600mhz) DDR3 Windows 7 Ultra 64 bit And so on. . . Problem I hooked this beast up to our home theater and settled in for a great gaming season only to realize a couple of drawbacks: It's hard to accurately wax bad guys using a keyboard in your lap whilst reclined on your couch (and using a wireless keyboard). It's hard to read the text on the screen (i.e. menus, etc). I find that a 1:1 ratio (screen diagonal inch to inch away from screen) is optimum, but using the home theater, it's more like 1:3 which has me squinting unless I sit on the coffee table. The wife always seems to want the TV the same time I do and, unfortunately "Real Housewives of Beverly Hills" and Battlefield BC don't mix. I am losing the battle in the home theater room, but the PC has to stay there (long story). So, this leaves me with the option of playing in my home office which is about 30 feet away from the home theater. I am a software developer so I have a pretty decent set up in my office--multiple 1080p monitors, HP Envy 17 which can run games like Crysis in 720p with out stammering too much. Also, I can game very comfortably at my desk in the office. Still, even though the set up in my office can run games well enough, I don't want to regress to that when I have worked YEARS for an awesome gaming PC that can run everything on ultra high settings. My Question What are my options for running my games on the beastly desktop in the Home Theater, but physically playing in my office about 30 feet away? A really long HDMI cable? LAN/RDC? Details that May Help We have an open crawlspace so running cable from HT room to office is no problem. I already have networked the house with a LAN Any help is GREATLY appreciated. Thanks, Matt

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >