ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 13:46:29
(permalink)
kram36
Why would I want to reproduce your setup if I already know on my system it doesn't work as I must use VROC?
When I’m troubleshooting something and someone else tells me they are not having same problem I try to recreate what they are doing to see is issue due to me doing something wrong or due to my particular setup. Especially if it is in area I’m not completely familiar with. Considering you tried to shovel 20 lanes worth of drives into 16 lanes worth of slots to see whether that would work I think it is very safe to say your effort would benefit from double-checking in KISS manner. But that is me, I’m not telling you what to do, I’m just saying what I would do if that was me. kram36
I used Microsoft Storage Spaces to put my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and it gave me zero benefit.
Then you were either doing something wrong or forming incorrect conclusions. My benchmarking of Samsung NVMe drives (both in mb slots and on Asus card) in RAID 0 with Storage Spaces showed clear benefit that was in line with results using other technologies. kram36
So I just use the regular Windows Disk Manager to put my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and the benchmark has no issue with the drives.
I had absolute zero problems benchmarking Storage Spaces with Crystal Disk Mark, ATTO, and DiskSpd. More importantly I don’t choose my setup based on how benchmark works with it, I choose it based on how it runs in real world use.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 13:56:57
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
Why would I want to reproduce your setup if I already know on my system it doesn't work as I must use VROC?
When I’m troubleshooting something and someone else tells me they are not having same problem I try to recreate what they are doing to see is issue due to me doing something wrong or due to my particular setup. Especially if it is in area I’m not completely familiar with. Considering you tried to shovel 20 lanes worth of drives into 16 lanes worth of slots to see whether that would work I think it is very safe to say your effort would benefit from double-checking in KISS manner.
But that is me, I’m not telling you what to do, I’m just saying what I would do if that was me.
kram36
I used Microsoft Storage Spaces to put my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and it gave me zero benefit.
Then you were either doing something wrong or forming incorrect conclusions. My benchmarking of Samsung NVMe drives (both in mb slots and on Asus card) in RAID 0 with Storage Spaces showed clear benefit that was in line with results using other technologies.
kram36
So I just use the regular Windows Disk Manager to put my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and the benchmark has no issue with the drives.
I had absolute zero problems benchmarking Storage Spaces with Crystal Disk Mark, ATTO, and DiskSpd. More importantly I don’t choose my setup based on how benchmark works with it, I choose it based on how it runs in real world use.
I benchmarked on both Microsoft Storage Spaces and regular Windows Disk Manager setting my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and there is ZERO, NONE, NADA speed difference. Both ran the drives as fast as they can run. The only difference is Windows does not want to Optimize the the Raid 0 created by Disk Manager, but my Auslogics Boost Speed 11 Disk Optimizer will TRIM them. It's not an issue with the speed of the drives being read by the benchmark, it's the fact that the benchmark sees Microsoft Storage Spaces as a Ram Disk and kicks those drive out of the scoring for your system. Try it yourself, go here https://www.userbenchmark.com download the the benchmark and see what it says about your Microsoft Storage Spaces drives.
post edited by kram36 - 2020/09/20 14:00:18
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 14:05:24
(permalink)
kram36
I benchmarked on both Microsoft Storage Spaces and regular Windows Disk Manager setting my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and there is ZERO, NONE, NADA speed difference. Both ran the drives as fast as they can run.
It's not an issue with the speed of the drives being read by the benchmark, it's the fact that the benchmark sees Microsoft Storage Spaces as a Ram Disk and kicks those drive out of the scoring for your system. Try it yourself, go here https://www.userbenchmark.com download the the benchmark and see what it says about your Microsoft Storage Spaces drives.
Then if use of Storage Spaces doesn’t result in issues then I don’t see why I should be using something inferior in all other regards just because one benchmark’s scoring system penalizes it. What matters to you more, some figure on the screen or how fast it actually works? To me it’s the later so I don't see ay problem here.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 14:13:37
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
I benchmarked on both Microsoft Storage Spaces and regular Windows Disk Manager setting my Samsung NVMe drives in Raid 0 and there is ZERO, NONE, NADA speed difference. Both ran the drives as fast as they can run.
It's not an issue with the speed of the drives being read by the benchmark, it's the fact that the benchmark sees Microsoft Storage Spaces as a Ram Disk and kicks those drive out of the scoring for your system. Try it yourself, go here https://www.userbenchmark.com download the the benchmark and see what it says about your Microsoft Storage Spaces drives.
Then if use of Storage Spaces doesn’t result in issues then I don’t see why I should be using something inferior in all other regards just because one benchmark’s scoring system penalizes it. What matters to you more, some figure on the screen or how fast it actually works? To me it’s the later so I don't see ay problem here.
Putting the drives into Raid 0 with Disk Manager is not inferior for my usage. Matter of fact doing it through Disk Manager way gives me more drive space as Microsoft Storage Spaces uses extra disk space to create pools.
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 14:28:51
(permalink)
kram36
Putting the drives into Raid 0 with Disk Manager is not inferior for my usage. Matter of fact doing it through Disk Manager way gives me more drive space as Microsoft Storage Spaces uses extra disk space to create pools.
It is inferior for mine. First, it is my understanding that technology will be deprecated and I will not be in the mood to rebuild my volume once it stops working. Second, it is my understanding it stops TRIM command from being issued to disk while TRIM works fine on SS ( https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1375903). Third, SS allows me to use storage tiers with automatic caching so I have 2 TB NVMe tier in front of / in addition to 16 TB magnetic SATA tier. Last, SS allows thin provisioning. I'm not using it but for some people it matters. Capacity lost for metadata is very small compared to total drive size and it is very VERY small price to pay for all benefits it offers.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 14:34:24
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
Putting the drives into Raid 0 with Disk Manager is not inferior for my usage. Matter of fact doing it through Disk Manager way gives me more drive space as Microsoft Storage Spaces uses extra disk space to create pools.
It is inferior for mine.
First, it is my understanding that technology will be deprecated and I will not be in the mood to rebuild my volume once it stops working.
Second, it is my understanding it stops TRIM command from being issued to disk while TRIM works fine on SS (https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1375903).
Third, SS allows me to use storage tiers with automatic caching so I have 2 TB NVMe tier in front of / in addition to 16 TB magnetic SATA tier.
Last, SS allows thin provisioning. I'm not using it but for some people it matters.
Capacity lost for metadata is very small compared to total drive size and it is very VERY small price to pay for all benefits it offers.
There are zero benefits for me to use SS and just one pool I created took 5GB of space to create it. Why lose disk space for no reason in my use scenario?
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 14:51:49
(permalink)
kram36
There are zero benefits for me to use SS ...
So once again, just because there are no benefits for you doesn't mean there are no benefits for everyone else and vice versa. kram36
... and just one pool I created took 5GB of space to create it. Why lose disk space for no reason in my use scenario?
I don't know what you did and how but I know that -my- storage pool -I- created has 36 TB worth of drives in it and I didn't lose that much of capacity when I checked. Even if I did I would consider 0.01% a very very small "loss". With that said I'm checking out, have great rest of Sunday.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 15:32:23
(permalink)
ZoranC
So once again, just because there are no benefits for you doesn't mean there are no benefits for everyone else and vice versa.
Well what do you know, you actually do realize people use their pc (personal computer) in different ways then you do. Yes I benchmark my pc, it's a hobby and one I like very much, oh and there are people way more serious about it then me. Right now my system is snappy and the fastest system I have had to to date. I absolutely love my current setup and will love it even more when I get a RTX 3090 in it. kram36
... and just one pool I created took 5GB of space to create it. Why lose disk space for no reason in my use scenario?
ZoranC
I don't know what you did and how but I know that -my- storage pool -I- created has 36 TB worth of drives in it and I didn't lose that much of capacity when I checked. Even if I did I would consider 0.01% a very very small "loss".
With that said I'm checking out, have great rest of Sunday.
I did it exactly as I'm supposed to do it. I created the pool, stopped there and then I created the Raid 0 through PowerShell as you're supposed to do. https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/storage-spaces-trying-to-create-a-raid-0-with/c440086c-4bb6-410d-9e92-fd98ce6626cc Yes I lost 5GB of space using SS, plus I would think there is added overhead to the system using SS. Microsoft Storage Spaces Raid 0 gave me 926GB.  Microsoft Disk Manager Raid 0 gave me 931GB  Have a wonderful Sunday. 
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 15:48:45
(permalink)
kram36
Well what do you know, you actually do realize people use their pc (personal computer) in different ways then you do.
I obviously do. But you (obviously?) don't seem to. kram36
Yes I benchmark my pc, it's a hobby and one I like very much, oh and there are people way more serious about it then me.
Benchmarking is one thing. Dismissing technology just because one benchmark you tend to use doesn't treat it correctly is completely different thing. kram36
Yes I lost 5GB of space using SS ... Microsoft Storage Spaces Raid 0 gave me 926GB. Microsoft Disk Manager Raid 0 gave me 931GB
That doesn't sound right at all. I get 931 GB using Storage Spaces, not 926.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 17:03:40
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
Well what do you know, you actually do realize people use their pc (personal computer) in different ways then you do.
I obviously do. But you (obviously?) don't seem to
Oh shut the front door, I of all people could care less what people do with their pc. You were the one attacking because I prioritize benchmarking over SS. You're the one telling me to setup my drives like yours. I never told you what to do with your drives, I did ask for a test on the way the motherboard works under certain settings since you have a setup like mine. kram36
Yes I benchmark my pc, it's a hobby and one I like very much, oh and there are people way more serious about it then me.
ZoranC
Benchmarking is one thing. Dismissing technology just because one benchmark you tend to use doesn't treat it correctly is completely different thing.
I never dissed SS, I said it was of zero use for my use scenario, deal with it. kram36
Yes I lost 5GB of space using SS ... Microsoft Storage Spaces Raid 0 gave me 926GB. Microsoft Disk Manager Raid 0 gave me 931GB
ZoranC
That doesn't sound right at all. I get 931 GB using Storage Spaces, not 926.
That is correct, the picture isn't lying. Are you running Raid 0?
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 17:29:25
(permalink)
kram36
ZoranC
kram36
Well what do you know, you actually do realize people use their pc (personal computer) in different ways then you do.
I obviously do. But you (obviously?) don't seem to
Oh shut the front door ...
I wasn't expecting you will all of the sudden realize how you come across from this and other interactions you have with various board members so I will leave it at that. kram36
ZoranC
That doesn't sound right at all. I get 931 GB using Storage Spaces, not 926.
That is correct, the picture isn't lying. Are you running Raid 0?
Right now I'm not running RAID 1 but initially I did test both RAID 0 and 1 and how much I was getting didn't change based on RAID type, it was always 931 GB in both RAID 0 and RAID 1. So you getting 926 GB doesn't sound like correct setup of Storage Spaces.
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 17:46:59
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
ZoranC
kram36
Well what do you know, you actually do realize people use their pc (personal computer) in different ways then you do.
I obviously do. But you (obviously?) don't seem to
Oh shut the front door ...
I wasn't expecting you will all of the sudden realize how you come across from this and other interactions you have with various board members so I will leave it at that.
kram36
ZoranC
That doesn't sound right at all. I get 931 GB using Storage Spaces, not 926.
That is correct, the picture isn't lying. Are you running Raid 0?
Right now I'm not running RAID 1 but initially I did test both RAID 0 and 1 and how much I was getting didn't change based on RAID type, it was always 931 GB in both RAID 0 and RAID 1. So you getting 926 GB doesn't sound like correct setup of Storage Spaces.
The way I come off, eh? Lets just say you're not as innocent as you think you are, so I will leave it at that. I created the SS just as I should have according to the link I posted and that's the amount of space I had. The picture isn't lying and neither am I. https://forums.evga.com/FindPost/3073351
post edited by kram36 - 2020/09/20 17:52:10
|
ZoranC
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1099
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/05/24 17:22:15
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 16
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 18:13:10
(permalink)
kram36
I created the SS just as I should have according to the link I posted and that's the amount of space I had. The picture isn't lying and neither am I.
It seem you are not realizing I'm not questioning whether you did get 926 GB or not. What I'm doing is pointing out (for benefit of some reader that might be considering using Storage Spaces) that -I- did -NOT- experience issues you did and -I- did not have problem getting 931 GB period every single time I (re)configured Storage Spaces on this system (and I did it quite a few times) so something/someone -was- off. Why is there a difference between your and my experience with them? I don't know exact reason but I believe that shows one can't be without any doubt pointing a finger solely at Storage Spaces and nothing/nobody else.
post edited by ZoranC - 2020/09/20 18:17:03
|
kram36
The Destroyer
- Total Posts : 21477
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/10/27 19:00:58
- Location: United States
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 72
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/20 19:19:28
(permalink)
ZoranC
kram36
I created the SS just as I should have according to the link I posted and that's the amount of space I had. The picture isn't lying and neither am I.
It seem you are not realizing I'm not questioning whether you did get 926 GB or not. What I'm doing is pointing out (for benefit of some reader that might be considering using Storage Spaces) that -I- did -NOT- experience issues you did and -I- did not have problem getting 931 GB period every single time I (re)configured Storage Spaces on this system (and I did it quite a few times) so something/someone -was- off.
Why is there a difference between your and my experience with them? I don't know exact reason but I believe that shows one can't be without any doubt pointing a finger solely at Storage Spaces and nothing/nobody else.
Post a picture. I never said SS was bad, I said it was not needed in my use scenario. There are reasons to use it, mine is not one of them.
post edited by kram36 - 2020/09/20 19:25:37
|
zGunBLADEz
New Member
- Total Posts : 58
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/11/26 07:05:08
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/22 04:59:51
(permalink)
so evga have serious to work on their bios not only with that also with bios readings and those 12v drops reportings and REAL cpu die temperature reporting that nobody seems to notice after all this time.. me wonder if people really test this boards?? did with the micro 2 and now this dark... Like wheres the evga rep has to said about this stuff?
|
Monstieur
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 128
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2016/08/31 02:04:28
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 5
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/25 13:54:10
(permalink)
If I clear CMOS, restore a saved profile, and press F10 to save & exit, the BIOS hangs. I cannot successfully restore any saved profile after clearing CMOS. This is a nuisance while overclocking.
I've narrowed the issue down to the CPU Configuration options. After clearing CMOS, I must first set my PCIe Slot #3 to VROC, save & reboot, then re-enter BIOS before I can successfully restore a saved profile. I have a Hyper M.2 x16 card in that PCIe slot.
|
zGunBLADEz
New Member
- Total Posts : 58
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/11/26 07:05:08
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/09/26 05:42:02
(permalink)
This board was released on feb 2018 come on evga XD
|
AreYouDeeWhy
New Member
- Total Posts : 5
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2018/01/27 21:32:32
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/10/12 12:44:41
(permalink)
Would it be possible to get an option to select a primary/boot display device in a future bios update?
10G-P5-3895-KR 12/25/2020 7:03:07 PM PT No 10G-P5-3881-KR 12/25/2020 7:02:46 PM PT No 10G-P5-3883-KR 12/25/2020 7:02:31 PM PT No 10G-P5-3885-KR 12/25/2020 7:02:09 PM PT No 10G-P5-3898-KR 12/25/2020 1:27:50 PM PT No 10G-P5-3888-KR 12/25/2020 1:26:59 PM PT No 10G-P5-3897-KR 12/17/2020 12:23:13 AM PT No GIGABYTE AORUS Z370 GAMING 7 i7-8700K (4.8GHz) EVGA NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti FTW3 Corsair RMx750 NZXT Kraken Z63
|
ironage
New Member
- Total Posts : 87
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2008/05/10 08:48:31
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2020/11/03 00:51:44
(permalink)
AreYouDeeWhy
Would it be possible to get an option to select a primary/boot display device in a future bios update?
EVGA X299 Mobo Bios development is out of order, my 2nd EVGA X299 Dark is for sale on Ebay. would not expect something here too soon ... if ever.
|
Cooler420
New Member
- Total Posts : 1
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2020/08/21 23:32:33
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: BIOS Updates for X299 Dark (1.23) / FTW K (1.23) / Micro ATX 2 (1.16) / Micro ATX (1.2
2021/07/21 23:23:41
(permalink)
Does this support x4x4x4x4 with VROC?
|