HELP :U
-
- KVRian
- 851 posts since 26 Jan, 2014 from United States of America
My new computer, January 2017 build has 113Gb on C drive.
Program Files 14Gb,
Program File X86 21.8Gb (Steinberg folder 14Gb)
Program Data 24.6
Users 7.87
Windows 19.1
Total 87.37.
About 25 Gb are unaccountable (hidden folders made visible).
Program Files 14Gb,
Program File X86 21.8Gb (Steinberg folder 14Gb)
Program Data 24.6
Users 7.87
Windows 19.1
Total 87.37.
About 25 Gb are unaccountable (hidden folders made visible).
- KVRAF
- 5718 posts since 29 Sep, 2010 from Maui
Have you run the disk clean up on your system files and what not? Also check the recovery tools to make sure there aren't a ton of restore points.
There's really not many situations that could account for data being invisible to windows. Most of them aren't so good. Not all though.
There's really not many situations that could account for data being invisible to windows. Most of them aren't so good. Not all though.
-
- KVRian
- 851 posts since 26 Jan, 2014 from United States of America
The system is 3 months old, I hardly use it, still in testing mode. But Restore points is a good suggestion. Where can I find them?
I agree that this is a lot of unaccounted data. But this is not first time I see it. Every computer I had always had missing Gbs. The way SSD stores is that when it has information block larger than current block it writes on, it moves on to the next block (or cell- not sure about the terminology). This is why we have Trim function- it supposed to move data to use unused space. SSDs known to waist space. My C drive is Samsung 960 Evo M.2 drive. May be the Trim is not working that great. I did not install Magician, but I think Trim is preinstalled on the drive itself, not Windows application. Thanks.
I agree that this is a lot of unaccounted data. But this is not first time I see it. Every computer I had always had missing Gbs. The way SSD stores is that when it has information block larger than current block it writes on, it moves on to the next block (or cell- not sure about the terminology). This is why we have Trim function- it supposed to move data to use unused space. SSDs known to waist space. My C drive is Samsung 960 Evo M.2 drive. May be the Trim is not working that great. I did not install Magician, but I think Trim is preinstalled on the drive itself, not Windows application. Thanks.
- KVRAF
- 5718 posts since 29 Sep, 2010 from Maui
25 gb wasted space is easy when it comes to windows update. Other stuff as well.
Restore points can be accessed through the recovery section in the control panel.
Run the disk cleanup as well. There's tons of stuff left behind by installations and what not. You'd be surprised at the crap you can collect in a short time.
Good luck.
Restore points can be accessed through the recovery section in the control panel.
Run the disk cleanup as well. There's tons of stuff left behind by installations and what not. You'd be surprised at the crap you can collect in a short time.
Good luck.
-
- Banned
- 411 posts since 17 Jan, 2007
The missing space is probably taken up by the OEM recovery partition and the 100MB partition Windows uses if it creates partitions during install. A 3rd party app like GParted or such should list all partitions on the disk if Windows doesn't.Astralv wrote:My new computer, January 2017 build has 113Gb on C drive.
Program Files 14Gb,
Program File X86 21.8Gb (Steinberg folder 14Gb)
Program Data 24.6
Users 7.87
Windows 19.1
Total 87.37.
About 25 Gb are unaccountable (hidden folders made visible).
- Banned
- 6129 posts since 9 Oct, 2007 from an inharmonious society
You have to run Disk Clean utility for windows.
After it stops scanning, you will need to click on the "check mark" for Clean System Files.
Then press the clean button again.
You will then free up about 20gb of space.
After it stops scanning, you will need to click on the "check mark" for Clean System Files.
Then press the clean button again.
You will then free up about 20gb of space.
-
- KVRAF
- 1929 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
If you pull the full CPU benchmark and compare, you'll notice that the overall performance rating of the 7320 is over twice the performance of the 7700K. The isn't a DAW left out there I can think of where Multi-thread isn't important at this point.Zombie Queen wrote: If multi-thread doesn't matter, see:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
i3-7320 is almost as fast as i7-7700K on single core at half the price, just saying.
Yeah to echo that and add a bit more with PSU's a good one at 500W is going to be far more stable than a terrible 700W over time. GPU firms exaggerate the power requirements because people tend to cheap out on PSU's and the dips and lulls in delivery that then occur get blamed on pretty much everything except the PSU.Zombie Queen wrote: When done picking parts, check on some PSU calculator. Actual power consumption on a DAW will be more like 200W on peak. 500W should be more than enough, just pick a respectable brand.
So when you put in a new GPU and the is unstable voltage, the GPU gets blamed because the PSU claims to be 700W. Some firms list 700w and they mean the peak load, some mean the average load and some list pretty much the worst case scenario. Evga G3's are my current preference for a "cheapish" PSU, I wouldn't be keen to go much lower.
- KVRAF
- 4645 posts since 1 Aug, 2005 from Warszawa, Poland
-
- KVRian
- 1145 posts since 29 Jun, 2012
-
- KVRAF
- 1929 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
Not my preference.Zombie Queen wrote:And what's you take on Corsair PSUs?
I like to know what's in my PSU's and on some of the ranges they have a habit of chopping and changing the production partners and sometimes parts as they go, leading to variations in batches that I don't personally like to deal with.
The original HX series was Seasonic, they got all the awards and they switched to a few other ODM's. The AX series AFAIK remains Seasonic so should still be all good. The HX1000 upwards were coming from Toppower at one point (took the awards) although the HX1000i looks to be largely CWT based right now according to a quick Google. Below those in the range I've never had constant experience with them, so I just avoid them myself these days.
I'm a huge fan of the Superflower Leadex platform, so outside of Asia your talking the EVGA G2 / G3 series. i like the aftermarket cooling on the Bequiet Dark pro / straight power series although admittedly they are CWT inside which I don't normally like to deal with. Having chatted with Bequiet in the past they keep their own QC guys on the production line and I haven't had the same coil whine issues I find with other CWT rebadged units normally (i.e. when a third party isn't doing the QC stage) so after a few years of being hesitant with them, I'm happy enough to keep working with them these days.
I'm one of the fussiest people you'll probably find when it comes to PSU's in computer systems tbh.
-
- KVRian
- 851 posts since 26 Jan, 2014 from United States of America
They do the same with 500W PSUs. When it says 500, it may be 350. I got 800W EVGA platinum for this build. I had 800 Bronze Thermaltake on other build and had strange issues.Kaine wrote:Zombie Queen wrote: Yeah to echo that and add a bit more with PSU's a good one at 500W is going to be far more stable than a terrible 700W over time. GPU firms exaggerate the power requirements because people tend to cheap out on PSU's and the dips and lulls in delivery that then occur get blamed on pretty much everything except the PSU.
So when you put in a new GPU and the is unstable voltage, the GPU gets blamed because the PSU claims to be 700W. Some firms list 700w and they mean the peak load, some mean the average load and some list pretty much the worst case scenario. Evga G3's are my current preference for a "cheapish" PSU, I wouldn't be keen to go much lower.
- KVRAF
- 4590 posts since 7 Jun, 2012 from Warsaw
Nonense. Ableton uses all the cores I have - which is currently 8 with my new Ryzen . DAWs are nowhere like computer games. Many VSTs are internally paralleled as well. For instance LuSH-101 plugin can nicely use 16 threads on its own and it does make a difference. For now I can run full projects at 88200 and don't really hit 50% of CPU usage.For ableton single core performance matters most & more cores don't matter so i think AMD is not effective & feasible ???
That is, for playing plugins and recording in real time with low latency. Rendering the project is still unfortunatelly 1 thread. But if you don't render your projects many times a day, you won't notice a diffrence.
Blog ------------- YouTube channel
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)
-
- KVRist
- 272 posts since 28 Nov, 2007 from Dog-shit-ville- FRANCE
They are accountable but you can't see them.Astralv wrote:My new computer, January 2017 build has 113Gb on C drive.
Program Files 14Gb,
Program File X86 21.8Gb (Steinberg folder 14Gb)
Program Data 24.6
Users 7.87
Windows 19.1
Total 87.37.
About 25 Gb are unaccountable (hidden folders made visible).
Download a very useful tool called Folder Size. Run it as an administrator. It will show you where everything is.
Look how much is in "pagefile.sys" and "hiberfil.sys" ...they can have each 20 GB, depends on amount of RAM.
Look on web what to do with these 2...easy fix.
Then move temp folders, documents, music, photos etc to another location. There is a way to do that!!, not just moving them. Google it.
Hope this helps.
-
- KVRian
- 851 posts since 26 Jan, 2014 from United States of America
Thank you for suggestions for disk. On my old computer I had something installed for folders size. Are you saying that size listed in preferences is not reliable number?
This is an article about Ryzen AMD processor- somebody on Cakewalk forum ran some extensive benchmarks and concluded that it is not fully ready. http://forum.cakewalk.com/Ryzen-1800x-T ... px#3598545
My intel processor shows like 10% load at 80 tracks project- 40 audio and 40 midi tracks (40 software instruments used- bounced to audio individually). Which means- it is not wise to spend too much on processor (like going Extreme edition), unless you need more lines to run more SATA and PCIe expansions.
This is an article about Ryzen AMD processor- somebody on Cakewalk forum ran some extensive benchmarks and concluded that it is not fully ready. http://forum.cakewalk.com/Ryzen-1800x-T ... px#3598545
My intel processor shows like 10% load at 80 tracks project- 40 audio and 40 midi tracks (40 software instruments used- bounced to audio individually). Which means- it is not wise to spend too much on processor (like going Extreme edition), unless you need more lines to run more SATA and PCIe expansions.
-
- KVRian
- 851 posts since 26 Jan, 2014 from United States of America
This is nice thread about
6850k - six cores @ 4GHz
1800x - eight cores @ 4GHz
7700k - four cores @ 4.5GHz
Conclusion: For low-latency audio work, the i7-7700k ($300) is outperforming the 1800x ($500).
That kills the impetus to use the 1800x.
For working with heavy loads at low-latency, the i7-6850k ($500) is the best of the three.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/i76850k-vs-i7 ... 78609.aspx
6850k - six cores @ 4GHz
1800x - eight cores @ 4GHz
7700k - four cores @ 4.5GHz
Conclusion: For low-latency audio work, the i7-7700k ($300) is outperforming the 1800x ($500).
That kills the impetus to use the 1800x.
For working with heavy loads at low-latency, the i7-6850k ($500) is the best of the three.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/i76850k-vs-i7 ... 78609.aspx