AMD Threadripper 1950X Linux Benchmarks

[pal666]

or here https://www.freebsd.org

Ya know if Linux doesn't want the customers that want to use it.. thats ok.

why should linux want dumb customers? linux provides superior filesystem

[pal666]

I feel confident enough in them that you can google search the proof yourself

lol, you fail at basic logic. i feel confident enough that you are idiot

[schmidtbag]

lol, you fail at basic logic. i feel confident enough that you are idiot

Basic logic? Since when would me doing research for you have anything to do logic? If you ever looked at any RAID benchmarks, you'd know it often cripples seek time and increases CPU usage.

Since you fail to provide anything of substance to say, let alone seem to understand what logic means, the only one here who is an idiot is you. No need for me to feel confident about that claim, that's just fact. If you want to come off as superior, prove your worth.

[jrch2k8]

that is not linux. and it is not even targeted to reach linux, like amd vulkan or dc for example
also lol@"btrfs is unstable" https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/issues

OMG you are right a GIT repo show this software have issues reported the horror /sarcasm

I guess you mean is not upstream? so what pretty much any decent distro provide packages if you are scared of compiling.

BTRFS has failed me a lot in the past(Raid 1, force shutdown under heavy I/O at some point will stop mounting, is true tho I have couple of years without using it but not long ago someone posted here that the same happened recently to him as well so who knows), ZFS has never failed me period(not with burn discs, not with hot swaps, not on power failures under server grade load, not on raid 1 or 60, nor when the caches disks burn(SLC SSDs for Zil cache are a bad bad idea), not with enterprise PCIe SSD, Sata or SAS disk, nor volumes, compression, encryption under previous cases, not in 50+ servers I manage, not with Archlinux or RHEL 7 or Solaris(Nexenta NAS) or FreeBSD(FreeNAS) nor with boot pools nor cold storage pools nor on ethernet nor on fiber connection nor with bacula backups(with ZFS never had a bacula differential failing because of bit rot on me and some of those have a composite size of 100TB+), I guess you are one of those that go full anal because is not fully GPL? who cares is still open source and that is good enough for me even if it is the "wrong" kind of open source I guess

[ar1111]

Is anyone able to run a multicore virtual machine using VirtualBox with the Threadripper 1950x and the Gigabyte Aorus 7 X399 motherboard tested here?

I recently completed a build and installation of Ubuntu 17.04 and am trying to run a Windows 10 (64 bit) and a Windows XP (32 bit) virtual machines under VirtualBox 5.1.22, Ubuntu 7.04 host. The VMs work fine if I have just 1 processor assigned to a VM, but when I try to assign 2 or more processors, I get the VirtualBox error "AMD-V is disabled in the BIOS (or by the host OS). (VERR_SVM_DISABLED)" and the VM fails to start. I did enable SVM mode in the BIOS, and /proc/cpuinfo lists the "svm" flag. I see some posts online saying Gigabyte motherboards do not properly support virtualization. I tried a few options mentioned in various forums, but so far nothing gets me past that error.

Any help would be appreciated.

[ar1111]

Correction to the problem described above: the 64-bit VM does not run at all. The 32-bit VM runs with a single processor.

[ar1111]

After some additional searching, I came upon this forum discussion: http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/1847...-gaming-issues which described the same issue. It was indeed the motherboard that was causing the problem. A motherboard BIOS update the latest version fixed the problem.