Cisco class is horribly outdated- need info 10 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

gravy666

I pretend I'm cooler than AzH

50 XP

20th August 2007

0 Uploads

7,561 Posts

0 Threads

#1 8 years ago

In school right now I'm taking a Cisco class. Basics of computers.

Problem is, the sort of online textbook that we use is... outdated. Doesn't mention a thing about quad-core CPUs: it makes dual-core CPUs sound brand new. They made us memorize the transfer rates of USB 1.0 (tell me, when was the last time you saw one of those things?). Vista is never mentioned at all. And just a few minutes ago on the forums I discovered the existence of DDR3.

Basically just tell me what the latest available hardware is and give a short summary of what it does/the improvements over the last iteration. Please.




Freyr VIP Member

A2Files Staff

46,875 XP

5th February 2005

11 Uploads

4,275 Posts

0 Threads

#2 8 years ago

Single core CPU's are still mainstream in business and are likely to stay that way simply because of the impact of running a few thousand quad core PC's on the electricity bill. Recently, working for a large IT Dept I know they had around 4500 PC's. Upwards of 4300 were single core machines. What does your average office user need a quad core CPU for? Excel?

Quad core CPU. Generally used in servers and home PC's for gaming. A Quad core CPU can in theory do 4 times the work, however this largely depends on programs being written to use the other 3 processors. The great majority of programs aren't written for multi core programs and simply only use one core.

DDR3 Memory is faster than DDR2.

SATA Hard drives; SATA is another transfer method for hard drives, which is about 3 times faster than IDE, which as been retrospectively renamed to PATA.

Solid State Discs; these are basically just massive flash memory sticks. They have a lower transfer speed (typically about a third of a old fashioned hard drive) but as they don't use platters they don't need to wait for a head to find the files so the seek time is decreased to virtually nothing. This makes them very good at reading lots of small pieces of random data, but not good for massive file storage as they are smaller and the sustainable read and write speeds are lower.

Writable Blu-ray discs; latest optical storage which uses a blue laser in replacement of the green laser the DVD uses. Due to the smaller wavelength of the laser it can store more information. (25/50GB instead of 4.7GB)

Latest graphics cards; You can now run computer code on a graphics card. (See CUDA/TESLA) Depending on the task, you can attain performance many times that possible from a CPU.

USB2/3; Faster than their predecessors.




Mr. Pedantic

I would die without GF

234,620 XP

8th October 2006

0 Uploads

23,127 Posts

0 Threads

#3 8 years ago

What do you want to know, and in how much detail do you want it? Is what Freyr said enough depth? What other things do you want to know about?




ConstanceJill

Huh yeah, whatever ^^

38,761 XP

6th December 2006

0 Uploads

3,246 Posts

1 Threads

#4 8 years ago
Freyr;5149236Solid State Discs; these are basically just massive flash memory sticks. They have a lower transfer speed (typically about a third of a old fashioned hard drive) but as they don't use platters they don't need to wait for a head to find the files so the seek time is decreased to virtually nothing. This makes them very good at reading lots of small pieces of random data, but not good for massive file storage as they are smaller and the sustainable read and write speeds are lower.

Huh ? I'm pretty sure the transfer rates are well above any physical disk... also, I think SSD means "Solid State Drive" as it's not a "Disk" ?_?




*Daedalus

A Phoenix from the ashes

50 XP

18th April 2006

0 Uploads

3,091 Posts

0 Threads

#5 8 years ago
ConstanceJill;5149309also, I think SSD means "Solid State Drive" as it's not a "Disk" ?_?

Yeah, it does, not a huge biggie though. =p (Says me, the grammar Nazi.)




Mr. Pedantic

I would die without GF

234,620 XP

8th October 2006

0 Uploads

23,127 Posts

0 Threads

#6 8 years ago
Huh ? I'm pretty sure the transfer rates are well above any physical disk... also, I think SSD means "Solid State Drive" as it's not a "Disk" ?_?

It depends. Intel's X-25 drives have relatively slow transfer rates compared to other SSDs (though in terms of random read/writes they blow all other drives out of the water), and certain drives, especially enterprise hard drives and velociraptors, can get above that. But As far as I know no mechanical drive approaches the 200MB/s transfer rate that most other SSDs can get.




Freyr VIP Member

A2Files Staff

46,875 XP

5th February 2005

11 Uploads

4,275 Posts

0 Threads

#7 8 years ago

ConstanceJill;5149309Huh ? I'm pretty sure the transfer rates are well above any physical disk... also, I think SSD means "Solid State Drive" as it's not a "Disk" ?_?[/QUOTE]

I've heard both used. Drive is probably the correct terminology, but given that some manufacturers call them Disks...

It's just like the old Floppy disc thing. 5 and a quarter inch discs were floppy discs by definition, you could bend them in half and they'd spring back and still work. Three and a half inch discs are not floppy discs, because they aren't floppy. However, it's just an accepted name for them and nobody knows why these days.

[QUOTE=Mr. Pedantic;5149552]It depends. Intel's X-25 drives have relatively slow transfer rates compared to other SSDs (though in terms of random read/writes they blow all other drives out of the water), and certain drives, especially enterprise hard drives and velociraptors, can get above that. But As far as I know no mechanical drive approaches the 200MB/s transfer rate that most other SSDs can get.

It's pointless comparing random read/writes with SSD's to HDD's, it's the overall performance. Plus, SSD's degrade quite quickly. The performance after two years is not going to be the same as the performance of the brand new cherry picked SSD given to some reviewer.

Plus, most comparisons between SSD's and HDD's compare the 2.5 inch 5400RPM laptop drives, not the 3.5 7200RPM desktop drives. That's fair enough as a comparison for laptops but it can be a bit misleading, as can describing burst transfer speeds as a sustained transfer rate.

I don't have a problem with SSD's, i'm just saying that the performance is not better to a desktop hard drive in the real world and they are getting a bit over hyped by salesdroids.




gravy666

I pretend I'm cooler than AzH

50 XP

20th August 2007

0 Uploads

7,561 Posts

0 Threads

#8 8 years ago

Freyr;5149236Single core CPU's are still mainstream in business and are likely to stay that way simply because of the impact of running a few thousand quad core PC's on the electricity bill. Recently, working for a large IT Dept I know they had around 4500 PC's. Upwards of 4300 were single core machines. What does your average office user need a quad core CPU for? Excel?

Quad core CPU. Generally used in servers and home PC's for gaming. A Quad core CPU can in theory do 4 times the work, however this largely depends on programs being written to use the other 3 processors. The great majority of programs aren't written for multi core programs and simply only use one core.

DDR3 Memory is faster than DDR2.

SATA Hard drives; SATA is another transfer method for hard drives, which is about 3 times faster than IDE, which as been retrospectively renamed to PATA.

Solid State Discs; these are basically just massive flash memory sticks. They have a lower transfer speed (typically about a third of a old fashioned hard drive) but as they don't use platters they don't need to wait for a head to find the files so the seek time is decreased to virtually nothing. This makes them very good at reading lots of small pieces of random data, but not good for massive file storage as they are smaller and the sustainable read and write speeds are lower.

Writable Blu-ray discs; latest optical storage which uses a blue laser in replacement of the green laser the DVD uses. Due to the smaller wavelength of the laser it can store more information. (25/50GB instead of 4.7GB)

Latest graphics cards; You can now run computer code on a graphics card. (See CUDA/TESLA) Depending on the task, you can attain performance many times that possible from a CPU.

USB2/3; Faster than their predecessors.

Thanks.




kow_ciller

Gettin' hardware chilly

50 XP

16th June 2004

0 Uploads

5,787 Posts

0 Threads

#9 8 years ago

Having fun with cisco? I got my CCNA and it was a pain in the ass. Just wait until you start router configuring, you work with crap thats like 15yrs old.




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#10 8 years ago
Freyr;5149687It's just like the old Floppy disc thing. 5 and a quarter inch discs were floppy discs by definition, you could bend them in half and they'd spring back and still work. Three and a half inch discs are not floppy discs, because they aren't floppy. However, it's just an accepted name for them and nobody knows why these days.

I broke a 3.5" floppy in half about 10 years ago when I was bored, and yes they're floppy. Hard and uncaring on the outside, sweet and innocent and floppy on the inside. Or something.




  • 1
  • 2