Computing desk
< May 29	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 31 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 30

Barebones PC with basic video hardware

Starting to look at minibox computers, and I like the idea of a "barebones" because I'd rather put in RAM and a solid state HDD myself, but are they ever sold with basic graphics capability? Basically, would a machine consisting of the computer box and sockets, the motherboard with built-in graphics and the CPU still be called a barebones, or do I need to search something else? I wouldn't use this machine for gaming (it would overheat) and a dedicated graphics card seems like overkill for anything else. Am I wrong about that though; would watching movies on a decent WQHD screen (which I haven't bought yet) call for such a graphics card? 82.6.151.23 (talk) 11:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NewEgg regularly sells various bundles. The last computer I purchased came with a case, power supply, motherboard, CPU, and video card. I had to separately purchase RAM and a drive. They've always had mobo+CPU combos. Most motherboards have built-in video. So, you will tend to always get that. If you want a separate video card, they usually have a mobo+CPU+video combo. They happened to have a deal on the case+power when I last got a motherboard. 209.149.114.20 (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

dependant upon country.FAMASFREENODE (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's fairly rare that modern computers have IGPs on the motherboard. They're almost always on the CPU/SOC. And yes most barebones computers will come with IGPs although you should always check the specs of exactly what you're getting. Nil Einne (talk) 04:40, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, "rare" means "difficult to find." Motherboards with integrated graphics are very easy to find. NewEgg (mentioned above) has over 200 new motherboards with integrated graphics. Amazon has over 200 new motherboards with integrated graphics. I see no reason to believe that I'd have difficulty finding a motherboard with integrated graphics. It may be that more boards are produced without integrated graphics, but there are plenty of boards produced with integrated graphics as well. 209.149.114.20 (talk) 15:53, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If there are so many, it should trivial to give me plenty of examples of recent motherboards with built in graphics i.e. IGP on (the chipset of) the motherboard. (Which is basically what I said in my first post.) By recent I mean released in the past 2 years. Anything in the pre-Intel HD and Iris Graphics era is unlikely to be recent. IIRC you've been here for longer than me (well I mean from when you first came, not length of time as I'm not sure how long you left for after SOPA), so you should know that it's always better to provide references on the RD rather than simply insist they exist.

AFAIK Intel hasn't produce a chipset with an IGP/GPU on the Platform Controller Hub ever. It goes against the ideals of the PCH. So the last chipsets with IGPs were the Core 2 ones (Intel G45 etc) and some Atom ones. (Old Core 2 systems are sometimes useful to purchase particularly if you're willing to mod them to support Xeons but new ones, not so much.) Well even on Atom I don't think there were newer chipsets in fact they were older ones, but they continued for a while before the iGPU on CPU took over while the Nehalem (microarchitecture)/Westmere (microarchitecture) had already taken over on the desktop/server side and these were designed for the GPU to be on the CPU even if the Nehalem ones were never recently.

AMD's APU strategy hasn't always been clear cut probably not helped by the failing of Bulldozer (microarchitecture) so they did continue the Socket AM3/Socket AM3+ for quite a while. But realisticly there are very few AMD systems on offer. And in any case the AMD 890GX etc which AFAIK were the last AMD chipsets with IGPs died out a lot quicker since most chose the APU's if they wanted AMD with graphics built in to the system. I'm not really sure what people like Via were doing, but I'm fairly sure they too moved the GPU to the CPU a while ago. Likewise ARM systems have had the GPU on the CPU/SOC for quite a long while. (Was there ever a ARM phone or tablet in the post iPhone/iPad era that had a GPU that wasn't on the CPU/SOC?)

Bear in mind that the vast majority of motherboards produced recently have support for the iGPU on the CPU even though they don't have IGP on the motherboard. (Nothing in my original post denied this.) So the presence of video output on the motherboard doesn't mean the motherboard has built in graphics. If the motherboard needs a CPU with iGPU (and admitedly it isn't always easy or possible to get a CPU without an iGPU) it's clearly doesn't have an IGP on the chipset. With modern small computers with soldered CPU and highly SOC design, the distinction between motherboard and CPU isn't so clear cut. But I felt and still feel my comment was clear in excluding anything where the IGP was on the CPU regardless of what you want to call it.

One minor complication is that I'm sure there are some barebones systems using hardwired, perhaps mobile external GPUs on the motherboard. I was thinking of but didn't really address these in my earlier comment. These go against the classic case of having a IGP/GPU that's actually part of the motherboard's chipset rather than something which is simply add more or less likely a graphics card even if it's part of the motherboards circuit board. Still I guess you could say these are on the motherboard. However these would most likely be oriented at people looking for gaming or perhaps super media systems and the vast majority of them are going to be similar to laptops and have a iGPU on the CPU anyway so I didn't think they were that important since I said rare, not non existant and still feel this is justified. (The vast majority by far barebones systems are going to be using the iGPU on the CPU. Some will have support for a socketed iGPU of somekind be it simply PCIe x16 or MXM or whatever, perhaps in some cases they will even come with one. Only a tiny number are going to come with an external GPU actually part of the motherboard (rather than simply being attached).

Nil Einne (talk) 07:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To give an example, none of the motherboards (first page only, I didn't bother to go further) which show up here [1] seem to have an IGP on the motherboard. They support the one on the CPU/SOC sure but they don't have it on the motherboard. This shouldn't be particularly surprisince since as I said earlier, the last Intel chipsets to have IGPs were in the Core 2 era.

Also remember that you should always check the details of the motherboard. I'm sure many retailers put motherboards which support the iGPU on the CPU in the motherboard with integrated graphics category. Newegg for example seems to do that with this "integrated graphics" cat [2] (again only checked the first page) although they also have another cat "Supported only by CPU with integrated graphic". (For whatever reason although the cat is supposed to have 200+ items, when I actually look at it only 87 or something show up.)

Interestingly from what I can tell, stuff appearing in the "Supported only by CPU with integrated graphic" cat doesn't appear in the "Integrated Graphics" cat and vice versa despite most of them being the same thing which gives you an idea of their consistency.

In any case, regardless of whether you agree with this categorisation, the wording of my first post still seems clear to me that it wasn't referring to such cases. So I'm fairly mystified where there's 200+ motherboards are on NewEgg that actually have integrated graphics on the motherboard (chipset). Since not only did I only find 87 or so (maybe it's because I'm in NZ or something but I'm set to use the US site) that claim to have, none of first 30 or so that I found seem to actually have. Which means NewEgg must be hiding them very well if they really exist. (Your wording seems to suggest they exist, rather than you were making a semantic argument over what I actually said.)

I'm not going to bother but I'm guessing you'll find the same thing on Amazon.

Either the motherboard doesn't have an IGP and just supports the iGPU on CPU where present. Or it's not something which can really be called a modern computer. (Again, old Core 2 systems are useful in some cases but they aren't exactly modern. I guess there a still a tiny number of motherboards being made for replacements etc or more likely old stock that was never sold and if you want to call these modern since they are new, well there's no point arguing because even accepting that, it's hard to argue these aren't rare.) Or it's some oddball, e.g. a motherboard with a external GPU or perhaps a recently released motherboard with some old chipset (maybe AMD) compared to the 99.9% of stuff released recently without an IGP on the motherboard. This isn't surprising since the info on what's been released in the past 4 years or so tells us this.

Nil Einne (talk) 07:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Already mentioned in my first post that most barebones systems should have an IGP generally on the CPU. In answer to the question of whether it's enough, you'll need to look at your own uses and what exact iGPU you're consider. They're definitely a lot better nowadays then they used to be and in most cases should have no problem outputting at that resolution, and will also have support for hardware decoding h264 at up to 1080P. (h265 is a bit more iffy dependent on precisely what you get.) Bitstreaming etc should also be supported.

If the only thing you're doing with the computer is indeed watching video then it's a somewhat simple but still nor clear cut. E.g. If you just want to play the video with whatever default upscaling (possibly that provided by your GPU) which will still be decent, then yes iGPU should be fine.

If you want to use something like MadVR for your upscaling, then it's possible the iGPU, again even the best one won't be enough. To be clear, I'm sure you could use some level of madVR, but even simply upscaling to 1080P24 using extreme levels needs something like a AMD R9 280 or equivalent Nvidia or even higher. Once you had WQHD to the mix, well definitely the iGPU could be insufficient. Personally although I use madVR and at a fairly high level (but only to upscale to 1080P where needed), I'm not convinced many people are going to notice the difference especially at such an extreme edge. I suspect I don't. Still you'll need to look at your requirements and expectations and figure out what you want.

Now, if you are planning to do other things besides watching videos (or really browsing the internet or I think most of MS Office), e.g. Photoshop, remember that GPGPU means the GPU will sometimes be used for other stuff. Sometimes even stuff that isn't related to graphics. GPGPU on the home user side hasn't really took off muchised, and in most cases the iGPU will be enough heck probably if you just get a HD Graphics 510 (presuming current generation Intel). Still there are non-gaming non-research cases when even the Iris Pro 580 is not going to be enough. You'll need to look at your specific use case to know what if anything the GPU may be used for and whether the iGPU will ne enough.

BTW my earlier point is important here. The GPU will almost definitely be on the CPU/SOC. You'll need to look at the perfomance and feature set based on whatever GPU is on the CPU. Looking at reviews for systems with the same chipset (PCH or whatever) or even exacty same motherboard is going to mislead if the CPU has a different GPU.

The motherboard does have some minor relevance, for example it will affect what outputs are present. (You can sometimes add these in various ways, but except for passive adapters on the output ports, it's best not to rely on these given the difficult you may have finding them and attaching them.) Also, it may affect what CPUs are supported and the maximum memory speed and maybe even how many channels. Note that while the memory controller will likewise be on the CPU, BIOS settings and circuity and additional components can affect what works and what doesn't. And number of channels and memory speed can affect iGPU performance although not quite so much on Intel ones AFAIK. (But my knowledge in this area is like 3 years out of date.)

However these effects are likely to be minor compared to what GPU is on the CPU.

Hopefully I don't have to spell out the other implications but just in case. As I said above, make sure what you're buying has a iGPU, if that's what you want. CPUs without GPUs are very rare on the Intel side now, AFACT, there are still no Skylake (microarchitecture) without GPU other than server chips. The ones expected to not have GPUs ended up having them [3] [4]. But you may find them so even if the system you're buying has the same chipset or even the exact same motherboard as another one which you've confirmed has graphics, and of course with video out ports etc, it doesn't mean it'll actually have an iGPU/graphics. If the CPU it comes with doesn't then it won't. I.E. Don't assume the same chipset or motherboard, or the presence of video out ports means theres an iGPU, you need to look at the CPU.

Nil Einne (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

how to disable data usage warning android

helpFAMASFREENODE (talk) 16:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does this help? -- BenRG (talk) 19:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.wikihow.com/Turn-Off-Data-Usage-Warnings-on-Your-Android The Quixotic Potato (talk) 20:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Password protected .zip File/Folder

I have this file/folder ("Type of file: WinRAR ZIP archive (.zip)", "Opens with: WinRAR archiver"). I can't extract it because its password protected. Any idea/open source software that I could use to pass through the password barrier? -- Apostle (talk) 19:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, this. Ruslik_Zero 19:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In progress...been less/more than 24hr now probably. Thank you.

-- Apostle (talk) 18:41, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Folder's Window

A window appears after clicking on the "Computer/My Computer" folder. How do I change the 'extremely light blue' colour bits of the window? -- Apostle (talk) 19:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What application and/or operating system are you talking about? 81.157.10.165 (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7 Ultimate Service Pack 1. -- Apostle (talk) 04:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can change the color theme under Appearance in Settings, but not sure if you can change the one window alone. StuRat (talk) 14:25, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it, it doesn't change the 'extreme blue colour' bit. The only other option I've seen is, going to the XP mode, what I don't want. -- Apostle (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try disabling Aero mode ? There are also accessibility options like using inverted colors or grayscale, but obviously those affect everything. StuRat (talk) 19:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How do you disable it? Beside, I wish to change the blue colour of the aero mode theme, if you know what I mean? -- Apostle (talk) 10:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See [5]. StuRat (talk) 18:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re-noted. Thanks.

-- Apostle (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Raspberry Pi serial port

I'm trying to set up the serial port on the Raspberry Pi model B, running Raspbian (Debian). All online documentation says /dev/ttyS0 should be present, but it's not, even when I erase the SD card and start over. So I create /ttyS0 with:
mknod -m 666 /dev/ttyS0 c 4 64
I confirm that ttyS0 is present in /dev/ but then find that ttyS0 cannot be found when I try to attach it to the port using:
sudo kissattach /dev/ttyS0 aprs
where 'aprs' is the port that I set up in /etc/ax25/axports.
So I check /ttyS0's file permissions and find they are r-xr-xr-x or similar. So I set them totally permissive and get them to rwxrwxrwx, but this still doesn't allow attaching. The Pi responds with:
kissattach: /dev/ttyS0: open: No such device or address
I notice that /dev/serial0 is present, and can successfully kissattach it to aprs. What more can I do? Is there something else needs doing to /ttyS0? Akld guy (talk) 21:27, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does /dev/serial0 also have 4 and 64 as major and minor numbers (ls -l)? (maybe ports which aren't an actual 16550 chip must identify in a different manner.) What about group membership (dialout etc)? Asmrulz (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to go out for lunch and won't be able to investigate that until about 7 hours from now. Akld guy (talk) 22:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are only so many ways in which two device files can be different. So if it's not the permissions... If it still doesn't work perhaps someone (udev? gvfs?) either doesn't see /dev/ttyS0 and must be pointed to it, or otherwise hogs the file and must be told to un-hog it. Asmrulz (talk) 22:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Asmrulz: You asked, "Does /dev/serial0 also have 4 and 64 as major and minor numbers (ls -l)?"
I typed sudo ls -l /dev/serial0 but it didn't give that information. It returned:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 May 31 09:35 /dev/serial0 -> ttyAMA0
I can't believe that something else is hogging /ttyS0, because it didn't exist until I created it. Akld guy (talk) 07:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to leave my model B at work today, so I can't check just now.

After you tried the mknod and got "No such device or address", that indicates that major/minor number 4/64 does not refer to a valid driver for a valid device. —Steve Summit (talk) 03:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Scs: Thank you. I've given up on /dev/ttyS0 and am pretty sure I should be using /dev/serial0 instead. Reason is that I discovered documentation which said that the Raspberry Pi's serial port is pre-empted by the console for debugging and it's necessary to release it. It recommended removing console=ttyAMA0,115200 from /boot/cmdline.txt. I looked at that file and found only console=serial0,115200 console=tty1, so I removed the console=serial0,115200 part and rebooted.

Another document suggested trying to copy the contents of a file to the serial port. The following resulted in a voltage swing at the Txd wire whenever it was typed:

sudo cp /etc/ax25/axports /dev/serial0

so I'm now regarding /dev/serial0 as valid for the serial port. Akld guy (talk) 07:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: the app (Xastir) that I'm trying to interface to the serial port now recognizes /dev/serial0 and when I send data from Xastir, the voltage on the Raspberry Pi's Txd wire fluctuates as the data goes out (I slowed it to 300 Baud so it's more obvious on the meter). I'm rather annoyed that no documentation refers to the Pi's serial port as /dev/serial0. All information I've seen refers to it as (the historical) /dev/ttyS0, so it's pretty obvious that nobody has recently been using the traditional UART serial port. Instead, they've been using the USB port, /dev/ttyAMA0.

Resolved. Akld guy (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]