Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Many people ordering BIOS chips for A8N32-SLI Deluxe

K

krw

Jan 1, 1970
0
My SLI Deluxe carries 2 1GB ECC registered RAM sticks.

Your point? My Tyan S2875S has two 1GB sticks and two .5GB sticks.
....and has for two years. I was considering upgrading the .5GB
sticks to 1GB, but $250 is still too steep.

My ThinkPad has one .5GB and one 1GB. Memory was expensive a year
ago but at $44 I might toss the .5GB stick. Memory is now so cheap I
put 2GB in my wife's ThinkPad. It needs it, even for games, at least
until I can get pig Vista off it.
 
B

Benjamin Gawert

Jan 1, 1970
0
* Skybuck:
Good point fuckwit but not really.

You forget the OS needs some memory too.

Quite frankly I don't believe your 2 GB theory.

Again you make yourself a fucking moron, SkyFuck. You're even too stupid
to use a search engine, otherwise it would have pointed your bukkake
face directly to the MS KB reference:

<http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb;en-us;888732&x=10&y=10>

Besides that there ins't *any* game yet that uses more than 2GB. Even
the 64bit versions of FarCry and HL² don't use more than 4GB.
Maybe there is more going on like file caches, graphics caches, etc.

BIG PROBABLITY THERE !

The only BIG PROBABILITY THERE is that is was a failure of your parents
to reproduce. You're not living close to a russian made nuclear power
plant, are you?
Actually excellent theory from myself if I say so myself.

You talking about "excellence" is the same as a blind man talking about
colors.
OS is caching the data the game needs ! :p*

And yes Microsoft is definetly using Windows XP 64 bit for their
websites or related 64 bit windows versions !

LOL.

YOU FUCKING HILARIOUS.

What you think they using: LINUX ?! PUH GOOD JOKE ! =D

Of couse someone who uses it's free time to make love to goats like you
never ever heard that there is WINDOWS SERVER. Besides that until some
years ago the whole MS internet ressources were hosted on Sun servers
running Solaris. No, I don't expect a fucktard like you to know what
Solaris is.

Thinking that someone would rely a huge companies website on a desktop
OS like Windowsxp is just plain silly. The only thing that's bigger than
your infinite stupidity is your ignorance. You already made yourself
looking like an idiot several times, without realizing that people don't
laugh with you - they just laugh about you.

Benjamin
 
L

Lamey

Jan 1, 1970
0
You're a goddamned retard that should be ignored from here on out.

But can you do it obsesso?

--
Usenet lits score:

GIT-R-DONE!
alt.usenet.legends.lamey
http://blu05.port5.com
AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
#20 Usenet asshole
#6 Lits Slut
#9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
<approved by Lionel>
#11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
#1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
#1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
< we all know how well that works...LOL >
Co-inventer of the "Prongtard Yap-Dog Award"

<working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
 
J

JackShephard

Jan 1, 1970
0
Maybe in your part of the country, but I seriously doubt it. I am a system
builder, have been for many years. And no I don't run a store out of my
basement, I have an actual store in downtown, right on the main square. My
sales have doubled every year that I have been open from the previous year,
and yes I do know what I am talking about. 512mb of ram for a basic user is
plenty, only a power user will need more.


Perhaps you are not aware of the minimum requirements for Vista.

Oh and not only that, anyone that only wants email can use their cell
phone. Most "basic users" of PC want it to move faster than a snail.

512MB base memory is extremely lame.
 
J

JackShephard

Jan 1, 1970
0
I am a very impatient person, and require that my machines be very
responsive and run as fast as possible.


Then everything you have said about 512MB systems is bullshit, because
it gives one a snail's pace machine.
 
A

Angry_American

Jan 1, 1970
0
JackShephard said:
Then everything you have said about 512MB systems is bullshit, because
it gives one a snail's pace machine.


512mb is not a snails pace on a XP machine, matter of fact unless you are
running huge apps such as Photoshop you won't notice a difference between
512 and 1gb of ram on a xp machine.

Dan
 
A

Angry_American

Jan 1, 1970
0
JackShephard said:
Perhaps you are not aware of the minimum requirements for Vista.

Sure minimum requirements for Vista is 512mb for the basic version, 1gb for
all other versions, not that I would ever sell a machine with Vista and that
amount of ram. Re-read what I said, 1gb is the minimum in an Vista machine I
will build and sell. The only thing I am contesting is your claim that XP is
slow with 512mb of ram. Minimum requirements for XP are 128mb of ram beleive
it or not.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/editions/systemrequirements.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upgrading/sysreqs.mspx
Oh and not only that, anyone that only wants email can use their cell
phone. Most "basic users" of PC want it to move faster than a snail.

512MB base memory is extremely lame.

Tell that to the home users that only want a basic machine, they have no
need to spend the extra money on the extra ram they will never use, much
less over the top processors and other hardware. And not everyone can check
their mail on a cell phone, take into consideration that a cell phone screen
sucks for reading mail, not all parts of the country have those services
available, and that its expensive as hell for data min. in other areas of
the country. Yes there are still people out there that only need a machine
for email, browsing the internet every now and then, and the occasional card
game.

Dan
 
J

JackShephard

Jan 1, 1970
0
512mb is not a snails pace on a XP machine, matter of fact unless you are
running huge apps such as Photoshop you won't notice a difference between
512 and 1gb of ram on a xp machine.


Total bullshit.

No flash... no java... no decent basic spreadsheet performance,
email... err...e-snail.

You couldn't be more wrong.
 
J

JackShephard

Jan 1, 1970
0
The only thing I am contesting is your claim that XP is
slow with 512mb of ram. Minimum requirements for XP are 128mb of ram beleive
it or not.


Yeah, if all you want to do is sit and look at your desktop and browse
you files. No java... no flash... no active-x... no decent application
performance. Go look at the RECOMMENDED requirements for XP Pro.

BIG DIFFERENCE. Big difference in operation as well.

Hell, try sandra benchmarks. There is a HUGE difference.

You guys are so full of shit claiming there isn't. Just because
something will install and boot doesn't mean it will actually perform
worth a shit.
 
J

JackShephard

Jan 1, 1970
0
Tell that to the home users that only want a basic machine, they have no
need to spend the extra money on the extra ram they will never use,


Bullshit. The difference in price is fucking minuscule!

Unless you are one of those fucktards that has to jack everything up
you sell, and every one you sell it to.
 
K

krw

Jan 1, 1970
0
512mb is not a snails pace on a XP machine, matter of fact unless you are
running huge apps such as Photoshop you won't notice a difference between
512 and 1gb of ram on a xp machine.

I noticed a huge difference between 512MB and 1.5GB on my laptop.
For example, the cold boot time went from about fifteen minutes down
to three. Still :-(
 
M

mr deo

Jan 1, 1970
0
JackShephard said:
Yeah, if all you want to do is sit and look at your desktop and browse
you files. No java... no flash... no active-x... no decent application
performance. Go look at the RECOMMENDED requirements for XP Pro.

BIG DIFFERENCE. Big difference in operation as well.

Hell, try sandra benchmarks. There is a HUGE difference.

You guys are so full of shit claiming there isn't. Just because
something will install and boot doesn't mean it will actually perform
worth a shit.

My phone can run java apps, it doesnt have 4 gig of ram..
sandra benchmarks are partially synthetic..
XP is not nearly as bloated as Vista and 512 is fine for XP as long as your
not running intensive games or intensive apps..
If your going to say that 95% of people play Wow while rendering Autocad
images and ripping dual DVD's while having 18 browser windows open playing
flash movies and lots of active-x scripts running then yea sure, people need
buckloads of ram...

Just FYI, Flash, Active-X, and "most" java apps you come across run fine on
anything greater than a p2, If they dont then they are poorly written flash
or java apps...
(possibly you were meaning directX and not activeX)?
 
Top