|
Re: Hare, version 1.1 (Community)
Re: Hare, version 1.1 // Community
Apr 21, 2001, 1:59pm
I'm honestly not worried about burning it out. They only cost pocket change to replace. And in a couple years I intend to have a
10GHz processor on muh desk to play with :)
[View Quote]"sw chris" <chrisw10 at nckcn.com> wrote in message news:3ae10f1c at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> lol 71%!? My poor old PIII 733 wont' even go up to 800 without goofing up
> Windows... Bah, anyways that thing'll burn out in a couple years, at
> least. =P
>
> SW Chris
>
> "wing" <bathgate at prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:3ae00dad at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> of hardware, it doesn't even make any difference on my
> equipment, my ONLY Intel box is somewhat of a science
> 1200 standard, I just force mine too, and it does so
> onboard benchmark shows a 170% speed increase for my
> RAM to keep it within range of sensibility. This, in all
> takes a long time to load on their ficticious computer.
> blank document. This remains EXACTLY the same. Tribes 2
> 1280x1024x32. With Hare, I get 65FPS, apparently because it's
> K6-2 300 with a TNT2 Vanta LT and 128mb RAM. If you can't
> could probably make a FORTUNE selling that to eMachines
> to find among most of us here. As soon as I get the time,
> Also, whats up with telling you to reboot every 16 hours
> longer than 16 hours if all it's technical issues are
> systems with extreme technical issues anyway. I do NOT
> not. I either prove or disprove claims and I can smell a lie
> news:3ADFDA6D.67782E95 at sk.sympatico.ca...
> 1200... and if you read the PR Spin >you'l see it says 'up
> you'v already >decided it won't work...
>
>
|
|
