(25/05/2010 01:52 AM)Tetris999 Wrote:  You just sound like you really REALLY hate apple; i just get whatever i see that is useful and promising.

I love tech, not microsoft or apple.

I love my iPod Nano G3 D:

(25/05/2010 12:29 AM)Assassinator Wrote:  It's not just the processor, you'll be using slow ram, slow HDD, slow everything else.  In the end, it'll be very likely much slower than your Atom netbook.

Hardly.  RAM has barely increased in speed over the past 8 or so years.  By speed, I mean latency.  The revisions increase throughput, but not latency.
And I'm running DDR2 667MHz RAM, which is like equivalent to 333MHz DDR1.
Anyway, RAM speed doesn't even have that much impact due to CPU manufacturers including all that cache.

Same thing with HDDs.  Have been running at 7200rpm for ages now.  Larger drives have higher densities, which means faster reads/writes, but does absolutely nothing to help latency, which is the primary speed issue in both HDDs and RAM.

(25/05/2010 12:34 AM)Tetris999 Wrote:  I meant to say 128MB of video ram + 1.5 DDR RAM.

That's actually a pretty good system in those days (you must've upgraded?).
I know in early 2006 when I bought my computer, 128MB graphics was fairly standard, as was 512MB-1GB of DDR1 RAM.

(25/05/2010 12:34 AM)Tetris999 Wrote:  The first pentium 4 codenamed williamette; was released in 2000, but since I'm not an donkey, i verified my CPU to be the northwood chipset with the 130 nanometer build; so i guess this computer is 8 years old, which is still a pretty old machine anyway...

Must've missed something then.  Either that, or no-one was using those chips in those days.  Or maybe it's Australia lagging behind the world, cause I recall only seeing Northwood (P4C) chips in store around late 2002.
I believe HT was introduced in Northwood.

Either case, it was "current generation" until 2004, and even then, still buyable until around 2005-6 in stores before finally being phased out.  It's not that old.


I got my PSP in 2005.  I hardly consider it "old" :P

(25/05/2010 02:31 AM)ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:  

(25/05/2010 12:34 AM)Tetris999 Wrote:  I meant to say 128MB of video ram + 1.5 DDR RAM.

That's actually a pretty good system in those days (you must've upgraded?).
I know in early 2006 when I bought my computer, 128MB graphics was fairly standard, as was 512MB-1GB of DDR1 RAM.

i did upgrade it, the system came with 512 MB's of ram and a 64 MB Nvidia Graphics Card. :P

I still wub it though.