|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12052 |  KimChi (49) Sep 01, 2006 - 06:42 pm
| I don't need a "real test" to pass judgement.
There's NO WAY I would endorse buying a $280 network card when you'd get MUCH Better return spending that on a faster CPU or Graphics cards.
This card's MAIN POINT is TCP/UDP _OFFLOAD_. If you spent $280 on a faster CPU, your CPU wouldn't need to offload _AND_ it'll have enough cycles to spare to keep the frame rates high. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12052 | KimChi (49) Sep 01, 2006 - 06:40 pm » Edited on Sep 01, 2006 - 06:51 pm
| I bet that shiny chrome claw is 75% of this NIC's cost. It's able to skim network packets off its smooth shiny surface, thereby accelerating them!!
And the heatsink helps to keep those packets cool, which in turn shrinks their packet headers and allow them to flow through network cables and the intertron smoother!
EDIT: Garsh! I can't wait for the water and peltier combination cooler version of this card! You can DEEP FREEZE the packets in CRYOSTASIS, thereby making them FREEZE IN TIME. By the time they reach the game server, they'll thaw out and it'll be like the packets were never on the wire! I'LL HAVE 0ms PINGS!!! All hail ME, the ULTRA LOW PING BASTIGE (ULPB)!!
I don't work for them, I'm just an eXXXXXXXXXXXtreme hardcore gamer who can't wait for the $1000 version of the DEEP FREEZE card!
OOPS! I think I just violated my NDA! Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12038 | KimChi (49) Aug 31, 2006 - 10:42 pm » Edited on Aug 31, 2006 - 10:47 pm
| If the price was about $50, I'd consider it.
But $280 is WAY too much. I don't care how much this card can off-load UDP/TCP traffic and have automated QoS for game traffic, $280 is NOT worth shaving 10ms off a distant game server w/ a 94ms ping.
Save yourself the cash and play on a server within your state.
OR, use the money to get a better video card. That'll do more to smooth your gameplay during graphics heavy fire fights. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11926 | KimChi (49) Aug 26, 2006 - 10:36 am
| With all the great advancement in graphical prowess of Vista, Halo 2 on PC still looks like a higher res version of the Xbox 1 release.
The least they could have done is added more detail to the textures, upped the poly detail of levesl and characters and revamped the flat color theme.
I'd like to have seen the Master Chief's armor on par with the version seen in Dead or Alive 4 (yeah yeah, I know that one is a girl, but Team Ninja's interpretation is pimp). Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=11240 | KimChi (49) Jul 20, 2006 - 10:27 pm » Edited on Jul 20, 2006 - 10:28 pm
| Due to the time in designing new CPUs, there's no doubt AMD saw a quad core coming from Intel. Even AMD themselves planned to released its 4x4 in hopes of countering the Core 2 Duo.
However, AMD probably did not expect Intel to get such great yields, let alone be able to ramp up production.
And, production is a major bottle neck for AMD. The reason they trimmed down their product line was to free up fab production space for their new line.
I think AMD will be hurting for the next year and half. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=10604 | KimChi (49) Jun 08, 2006 - 10:43 pm » Edited on Jun 08, 2006 - 10:41 pm
| Smoke, how about you learn to freaken read before tossing your useless contribution into the thread?
First off, you can make a good bet that Vista is still based on NT tech. MS claimed XP was a rebuild, but its still based on NT. One of the great and MAIN changes I was looking forward to was Vista's new file system. BUT, it was taken out.
Second, the reason each subsequent windows versions are so bloated is due to MS trying to keep everything backwards compatible. This is also one of the main vectors of security vulnerabilities.
Finally, there is absolutely NOTHING that Vista does that XP can't do. Theyonly reason XP can't run certain components is because MS is coding Vista exclusivity into them (DX10 anyone?).
So go Smoke your weed and sit on a knife. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=10604 | KimChi (49) Jun 08, 2006 - 12:31 am » Edited on Jun 08, 2006 - 12:40 am
| Windows should indeed change and improve. However, it should change and improve in stability, security, useability and technology.
Can you list the true benefits of "Aero" UI?
Yes, I was alive back when the original NES was released. I was alive and played on the Commodore64. I had to config a DOS 5.25" floppy bootdisks to play Starflight 1 on my IBM clone BEFORE the 386 series Intels were released.
In each next-gen CONSOLE iteration, there was a LEAP in graphics and processing power. Graphics horsepower actually matters in game consoles. For an OS's basic functions, all it does is suck up memory and cpu cycles.
Using your metaphore, there isn't much to gain by upgrading from XP to Vista. ESPECIALLY when you consider the hardware upgrade price. All you get is BLOATED software that is ALL GLITZ and NO GLORY. 64-bit support? WinXP-64 is already here. AERO? You can get quite close with the XP addon. What else? DRM? Whoopty-F'ing'-DO!
So, why don't you take advice from your own name and CASTRATE yourself!
EDIT: If MS really wants to make leaps and bounds, they should build an OS from the GROUND UP to get away from the insecure framework that is inherant in making it backwards compatible.
And, Castrator, if you bring up the silly metaphore of "Should we also have protested PS2's backward compatibility!?" you belong in the alley way, giving hand jobs for smack. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=10528 | KimChi (49) Jun 05, 2006 - 09:10 am
| Some interesting choices for an HTPC.
I'd personally wait a lil longere for Intel's Conroe (Core 2 Duo) chips and mobos. A mATX mobo based around a laptop's chipset would make a fully silent setup possible with the additional option to overclock easily with quiet air flow.
Also, I would have rather gone with Antec's NSK2400 case since you've already chosen a mATX board. The Thermaltake's case is nothing but a tower case on its side, where as the NSK2400 is intelligently designed with silent operation in mind.
Certainly, a TV tuner with an integrated hardware encoder should have been in there too.
I'd suggest writing a part 2 article giving your readers more options available for various levels of HTPC, be it a full blown terabyte super HTPC with six tuners to a simple SDTV DVR. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=10496 | KimChi (49) May 31, 2006 - 10:45 pm
| » Ping is NOT an accurate measurement of QoS
First off, Ping is an ICMP packet and does NOT have the overhead of a TCP/IP connection, which has to deal with handshakes, retrans, server/network/client delays, and roundtrip delays.
Ping is also a small packet, which network devices are usually designed to accelerate for an illusion of a faster network device. If there's a QoS traffic shaping, it may even be pushed to the front of a queue.
Finally, due to the above, ping can take a dramatically different route across the intertron than a TCP/IP packet. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
|
|
|
