Messages

Haven't seen too many comparisons, but there is this one showing both GTX and the 640MB GTS benched both in single and SLI modes: Link

It varies with the title, but the trend seems to be that the GTX performs about halfway between the single and SLI speeds of the GTS.  Additionally, SLI in most games yields far less than the 40-50% performance increase you might hope for. 

On a pragmatic note, the variance in costs (2 GTS v. 1 GTX) seems to coincide neatly with the performance.  For myself, that amount of extra performance isn't worth the extra troubleshooting, noise, heat, and power consumption. 

I found it quite entertaining until you threatened to be relevant.

Driver support for Vista's still pretty iffy, but nVidia's been concentrating on both Vista and it's 8800-series drivers for all of '07 so far, so things should smooth out soon.

Yeah, Vista gaming performance is shit, but since you're going for an SLI 8800 rig, the performance should more than make up for it.  Although, SLI was never 100% reliable in XP so I'd expect occasional incompatibilities in Vista for the near future. 

The one change I'd make (aside from motherboard/case + adding a dedicated sound card.. personal preferences, really) is to drop the 8800 GTSes in favor of a single GTX.  It would be cheaper, more reliable, keep your temperatures lower, noise lower, consume less power, and provide nearly the average performance benefit of SLI once games actually make real use of the DX10 features. 

Vista/DX10 require more video resources be shared with the OS and applications.  To compensate, a portion of system RAM is attributed to the video card.  In my setup, for example, my 256MB card is reported as 520MB w/ nearly half that being temporary swap with system RAM. 

So, the largest bottleneck is going to be the RAM architecture as well as reliance upon slower DDR2 versus GDDR3.  You're not just talking clock-speed difference with the GTS versus GTX either.  You're talking reduced memory bus bandwidth, smaller memory size, reduced processing streams, along with the reduce clock and memory speeds.  The GTS is very much a budget card, with even more castration versus the higher-end models than the 7900-series had. 

The caveat is the size of the card - I'd choose the GTX knowing that it would fit in my current case, but I'm not sure about the one in your list (mine's a little bigger longer I think).

It's interesting as a visual IM-type program, but if I were going to chat via text, I'd rather use IRC or IM.  If I were going to chat via voice, I'd rather use a cellphone or skype.  There's a relative degree of anonymity to this, but chatting with anonymous people tends to get old rather fast (also showing the Sony's not as paranoid about the whole e-stalker potential as Nintendo). 

What I find interesting about the presentation (and hasn't been brought up too much) is that it's supposed to be a mirror of real-life (although a miniaturized carnival mirror at best) and will bring along many of the same downsides: advertising plastered everywhere and the capability to dress nicer, have a nicer place, and have more access to cool stuff if you've got the cash for it.  So, are we going to see gorgeous mansion spreads decorated by the bored and moderately wealthy while budget gamers are relegated to rooting through trashcans for empty Sony Cola cans?

Isn't there a new version coming with Vista?

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: Fuck no.

It's the same old program.  Without a comprehensively nit-picky comparison, it seems to be the same version as XP's.

I dig the movie as well, but for some of the same and some differing reasons.

I can't say I enjoyed it (maybe captured by it?), for the reasons you mention.  The reactions of the kids as well as the different paths they choose in the situation seemed - if not realistic - to convey a much greater depth than most horror or action filmes I've seen.

The aspect I did actually enjoy was the b-movie style of it.  It was very campy and, in its own way, bitterly amusing. 

It seems a bit like the Lord of the Flies story.  However, LotF was written as rebuttal to the "Noble Savage" philosophy and BR was some of that, but more in keeping with story trends like about survival, resourcefulness, and what happens when character (weak or strong) battles dire circumstances.  It also seemed to have a theme in keeping with "Those that fail to learn the lessons of history . . . " and a kind of, "Sins of the fathers shall be visited . . . " 

I halfway want to read far too deeply into it before reminding myself how campy it is.  Where LotF was more hyperbolic in the speed and severity of the children's actions, BF was more hyperbolic in the scenario, yet with more realistic reactions, I think.

It's all due to the upscaling.  It can't display 320x240, so it has to resize the image to the native resolution. 

One other thing you can try is adjusting how it does this.  I haven't got an ATI card, but nVidia's control panel lets you choose whether the monitor or card does the upscaling (though I don't see a lot of difference). 

Best solution's probably to either run a game as close as possible to the native (like your trying 640x480), or running in a window (though it'll be really tiny compared to the whole monitor res). 

It's definitely one of the downsides to LCDs... that and ghosting for those of us with POS ones.

There ya go..  an apology.  Now stop gang-raping the 12 year-old.

There's a handy option in the profile settings for ignoring PM's.  Every major IM app has some sort of block/ignore feature.  Just as with asinine waste-of-everybody's-time threads, I'm not sure why people keep bumping these things giving somebody a pulpit (smirking at my own hypocrisy as I type this). 

He asked for help, and was rude (though a couple of the immediate responses weren't entirely polite).  That's enough reason to ignore the thread.  If it continues to be bumped or new ones started, there's always allowing the situation to be handled by moderators.  If he could just figure out how to interact with people, we might be able to help him (as well as potentially other people).  I for one, am glad for his age.  A 12 year-old trying out an older game? The interest is admirable, and the patience for these is lacking in most 12 year-olds I've met.

To VD: If you retried your question while including each step of your attempt, then people might be able to help versus guessing what you're getting at  (e.g. "Computer has no sound" - all applications or just BASS? Avoid phrases like "Computer won't let me," and try, "I save the file, try to run it and I get an error," or, "It won't let me save it.").

I'm both dreading and anticipating Indy 4.  Despite a fear that it'll blow (the previous 3 weren't actually "Good" movies, but thoroughly enjoyable all the same (before getting slammed for the "Good" remark, know that I own the box set)) I'll watch it regardless.

That CGI whip thing scares me.  Once they do that, I get this feeling that we'll see a whip seemingly moving of its own accord, twining itself around people's necks and whipping them back and forth like a flail..  potentially into other adversaries.  *shudder*  It's just too easy to visualize this happening.

If it's very close, you could try overburning support.  You can enable that in the Nero options.  It uses the spare writeable area (CDs/DVDs are spec'd to be writeable for *at least* their labeled amount (700MB, 4.7GB, etc.)) the risks are potentially unreadable media and/or damage to the drive (I've used overburning off & on for 4 years with about 10 different drives and have only had unreadable media results at worst).

Other than that.. Nero's gonna go by the file length.. it reencodes the video from whatever to MPEG-1 (or MPEG-II for SuperVCD) and that'll be by playing length.  You could use another app to trim off a bit to make it fit, but any other app you use will encode to approximately the same size since it'll be the same codec. 

It has a cool-factor as far as gimmicks are concerned, but I'd really like to see the concept refined to having practical value.  The first thing that popped into my head while reading the idea was an adventure/rpg during which the more you succeeded in the game and role-played (i.e. not doing things like slaughtered a vendor on the street in order to acquire more potions or other things you probably wouldn't do if it were real life), the more immersed you became.  That is, the environment became more textures, the people animations more life-like, and the sound less tinny - surrounding you more and increasing the ambient factor. 

The net result being that the world came more alive to you and your perception seemed to increase the deeper you immersed yourself in the world.

It could also be more practical as far as technical details are concerned.  If you're the type of player that stops "to smell the roses" then you wouldn't require the low-polygon/high-framerate gameplay of the action-based type that might always be running about and mowing down enemies.

I think you're confusing sentiments, Andail.  There is a difference between blindly proclaiming that we ought to support our troops, particularly when it's declared as a knee-jerk reaction to some perceived insult or "anti-patriotic" sentiment and supporting individuals that (while you might not agree with their actions) at least seem to be doing the wrong things for the right reasons. Likewise, supporting those who actually think they're doing something to help (and might be accomplishing something) versus those who are bragging about their conquests doesn't seem entirely warmongering. 

I will not blindly support every last troop in Iraq, but I have known several who've gone and returned, or gone and will never return that were good men.  From what I know of their character, they wouldn't have stooped to a default to violence, would protect innocents of the "enemy" side even at the risk of provoking their superiors and lead a perfectly normal and non-depraved life outside of their service. 

The reasons for joining military service are varied.  From having joined, served, and honorably discharged, I can speak from experience on this one.  In an economy that makes it difficult to support one's family, particularly providing health benefits, it made sense to me to join for the sake of my family, particularly during a more peaceful time when the likelihood that I would have to make decisions based upon my morality was minimal.  I'm enough of a non-violent person, that I had difficulty going to practice at the rifle range using silhouetted semi-human-shaped targets - not because the target-shooting wasn't enjoyable, but because I was forced to recall why I was training in the first place. 

On a different note, I'm surprised that more people aren't called out for their questioning of people's patriotism.  It's incredibly hypocritical to proclaim that you're patriotic and that you're also against fanatics (as the patriots would refer to the small percentage of Muslims that are fundamentalist jihadists).  Since patriotism refers to zealously defending one's nation, even at the cost of one's personal interests (i.e. being fanatical themselves) - often even blindly jumping to the defense of it, it disgusts me that it becomes the default verbal position while they condemn Iraqi nationalists in debate yet live their lives in such an apathetic fashion. 

Also, I appreciate Helm's raving response.  There were a couple of declarations of when it was acceptable..  no, necessary to enter military conflict that defined my feelings on the matter more succinctly than I've been able to thus far.  I've realized that it isn't practical to do away with the military and stay out of all conflict, but feel stupid for not having been able to phrase my stance on when it's necessary in so few words.
[edited. My grammar's going to shit]

quote]

I like it.  The strikes against it you already touched upon though.  How does the US gain an ally for rebuilding when other nations don't want to be associated with the conflict.  Even if they manage to disassociate themselves from it, that doesn't make it any more appealing to place their citizens in harm's way. 

For some time now, Iraq has been able to be referred to as a mistake without losing the agreement of half the country (only 15% or so at the moment).  However, both sides agree that if we were to withdrawl completely at the moment, the Iraqi security forces wouldn't be able to keep things together and all-out civil war would be imminent. 

If the US could figure out a tactful way to announce that we've commited enough resources thus far and its time for the Iraqis to take the reins - thus we're pulling our troops out in X months.  If the UN or a specific nation has a problem with us doing so, they can feel free to contribute numbers to this multi-national rebuilding force. 

Strawmen. It's not my reaction that is the point, but rather those characterised as children in your analogy. I'm not getting offended on their behalf, I'm just pointing out that some Americans in general and Mr Bush in particular have let slip words like "Crusade" and "Axis of Evil" that have caused huge offence. It was presented in jest, because I know from your previous posts which side of the line in the sand you tend to stand on, but there was a serious point there too: when there is already so much hatred of America in Arab countries, you've got to be very careful not to offend. And invading the whole fucking country is hardly careful.

Looking back now, it would've perhaps been wiser to add that I was in no away attempting to insinuate that the US knew best or that the Middle East is full of children in need of guidance.  However, I won't pretend that I've got that amount of foresight. 

And Farl...  leaving is anyone's choice, but you're going to leave over forum posts?  Specifically *this* thread?  Why not simply avoid talking politics or religion if that's where you have contention?  I have several friends and family members with whom I won't discuss either. 

This forum, this thread is a general forum of an amateur game-making site.  I don't see why anyone would write thinking that they would change anyone's mind, or even be taken the correct way when writing plain text.  I don't write because I think it's important socially, or because I think my opinions are important enough that they need to be expressed to international strangers.  I do so because it interests me and is often quite educational.  Here's hoping you just mean that you're leaving forum activity. 

And I think it's annoying and presumptuous to readily brandish racial stereotypes based on what appears be a deliberate mischaracterization of one person's analogy.

And that I appreciate.  I'll even forgive the initial response that reassigned my gender.

SSH, are you ageist? Do you believe adults are somehow better than children?  If you were to skew my analogy in a semi-literal fashion, you could have as readily noted that children are also symbolic of potential, innocence, and -of course- youth (being a younger nation than the US). 

Initially, I thought your response was joking.. maybe it's the avatar that leads me to that as default.  Reading the subsequent replies, I'm disappointed.  An analogy is using two dissimilar things to demonstrate their similarity.  In the case of mine, it was the situation - not the ages involved.  Likewise, I spent the entire post painting the Adults/US as ignorant and arrogant assuming they'd be able to fix a situation without knowing anything about it. 

How did you manage to skim it so shallowly that you only took away a spirit of condescension?  Regarding the conflict, I believe we're on the same side of the metaphorical line in the sand (which does come closer to having a literal counterpart than my analogy). 

I've read a lot about hindsight, and about high-minded ideals.  While it bleeds a little into conspiracy theory territory, the documented doctrines of organizations related to the current administration are at least circumstantial evidence that this conflict was not an act of misunderstanding, but of misleading in order to justify an invasion (referring to the infamous PNAC document).  Regarding hindsight, I was serving at an airstation during September 11th, and while we were standing by shocked by the news broadcasts, every last person in my workcenter was assuming we'd end up going after Saddam - not because we defaulted to assuming he had something to do with it, but because we all felt that our government would want to return and resume what was halted after Desert Storm. 

Regarding American arrogance or blind assumptions that I promote aspects the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, I was proudest of my country when we'd avoided conflict for some time and the perception (at least of the public) was that the only conflicts we'd entered had roots in noble ideals even if they had selfish tangential motivations (i.e. Aiding Kuwait during invasion v. securing oil interests).  At least one could attempt to defend their country in arguments with the "Well, we meant well, even if we probably wouldn't have interfered if it hadn't been that region".  In this conflict, all the justifications and semi-moral reasonings were inserted well after the stages of conflict in order to placate the American people.

The perception that because half the nation supports the conflict & administration (doing some research, I think you'll find the number much lower today) means they believe in a "US knows best" policy is misguided at best.  The portion of the country supporting the conflict is mislead, ignorant of facts, or stupidly trusting due to apathetic patriotism. 

"Support our troops?" Most definitely, for the reasons DG mentioned.  I came very damned close to being retained in the military after my contractual obligation had ended, and I fully realize that I could very well have been over there (unless I'd had the fortitude to risk jail time).  They're doing what they're told, trusting or hoping that their superiors are right, and having faith that they wouldn't be told to do anything intrinsically immoral (whether that faith is religious or patriotic). 

If I were to apply my analogy towards people regularly posting here, I might've previously applied the moniker of "Adult" to SSH as he's got a tendency to shake his head patiently at some of the quibbling of the "Children" here.  Now, once again, I need to adjust my perception of vague on-line identities.

A matter I was just talking about this evening.  I don't know of a single "real" buffet within 30 miles of my home and find that it's one thing I miss about the South.  Golden Corral is sub-par food but I do miss it.

Do I think that the Iraq war is helping American Freedom? Not yet. But I believe it's a step in trying to remove some Anti-Americanism, and Anti-Western sentiment in that area.

I wish I could believe that this were actually the case.  No amount of ignorance or optimism I can summon will sway my opinion in this matter.  We were guided there under several false pretenses.  If there is a useful humanitarian effort, it is merely consequential and due in large part to the men and women in uniform and not those above them. 

We've stepped into the country oblivious to the social and political issues of the reason, with our leadership making decisions without even being aware that the Iraqi people weren't all "the same kind o' Muslim".  We're like an uninformed adult stepping into a dispute among neighborhood kids without knowing their individual personalities and history.  Even if we keep the peace by promoting one group over another or getting them to shake hands, the rest of the kids aren't likely to turn away satisfied.

I like the subtlety.

It's Bulgarian.  It's tough trying to find a competent Bulgarian translation site though.  A lot of the tech words are the same as Russian (being a phonetic conversion of words like "Forum") so if you're looking for the gist you might try Rus->Eng.  For more translation subject material, click the FAQ link at the top.