| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 39330 | 2003-11-03 04:54:00 | win98 and new p4 system | xerxes3 (4810) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 188885 | 2003-11-04 02:16:00 | That's true, but isn't it better to be able to utilise it? Otherwise why bother buying a Pentium CPU based machine? Lo. |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 188886 | 2003-11-04 02:57:00 | progs written with HT in mind will run a lot better but other non HT app can sometimes run SLOWER with HT turned on. personally i don't think HT is a big deal unless a lot of programs support it or can run faster with it on. |
tweak'e (174) | ||
| 188887 | 2003-11-04 20:12:00 | XP isnt exactly a bloated OS in the first place, it will run brilliantly on the hardware you're looking at, as well as being much much more stable than 98. 98, in my opinion, is only worth using on sub 500mhz machines with less than 256mb of ram, if you have anything faster than 2k/XP is the way to go. |
sanchez (3445) | ||
| 188888 | 2003-11-04 20:33:00 | so far the only program i know of that supports HT is the new versiono of Photoshop, might be wrong but thats what i heard. | Budda (2736) | ||
| 188889 | 2003-11-04 20:35:00 | Well when I benchmarked my video card under Win2K, I was approx 300 marks lower than under XP. Same drivers, same card, same timings. Both OS installs were fresh installs, and both using DX9.0b and 3DMark03. Lo. |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 188890 | 2003-11-05 08:51:00 | will be using p/shp and other graphic stuffso after these informative responses - i'll go with xp! | xerxes3 (4810) | ||
| 188891 | 2003-11-06 00:04:00 | a wise choice, putting 98 on such a nice pc would be almost irresponsible ;) | sanchez (3445) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||