| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 7764 | 2001-02-14 06:32:00 | Win2k = no games?? | Guest (0) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 8725 | 2001-02-14 06:32:00 | Is it true that Win2k sux for games?? Is it true that win 98 doesn't make full use of my 256 mbs of ram?? |
Guest (0) | ||
| 8726 | 2001-02-14 09:25:00 | Win2k has its roots in Windows NT - is really NT5 - it is primarily an OS for the business environment not for playing games! | Guest (0) | ||
| 8727 | 2001-02-14 21:13:00 | I run quite a few games under win2k at home. I have a 933 with 256 meg of ram. I do lose about 5 frames per second but when quake 3 runs at 100 fps 5 fps doesnt matter. | Guest (0) | ||
| 8728 | 2001-02-15 01:08:00 | Nothing wrong with Win2k for games, FYI win2k has roots in 95,98 and NT... Win98 will handle 256 mb ram fine, but there is a point whereby adding more ram to your system doesn't correspond with a marked performance increase.. Due to the limitations of the OS to address quantities of ram.. |
Guest (0) | ||
| 1 | |||||