They both suck so bad, it won't make a difference. You won't be able to play any games from after 2003 in anything more than 1024*768 without going below 30FPS consistently.Originally Posted by Elysia
They both suck so bad, it won't make a difference. You won't be able to play any games from after 2003 in anything more than 1024*768 without going below 30FPS consistently.
How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
If I told you I don't know, would that surprise you?
It was being advertised in the computer specifications at the shop as being a 7300 GS (512Mb). When I installed it with the shipping drivers, it said 7300 GS (128Mb) which is what shows during post. And now that I updated to the latest NVidia drivers, it is showing as 7300 SE / 7200 GS under Windows XP. I don't know anymore what I have...
Edit: Bah! Misunderstood your question. The onboard card is a Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950 (224Mb shared). Supports Pixel Shader 2.0 and DirectX 9.
Last edited by Mario F.; 06-08-2008 at 12:57 PM.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
