Author Topic: Do you use an x86 based machine? (Read 7168 times)

plexus · « **Reply #74 from previous page:** August 27, 2003, 08:28:16 PM »

I Dont going to use Microsoft crap no more in my life!

I use Linux on my AmigaOne XE Gç 800 Mhz and waiting for AmigaOS 4.0................

For Game its only one Machine for me! (Game Cube from Nintendo with PPC cpu.)

I promiss my self that i will never ever tuch a Micro Crap computer again!

/ Plexus

Marky_D_Sahd · « **Reply #75 on:** August 27, 2003, 08:43:06 PM »

At school, I use a PeeCee that was purchased second hand eight years ago, runs (badly) Windows 98, HATES uogrades, and crashes while powering down.
At home, I use an A4000T and an AOne, the latter running Linux, and I have to confess, I'm just a little tickled by seeing Scala running on UAE.

Hammer · « **Reply #76 on:** August 31, 2003, 07:48:19 AM »

Quote

64 bit windows has yet to be really made a mainstream platform and I doubt it really will be until the "next" version of windows which is at least 2 years away.

The MS Windows 2003 Server AMD64 Edition is planned be released as the next Service Pack 1(SP1) release (for MS Windows 2003 Server X86-32). The same can be true for Windows XP X86-32 Edition. MS Windows AMD64's project name refers as “Anvil” (same name as MS’s games label).

More AMD64 Windows XP/2003 refer to
http://download.microsoft.com/download/c/f/1/cf1806ad-5a4f-4f7d-a5b2-07fdb59a7adb/WH03_TPA56.exe

The next 2 year major release refers to the Windows “Longhorn”.

Hammer · « **Reply #77 on:** August 31, 2003, 07:54:43 AM »

Quote

DonnyEMU wrote:
OMG what a very weird viewpoint... No one runs NT anymore it doesn't even support DirectX (the windows gaming API wasn't introduced into NT technologies (beyond direct draw) till Windows 2000). So no NT 4 isn't even a choice for gaming. NT at that time was soley for file servers and enterprise useage.

Note that, MS Windows NT 4.0(SP6) (X86-32) can run OpenGL games (e.g. Quake series)…

Jiffy · « **Reply #78 on:** September 02, 2003, 10:14:01 AM »

I use several x86 machines at home, some of them with Win2k, some of them with different Linux distibutions. All in all, I have about 15 computers in current use (including the ones from the kids), which can be divided in Win2k workstations (6), Linux servers/router (4) and pure hobbymachines (SX64, C128, A1200, A2000 and a 486 pc with dos & WfW3.11).

Mad-Matt · « **Reply #79 on:** September 02, 2003, 11:46:24 AM »

Re: Do you use an x86 based machine?
by DonnyEMU on 2003/8/27 17:18:04

Good Choice on the Geforce FX5900 Ultra. I got one of these at a DX9 show. It is truly the most state of the art consumer gaming card out there.

----------------------------------------
There really a good choice if ya like a limited gameing experiance with massive driver troubles and the current gforcefx line are no good if you want to play dx9 games with any speed. The Rad9800 is the current best game card outthere and the only ati's latest cards have enough instructions so play HalfLife2 properly which is what everyonwe wants right ?

poktis · « **Reply #80 on:** September 02, 2003, 12:42:42 PM »

Main system :
PC Pentium 4 / 3 Ghz C, 1Gb RAM
Windows 2000 Pro.
Usage : audio (analogic and virtual synths)

Other systems :
PC Pentium II / 350 Mhz, 256 Mb RAM
Linux DEBIAN dvd version
Usage : databases, dev

Amiga 1200 (Blizzard card), 32 Mb RAM
OS 3.1
Usage : audio (symphonie pro+dsp)

2x A500 (with expansion cards)

Lozrus · « **Reply #81 on:** September 02, 2003, 04:59:53 PM »

I just have an Acer Alpha550 Laptop with a 1GHz PIII processor, 370mb RAM, Win XP and a very nice 15" 1400x1050 display.

I honestly get on with WinXP better than any previous version (except perhaps Win2k) once all of the eye candy and other rubbish is dissabled.

I also run Connectix VirtualPC and use that to host Vector Linux 4rc2 (under which I'm currently playing a lot with AROS), QNX Neutrino (I'm currently playing with it as I might need to do some printer driver development) and Windows NT4 and 98 (tor compatibility testing mostly).
I also tend to use WinUAE quite a bit.

I also own 1 dead A1200, 2 good ones and 2 A1000's. Unfortunately I seem to have the touch of death when it comes to Amiga accellerator cards so they are all now barely expanded and, as a result, barely used.

I seriously hope my next machine with be an AmigaOne with AOS4 but MOS certainly looks tempting too.....

Amiga1200PPC · « **Reply #82 on:** September 02, 2003, 05:06:58 PM »

Isch habe gar kein PC privat.
Amiga 1200 BPPC und Pegasos only here!

fx · « **Reply #83 on:** September 02, 2003, 05:36:10 PM »

i have loads of computers, my main system is currently a newly bought laptop. specs:

intel celeron mobile 2ghz
256mb ram
20gb hd
cdrw/dvd

and it's for the moment running xp home edition since that's what it came installed with but I am gonna install debian linux or maybe gentoo linux on it some day soon.

my old pc is:
p2 333mhz
128mb ram
120gb hd

it's running xp and i'm using it as storage for the moment. will become my new server.

my current server:

pentium 75
24mb ram
3.5gb hd

which is running debian and giving my other computers internet access. will be thrown out once I have made the 333mhz server.

other computers i have is an old 486 dx2 75mhz laptop with 24mb ram which runs debian.

a pentium 233mmx with 64mb ram and win98, soon to be given away i think since i don't have any use for it.

an pentium 90 in a really huge server chassi which i currently does not use, might give it to someone.

a 486 dx4 100mhz unused.

and then the amigas (although not x86):

my main amiga:

a4000 desktop
apollo 4040
2mb chip + 28mb fast
currently a 520mb hd but i have a 18gb just waiting to be installed in it.

i also have:

a2000
1mb chip + 4mb fast
20mb xt hd

a500
512kb chip, 512kb fast
action replay mk2

a600
2mb chip
120mb hd
cnet ethernet card (pcmcia)

cd32

and i also have two working c64's

ltstanfo · « **Reply #84 on:** September 02, 2003, 07:38:46 PM »

Main Home PC:
Intel Pentium 4@2.2Ghz
Windows 2000
768MB RAM
GeForce 3 video (soon to be ATI AIW 9800 Pro)

Travel PC:
Sony VAIO P4@2.0Ghz
Windows XP Pro (I have had ZERO problems with XP)

As for my "vintage" AMIGA (rarely used these days):
C= (NOT ESCOM) A4000T (serial number 16)
P5 Cyberstorm Mk3 with Cybervision
OS3.1 and OS3.9
256MB RAM
60GB HD (total)

Regards,
Lee Stanford

DonnyEMU · « **Reply #85 on:** September 04, 2003, 05:50:00 AM »

I was very aware of that back in 1994 during Microsoft Multimedia Developer Training in Redmond itself. But 99% of the games people run are direct X based games. I would imagine though that even though Quake will run, how OGL interfaces with Onscreen/off screen buffers that it's is just not optimal. Direct X 1.0 (which they are up to v 9 now) wasn't really available beyond a service pack hack to open a direct draw surface. The on and off screen buffer writes on direct draw and Open GL under NT would kill any decent frame rates.

The point is just that most people who are gamers wouldn't even try to game on such a system. At the time Microsoft considered NT to just be enterprise server and workstation class products with NO need to run games on it.

OpenGL was hillarious under NT 4 the PIPES screensaver just crawls. Even Microsoft admited it was just there to say that NT could compete as a graphics workstation (and went on to inspire an industry that competed well against SGI)...

-Don

DonnyEMU · « **Reply #86 on:** September 04, 2003, 05:59:25 AM »

For anyone who uses XP hates their boot times thinks XP sucks, I suggest that you do the following..

1) Download and buy Tweak XP Pro, besides booting your machine faster it will tweak every aspect of your computer for better performance. I really can't recommend this piece of software enough. It stops pop ups optimizes your net connection overclocks your graphics processor etc..

It can be had at:

Total Idea Software's Tweak XP Pro

mikeymike · « **Reply #87 on:** September 04, 2003, 08:23:04 AM »

Quote

OpenGL was hillarious under NT 4 the PIPES screensaver just crawls. Even Microsoft admited it was just there to say that NT could compete as a graphics workstation (and went on to inspire an industry that competed well against SGI)...

How long ago did you try this? I used to play Quake 3 / Counterstrike under NT4, no difference in frame rates between that any other Windows OS...

Also, the pipes screensaver draws in OpenGL without hardware acceleration. YMMV. Seriously. :-) Having said that, it doesn't use hardware acceleration on any Windows OS.

Hammer · « **Reply #88 on:** September 04, 2003, 09:41:42 AM »

Quote

OpenGL was hillarious under NT 4 the PIPES screensaver just crawls. Even Microsoft admited it was just there to say that NT could compete as a graphics workstation (and went on to inspire an industry that competed well against SGI)...

Dependant on the installed GPU hardware… I still remember the University LAN parties running on Windows NT 4.0.

**QuakeII/QuakeIII and mods....

Spidey · « **Reply #89 on:** September 04, 2003, 11:18:00 AM »

Hi iamaboringperson,

As main-system I've got:

Pegasos with MorphOS1.4 (great upgrade compared with version 1.3 :-))
512 RAM
40 GB HD
ATI Radeon 9000 64 MB
CD-Rewriter
DVD-ROM (DVD-Writer when there's software available for it)

Secondary system (until recently this was my main system):

A1200
Blizzard 040/40 64 MB
CD-Writer
CD-ROM
Various HD's and hardware upgrades :-)

Unfortunately since recently (2 weeks now):

Cyrix 300 MHz
64 MB
Win98
Simple 8 MB GFX-card
No sound

My first PC at home :-(
I use this one for internetbanking because I can't use the normal Amiga browsers to log into the secure site.
Immediately when I can do it with the Peg I'll throw this thing out of the window (and I live on the fourteenth flour :-D)

Spidey