haha, dont be, juz brag to them and let them PWNED !! ^^ On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:10 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, I gotta be careful, if after installing V1.1 my hdd score went > almost a whole wei point, then now it might reach 7.9... and then how > will I face people with laptops costing 4 times what mine cost? :) > > On Jun 15, 10:06 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > well, i could make a V1.1 and V1.2 suggestion / bugs report section, juz > > like espi have done many article in the group, but pinned topics are not > in > > my authority, as MAD_BEAST limit it to prevent clutter.. > > > > as for the installation method of the V1.1E, juz click and proceed...no > > uninstall and stuff...simple but powerful..juz like an update/patch.. > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:56 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > In that case some topics might have to be joined together, and closed > > > so they info would never get lost between lots of posting. After all > > > the pinned topics could be discussed on new topics, right? > > > > > On Jun 15, 9:54 am, Espionage724 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think MAD_BEAST in the past said something like there was a limited > > > > amount of things we could sticky (like 3 maybe). I could be wrong > > > > though > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:51 AM, tribaljet <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > It was nothing, I'm glad to help, and I could mention if I had a > quirk > > > > > or two but that issue in particular would never go unnoticed :) > Would > > > > > the install procedure be the same or in this specific case the > install > > > > > could be done without uninstalling, like an update? > > > > > And since you're a moderator, can't you pin a topic about your > > > > > releases? I feel we should have a couple of pinned topics, like a > faq > > > > > regarding the most common issues like addreg howto and proper > install > > > > > methods, wei scores (I know there is a topic already, but a cleaned > > > > > one with only the scores and the specs for those scores), a cleaned > up > > > > > download section, among a few other things. I firmly believe this > > > > > group has done many many things in the past before I joined, and > I've > > > > > seen some of the wonders myself, but there are too many leftovers > from > > > > > early days that haven't been cleaned up after all the ruckus with > > > > > intel. > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 9:44 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> well, im not saying that it's like installing a full driver...it's > > > like a > > > > >> patch to an already installed driver... > > > > > > >> im planning an upgrade coz V1.1 is pretty old now, and V1.2 is > under > > > early > > > > >> stage of development... > > > > >> some that u can expect from the update is... > > > > > > >> - fully working with netbooks, which apparently most netbook users > > > wanted it > > > > >> back then... > > > > >> - some minor bug fixed such as MSI code which make PCI slows down > such > > > as in > > > > >> ur case... > > > > >> - and some major bug regarding performance.. > > > > > > >> i had to handed to u tribaljet..^^ without ur report on the V1.1 > not > > > long > > > > >> ago, i never knew what the bugs are, finally now V1.1 will be > renew > > > > >> again...^^ i might released it next week for testers... > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:35 PM, tribaljet <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > So you're saying those who have V1.1 installed should install > this > > > new > > > > >> > version? And what kind of improvements might we expect? I > personally > > > > >> > ask because you know I've had my share of problems regarding > driver > > > > >> > installs, which after your help were solved and now things work > > > better > > > > >> > than ever. > > > > > > >> > On Jun 15, 9:29 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > > ah, maybe pretty soon i wanna make an update on V1.1...full > > > improvements > > > > >> > > coming soon for V1.1 users ^^ > > > > >> > > while waiting for the V1.2, V1.1 can enjoy an > upgrade...V1.1E... > > > > > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:26 PM, tribaljet < > [email protected] > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > It seems the majority of netbooks use 945gse, but a few also > use > > > the > > > > >> > > > same as mine, 945gme with the device id 27ae. > > > > > > >> > > > On Jun 15, 9:21 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > hmm, pardon me if it's off topic but what chipset that > most > > > netbooks > > > > >> > > > use?? > > > > >> > > > > i think i know how to make V1.1 fully compatible with > > > netbooks.... > > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:00 PM, tribaljet < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > So, between 166mhz (the power saving mode and default > for > > > some > > > > >> > > > > > chipsets), 250 (the mobile default) and 400 (desktop > > > default), if > > > > >> > you > > > > >> > > > > > have 400 is great, making the fsb the only limiting > factor > > > in your > > > > >> > > > > > graphic performance. > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Jun 15, 8:56 am, Espionage724 < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > I think GPUz in the past shows 400Mhz > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, tribaljet < > > > > >> > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > > Maybe it increases the speed a bit, but your chipset > > > resembles > > > > >> > more > > > > >> > > > > > > > the 945gms than 945gm which is the general chip. I > think > > > you > > > > >> > can't > > > > >> > > > > > > > activate dual channel, and your gpu clock is, at > least > > > at > > > > >> > default, > > > > >> > > > at > > > > >> > > > > > > > 166mhz. I'm not sure what's the equivalent desktop > > > chipset but > > > > >> > you > > > > >> > > > > > > > should use gpu-z to check the actual clock speeds. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 8:01 am, Espionage724 < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> hmmm, but GMABooster (not that I even 100% trust it > > > seeing as > > > > >> > it > > > > >> > > > > > > >> doesn't work) says I run at 200Mhz. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:58 AM, tribaljet < > > > > >> > [email protected] > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Since you have a celeron, I think you have a > 940gml > > > chipset, > > > > >> > > > which > > > > >> > > > > > has > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > a gma 950 gpu. 945gm chipsets are for core duos > and > > > the > > > > >> > likes. I > > > > >> > > > > > think > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > the only limitations you have are the fsbs of > cpus, > > > the > > > > >> > maximum > > > > >> > > > > > amount > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > of ram and a slower gpu, working at 166mhz > instead of > > > 250, > > > > >> > which > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > explains your gaming performance. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Jun 15, 7:48 am, Espionage724 < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> No, it means my chipset is lesser I guess? Which > I > > > guess in > > > > >> > > > turn > > > > >> > > > > > would > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> mean lower transfer rate between devices? But > I'm > > > pretty > > > > >> > sure > > > > >> > > > my > > > > >> > > > > > 945gm > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> is the same as anyone else who has a 945gm > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:35 AM, tribaljet < > > > > >> > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> > You sure? So it means you have a lesser gma > 950? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> > On Jun 15, 7:30 am, Espionage724 < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> 945GM for graphics, i940 for chipset > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:28 AM, tribaljet < > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > I think the increase of the processor will > be > > > felt > > > > >> > more or > > > > >> > > > > > less > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > easily, and the increase in graphics just > might > > > make > > > > >> > your > > > > >> > > > > > whole aero > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > experience less jerky. You have a > 945gm/gms/gme > > > or a > > > > >> > > > > > 940/943gml? > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> > On Jun 15, 2:10 am, Espionage724 < > > > > >> > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Ok heres my new results: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Windows 7 MD v1.1 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Celeron M 420 @ 1.6Ghz (original clock) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> 2GB 222Mhz DDR2 > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Processor: 3.1 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Memory (RAM): 4.5 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Graphics: 2.0 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Gaming Graphics: 3.0 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Primary Hard Disk: 4.3 > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Same machine only with PCI/PCI-E/DDR > frequency > > > jacked > > > > >> > up > > > > >> > > > to > > > > >> > > > > > max, and > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> CPU clock at 1.9Ghz (via SetFSB) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Processor: 3.6 (slightly boosted) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Memory (RAM): 4.7 (slightly boosted) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Graphics: 2.9 (significiant boost) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Gaming Graphics: 3.1 (slightly boosted) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Primary Hard Disk: 4.4 (slightly boosted) > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> So maybe the CPU does make the difference. > Idk > > > if I'm > > > > >> > > > that > > > > >> > > > > > convinced > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> though since gaming graphics barely > moved.... > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, Abhishek Indoria < > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Intel Pentium 4 2.4 gHz > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Intel G945 Integrated 256 MB graphics > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > 1 GB RAM > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Windows 7 Ultimate 32 bit > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > CPU 5.8 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > RAM 5.2 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Graphics 4.0 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Gaming Graphics: 3.9 > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > Yes, Gaming graphics and Processor speed > is > > > > >> > related. If > > > > >> > > > > > either is lower, the > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > second will be low too. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:51 PM, DanielPK > < > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > CPU: 4.4 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > RAM: 5.2 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > GC: 3.1 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > GC: 3.2 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > HDD: 5.8 > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > Base Score: 3.1 :( > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> >> >> > > 3.1MAX (with alpha drivers) the above > CPU > > > score > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > > -- > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
