December monthly poll

[Cityscape]

a very old pci ati 2mb video card

Ouch!  That's painful.  I don't know how you can even run Win XP with that video card. 

I ran XP fine for a while with a 2MB card on my afore mentioned PC#1.

Probably runs alright, I probably have a similar model card with 8MB of RAM, and it ran fine. The only limitation the VRAM gives is less resolution; for the most part the card (mine was an ATI 3d Rage Pro) could hardly handle much 3-d, Direct3d worked somewhat, but it had NO OpenGL support at all.

Is the Rage Pro older then the Rage 128? My PC#2 (see above) has a 16MB Rage 128 and it has OpenGL support. I have run several OpenGL games on it.

[Cityscape]

It might have been interesting to have a further breakdown in years for older PC's.

Based on some of the compatibility problems posted here with Win 98, and even Win 95 sometimes, there are still a lot of older PC's out there.

Fully agree! Many people use older computers and versions of Windows. I know many people in my city who use computers running Windows 98. My brother's main computer runs Windows 95 even. We're talking P2's and P3's here.

[BC_Programmer]

I ran XP fine for a while with a 2MB card on my afore mentioned PC#1.Is the Rage Pro older then the Rage 128? My PC#2 (see above) has a 16MB Rage 128 and it has OpenGL support. I have run several OpenGL games on it.

I think the rage 128 is a generation newer then the ATI Rage Pro which is a generation newer then the ATI Rage II; I managed to get broken OpenGL to work with Quake 2, but it was slower than the Software Renderer and full of artifacts.

Video Memory is more or less used these days for 3d textures; early on it was used exclusively to determine exactly what resolutions and colour depths were possible. (of course, the actual circuitry itself had some say; you couldn't get a CGA to show 32768 colour by adding VRAM, for example).

[kaigun]

XP is FAR more dependent on Processor power then graphics capabilities, and in the case were the latter is true one can always simply use the classic theme.

I've always used the classic theme because I prefer the look. I didn't know it used less resources to run.

[BC_Programmer]

I've always used the classic theme because I prefer the look. I didn't know it used less resources to run.

sure does

fewer bitmaps to draw and keep in memory, not as many effects, stuff like that. the effect is more pronounced the older the PC; for the most part any video card capable of hardware alpha-blending should be able to run the Luna themes without too much of a performance hit, as long as they have enough System Memory (the services used usually need around 15-20 MB).

[harry 48]

my pc is 4/5 years old , not as fast as i would like but still working well

[Cityscape]

I've always used the classic theme because I prefer the look. I didn't know it used less resources to run.

Yes, with running the Classic theme you should notice a performance boost. I always run it anyway cause I like it.

[computeruler]

you dont really have a choice though do you?

[camerongray]

My PC is from 1999 and still going strong 

[pds]

medium
duocore processor
ram mem 2,5 gb
motherboard kotoda
4 harddrives
games 400 gb
programs and tools 3,1 terabyte
windows&dos 2,5 gb
photos and other documents 10 terabytes

OS (operating system) windows 7 + nintendo operating system
wireless mouse and key board
two sreens

thats all

[kpac]

games 400 gb
programs and tools 3,1 terabyte
windows&dos 2,5 gb
photos and other documents 10 terabytes

I think you're using the wrong terms there....

[Carbon Dudeoxide]

3000 gigabytes of programs? Riiiight......

[BC_Programmer]

OS (operating system) windows 7 + nintendo operating system

dare I ask?

[Carbon Dudeoxide]

I have two sreens too!











what's a sreen?

[patio]

Wankel Rotary Engine...