jcarle

Heck, I had to rewrite part of my Windows Updates Downloader to fit within the Vista development guidelines, why should I start complaining and ranting and raving about how it's all Vista's fault because it won't let me store strings in the HKLM registry keys without throwing up in UAC. Vista's done nothing wrong, I'm the one who needed to change the way I store my application settings.

You'll typically find that when it comes to chipsets that offer on-board video, it usually depends on what the OEMs are selling, those are the chipsets that usually end up making it in large quantities to the mainstream market.

Here's another one, straight off of NewEgg... Case : CoolerMaster Elite 330 - $39.99 Power Supply : Antec EarthWatts 380W - $29.99 Motherboard : Foxconn P45A-S - $119.99 Processor : Intel E2180 - $69.99 Memory : 2GB OCZ DDR2-800 - $42.99 Video Card : EVGA 7200GS - $29.99 Optical Drive : Pioneer DVR-216D - $29.99 Hard Drive : 320GB Western Digital SE16 - $64.99 Total cost : $427.92 More then enough for anyone's average use.

If you can run at higher FSB, then by all means go for it. All I'm saying is that when conditions allow it, you try to use the highest possible clocks at 1:1 for optimal performance, do keep in mind that it doesn't mean running at something other 1:1 is bad either.

Well, it's not just a question of prehistorical, it depends on the price point you bought at. Remember the E2160 (very popular, still sold a lot) runs with an FSB of 800MHz. It's a beautiful CPU to overclock with because you can run it at 1600FSB and get 1:1 with DDR2-800MHz memory. Keep in mind, having an incredible amount of memory bandwidth is not very useful if your memory spends a great deal of time waiting for the CPU to come check it again. If anything, if your CPU is indeed the E6750, I would suggest overclocking the CPU to 1600(400)FSB which should be relatively easy, then running your memory at 800MHz. Using the new found overhead, it should be fairly easy for you to drop the timings down lower. Lower timings at 1:1 even with a slower clock will have a much greater impact on the performance then strictly playing with the clock speed.

You still don't get it... if you need to leave an icon to make something work chance are the person doesn't understand what "THAT" is. You can't expect your system to fly like a rocket when you have multiple VMs running concurently... I hope you understand that it has nothing to do with Vista and is strictly due to the way those applications are written. Vista is not buggy. That's the biggest misconception about Vista. Vista itself is incredibly stable. The problem are the drivers and the software. You can't blame the highways when your car breaksdown because of poor design. The same applies with Vista. As rock solid as it is, if the software people write are unstable and aren't respecting the guidelines defined by Microsoft then obviously the software's not going to work properly. The same goes with drivers. Companies aren't used to writing drivers in 64-bit and some of the driver guidelines have changed for Vista, especially in Video. So it's going to take time for companies to adjust just like the transition was difficult between 98 and XP. Page 4-27 of your manual not only shows that "Onboard PCI SCSI chip" must be set to "Disabled" but also that "Channel A Termination" must be set to "None" to "Disable SCSI Device Support." (which you haven't done). It might also be a good idea to set "Channel B Termination" to "Disabled".

You may be talking of one of two things. Running your memory in a 1:1 configuration with your processor, that is matching the frequency clocks, or you may be talking about Dual Channel. If you're refering to the first, it's a matter of adjusting your processor's FSB to the highest possible value that can match what your memory supports. It's simple math once you understand how it works. Although you don't mention the FSB speed of your processor (or what processor you have, it goes something like this. For a 1066 FSB CPU, it's base clock is determined by dividing by four (1066 / 4 = 266), which makes a 1066FSB CPU's base clock to be 266MHz. Memory FBS is divided by two for DDR to determine it's base clock. So 800MHz DDR2 would have a base clock (800 / 2 = 400) of 400MHz. To achieve a 1:1 ratio in this scenario, either the CPU base clock must be moved up to 400MHz giving it an effective FSB of 1600MHz or the memory must be slowed down to 266MHz, effectively making it run as DDR2-533. In the case of your 1066MHz DDR2, it's pretty impossible to get CPUs to run at the base clock that your memory is running at (1066 / 2 = 533) as it would give an effective FSB (533 * 4 = 2132) of 2132MHz. The most realistic combination that is commonly used is running the CPU at 1600FSB ( 1600 / 4 = 400 ) with a base clock of 400MHz and running the memory at ( 400 * 2 = 800 ) 800Mhz.

I think there's a higher chance that you didn't disable the right items in the BIOS more then there are that XP was detecting disabled items. I'm willing to bet if we interviewed any of those people, they'd pretty much say anything because they probably don't even know what they need or not in terms of windows components. I'm sure that if asked today they neither know what a batch file is nor do they remember where or what those icons you told them about are. People tune their OWN cars, not their neighbour's. I don't walk around the neighbourhood trying to see if I can help one guy get an extra 2 miles a gallon on his drive to work. I'll help when something's BROKEN and I'll help repair it to it's original working state but that's nowhere near the same as what you're doing to other people's computers. People like cars because they open the door, they start the car and they drive. People want to do the same with they computers. People want to be able to go to the store, buy a webcam, plug it in and talk to their grandkids on MSN. They do NOT want to sit at their computer and get frustrated because their webcam doesn't install or doesn't work because of some service that you thought was wise of you to disable since they "didn't need it". Vista does a fine job of adjusting itself to your hardware configuration but it can't make miracles if you're running it on underpowered hardware. People such as yourself always want to have all the latest and greatest but don't want to invest in the hardware needed to run it properly. It's funny, on my machine, I run Vista 64 Ultimate that has more "features" then any other version of windows. On top of that, I usually multitask to the point where I have over a hundred something processes running simultaneously. Not to mention that while I'm doing all of that, I'm often doing things like transcoding DVDs in the background. Yet, even with all that going on, Vista is faster on my machine then XP was. You take a F1 driver, throw him into a Pinto and expect him to win the world cup.

That's changing as nVidia has licensed SLI to Intel now. It's already available on the Skulltrail motherboard but that's just a crazy setup. Nehalem motherboards (coming soon) will support SLI just as they've done with Crossfire. If you want one of the best values for your money on the market today, take a look at the ASUS P5Q Deluxe. It's one of ASUS most stable motherboards to date, it has incredible overclocking overhead, supports all of the modern technologies, and even if you don't plan to use it, everything's that on-board is of high quality. And at $200, it's a really good deal.

I've seen that in a few rare occasions though I can't tell you what exactly caused it. I believe it actually has nothing to do with the mouse but it may actually have to do with something between video and sound. (Your video card does redraw the mouse pointer everytime it moves, doesn't it?)

This is further proof that you simply don't know what you're doing. It took me about 90 seconds to find page 4-27 of the manual for your Gigabyte GA-6BXDS. That includes the time it took for me to download it. After which, I saw that Mr Snrub had already beat me to my point, set "Onboard PCI SCSI chip" to "Disabled".There are a several dozen ways you can increase a system's performance without doing anything to affect end user experience. Disabling services is not one of them. Disabling un-used devices in the BIOS. Moving the pagefile to a 2nd physical drive if available. Changing the XP theme to Classic. Defragmenting. Those go a lot further than any service you can disable and don't change the end user experience.

That's where the importance of objectivity comes in. I myself use only nVidia video cards and adore them, yet I can still recognize the failure they are at writing drivers, unfortunately.

Here's one for on-board video. 87% of all video driver crashes last month were caused by nVidia drivers. That makes Intel GMA drivers pretty damned stable. And please don't ask for the source of this statistic, I'm not allowed to disclose that information.

You know what's wrong with what you're doing? Everything. You want proof that there's nothing wrong with XP as it is? Try asking the MILLIONS of users that use XP as is without "tweaking" it. nLite/vLite are the busiest sub-forums of this entire forum, and they're not praise and celebration posts either. Most of the posts in the nLite/vLite section are posts about problems and complaints of broken parts of Windows after "tweaking" the OS. The same goes with complaints about BlackViper's "tweaks". It's funny, you never hear people complain that an up to date install of XP with up to date drivers doesn't work, because guess what, it just does. Oh and yes, you can spell Microsoft any way you want, spelling it with a $ just proves your lack of education.

Just to satisfy those who believe that Prime95 wasn't hogging enough CPU during the network bandwidth test, I reran the test using the same conditions except this time I made sure that Prime95 was the only High Priority process (as you'll see in the screenshot) and I actually even beat my last record of 990Mbit/sec and this time topped out at 991Mbit/sec. There's not going to be much more proof as to the inherent strengths of on-board NICs. On-board NIC Challenge 2 Also, as crahak pointed out, a lot of on-board NICs have all the same features that expensive dedicated NICs do. I'm running a regular consumer motherboard, the ASUS P5Q Deluxe, nothing out of this world at $200 (certainly a lot cheaper then things like the Maximus or other high end gamer boards). This on-board NIC supports IPv4 Transmit Checksum Offloading IPv4 Receive Checksum Offloading TCP Checksum Offloading UDP Checksum Offloading Large Send Offload 512 Transmit Buffers 512 Receive Buffers 30,000 IRQs per second 9014 Byte Jumbo Frames VLAN tagging and priority and it's connected on-board through PCI-E ... what more could you want?

I tend to use this a lot lately... are you guys drunk? (Zxian excluded) Anyone who writes Microsoft with a $, refers to BlackViper and suggests turning off the DNS Client then replacing it with a hosts file shouldn't be distributing that kind of poor advice. Those are the people that drive systems into a mess that professional technicians such as ourselves end up cleaning up for people. You want a fast and reliable system? Clean install XP with SP3, install the latest drivers and upgrade the RAM and you'll have a wonderful system without the mess caused by those so called "tweaks". Increasing the amount of memory, even in an old system will outway the benefits of any possible "tweak" you can imagine.

I don't think there's any simpler proof as to why on-board chips aren't bad... how about running a full gigabit speed while running all CPU cores at 100% under Windows Vista? How much more of a challenge do you want? On-board NIC Challenge

Are you also drunk? You must be sharing drinks with BenoitRen.As Cluberti already explained, LCD refresh rates are tied to their response time. If fact you couldn't be more wrong. The fact that the interface is running at 60Hz means that even if your response time was 0ms you'd still be able to update the screen no faster then 60 times a second. The response time only affects how long it takes for the image to change once it receives instructions to change in one of those 1/60th of a second lapses. So the response time has nothing to do with the maximum refresh rate nor does it have anything to do with FPS. Get yourself another beer and go watch TV.

Are you drunk? Funny how you're talking about this but don't say a word about the cooling needed.Have you even looked at the coolers from a Core 2 Quad? They're smaller and quieter then the P4s ever were. Hell you could hardly even call the regular Core 2 Duo stock cooler a cooler considering is such a small and quiet cooler. I've never seen anything that small and quiet from any previous CPU from either AMD or Intel. Also, the TDP is the MAXIMUM heat output under 100% load. Under regular use then generate even less heat thanks to things like Speed Step. http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/07/12/epic_integrated_graphics/Umm, you haven't proven anything at all. Well, mine sure doesn't! It's got a SiS one.Just the fact that you bought a SiS based motherboard already speaks wonders about the greatest of your hardware knowledge. The on-board chipsets trump anything that was designed in the early 90s. The chipsets that you refer to as cheap can do more, faster, better and with less power then any of your draconian hardware can. Which is just an example of how you can. Of course you can. But such a rig is not everywhere, and it's not the standard.Not the standard? And what do you define as standard? A machine built on archaic technology that's built in a beige box running an AT power supply? Of course. The Core Duo series is based on the Centrino architecture. But there's more than Core Duo out there, and generally the heat rises exponentially the more cores you have on a CPU, which means more cooling, which means more power consumption.More cores is not the only factor in heat generation. A single core based on a 250nm architecture is going to generate plenty more heat then four cores built using a 45nm process.I think you're throwing arguments around thinking you're still in another decade. You should catch up with the times because the times obviously left you behind.

What's your operating system? What's your browser? And did you previously have another browser that you removed?

By the way, $600 for a Windows Server 2008 Standard license with Hyper-V is not exactly breaking the bank. We're consolidating 9 super micro servers into 2 Dell PowerEdges running Server 2008. We already tried the VMware approach and it was a total mess compared to this.

Those who question the choice between Hyper-V and the failing VMware ESXi have obviously not used Windows 2008.

Nothing sweeter then a 9800GTX running fanlessly... <3 Accelero.

I'd talk to the customer service / support for Transcend about your issue, see if there's something they can do under warranty.

You haven't provided us any information to help you. What is your laptop model? What is your operating system? Describe your symptoms in greater detail.