jcarle

Omnipeek Personal Network Analyzer could help you, best of all, it's free software.

This is a 20+4 pin connector: This is a 24 pin connector: Both are a total of 24 pins BUT the 20+4 can have the extra 4 removed to fit a 20 pin motherboard. There are 20 to 24 pin adapters available, but I don't recommend those: Here you can see how you can plug a 20 pin connector in a 24 pin motherboard: The last method is the way I recommend since the last 4 connectors are used for extra power in powerful systems. At which point you'd just buy a proper 24 pin power supply.

LOL. Hi.

Total available RAM to XP is equal to 4GB - (Total RAM of cards, bios, roms). If you have a 512MB video card with 4GB of system ram, you will only have 3.5GB available in Windows XP. There's a large article on [H]ard|Forum that explains the problem in depth. Also, here's an official microsoft doc about it too. There are two ways around that problem. Run Windows XP 64-Bit (or another 64-bit OS like Vista) on 64-Bit hardware OR run Windows XP 32-Bit using PAE (Physical Address Extension) on Intel PAE compatible hardware (CPU + motherboard).

Set it to 800x600 with 16bit and it should work for you.

24 pin atx connectors on motherboard will function with 20 pin power supplies, 6 pin atx12v connectors will work with 4 pin atx12v power supplies. Some power supplies have a 20+4 connector which means it will fit on both a 20 pin motherboard as well as a 24 pin motherboard. The only way that it won't work is that a 24 pin power supply will not work on a 20 pin motherboard and a 6 pin atx12v power supply will not work on a 4 pin atx12v motherboard... You might have to read that paragraph over a couple of times, but if you don't understand what i mean, let me know and I'll explain a bit better.

DDR1 is not compatible with DDR2, but slower DDR will work in faster DDR motherboards (in 99% of cases). Thing is, if you want to keep your DDR then you're better off with AMD, which puntoMX could advise you best. I don't recommend modern Intel motherboards with anything less then DDR2.

Chances are that your ports are blocked or the router's firewall is giving you heck. Why are you using two routers though?

I'd just like to get a feel as to how many people use Windows Media Player 11 Integrator. Thanks.

I'd just like to get a feel as to how many people use Compression Bin. Thanks.

I'd just like to get a feel as to how many people use XPreview. Thanks.

I'd just like to get a feel as to how many people use Windows Updates Downloader. Thanks.

@DigeratiPrime: Please do because this is a waste of time for everyone.

Noted. @Night Ranger: If you'd like to make your own client, feel free to do so as long as you reference http://wud.jcarle.com/ as the UL location.

I ran across an interesting read today which illustrates how much of a margin there is using the Core 2 Extreme at the moment. There's nothing stopping AMD from taking back the crown with their next generation processors but it made for an interesting read none the less. Tom's Hardware: GeForce 8800 Needs The Fastest CPU

There is no issue at hand other then your dillusions of an AVG time-bomb.

Winamp.

I thought to recover the files from EFS you had to have a user with the same GUID and password to be able to do that?

If the data was encrypted on the old harddrive, you'll need something like this to recover it.

It really depends on the benchmark. Things that weight more on memory bandwidth in relation to CPU usage, such as gaming, AMD follows up closely. The difference is really large when it comes to things that are directly depend on the CPU and CPU only, like video encoding. Tom's CPU Charts really illustrates that. A full minute and fifteen seconds difference in encoding time for the first 5 minutes of Terminator 2. Figure that Terminator 2 has a run-time of 137 minutes, then you're looking at the difference of 2 hours 8 minutes to encode the full movie on the Athlon 64 FX-62 vs only 1 hour 33 minutes on the Core 2 EX6800. That's pretty significant.

I only wish that the CNPS9500 came with an option to use the Intel 4 pin connector.

If you compare strictly budget CPU to budget CPU, the Sempron is a better performer then the Celeron. And just a note, the Celeron is also built on 90nm. It's only Intel's newer, more powerful processors which have moved to a 65nm process. But here's the upgradeability snag. Budget for budget CPU, the Sempron is the better performer, move to the high end, and it's no secret that the better performer right now is the Core 2 line up at Intel. Unless AMD releases a radical new design for their next generation processors, it's a clear concensus that they have a large margin to make up. So why would I suggest a Celeron instead of a Sempron? Because the Celeron can be upgraded to a Core 2 (the current champ to be for a while) whilst the Sempron cannot. It's simply that.

LMAO... how ironic. I was just sitting here thinking if I should make a post about my new upgrades. I changed my stock Intel CPU cooler and my nVidia 6600 GT's stock cooler with the exact same replacements (Zalman CNPS9500 & Zalman VF900-Cu). Go figure... Well anyways, it dropped 15C on my CPU and 12C on my video card, not to mention that they're both near silent now.

I agree to disagree. But you know, that's the whole point of these threads. To discuss what everyone's opinion is. There no way that everyone can agree, if we all did, we'd all have the same computers. The plethora of hardware configurations that everyone has is simple proof of how much difference there is between what people chose. I say Intel, you say AMD. It's a bloody war that's left many casulties along the way and it's a never ending debate. I like Intel for it's stability and workstation performance. You like AMD because of it's low cost and (I'm guessing) gaming performance. Both have strengths, both have weaknesses. Although I will say I don't quite understand how you can say Intel has left a hole in the budget market considering the cpu I suggested was $51. Hardly an amount that would break people's wallets.

You can't say things like "It’s your choice but jcarle is pushing you with his sales talk here." and not expect me to put up a fight. I'm well versed in computer hardware and I see no fault in any suggestions, advice, or information I have put forth. The motherboard I suggested is nor expensive nor unupgradeable. Simply because you can't upgrade to EVERY technology that is about to come out doesn't mean you can't upgrade for years with it. You can never keep up with technology, it's impossible. So you go with what is the best choice available NOW and you go from there.