Jump to content

Dixel

Member
  • Posts

    1,801
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    114
  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Country

    Netherlands

Everything posted by Dixel

  1. Thanks, interesting observations. Can't say anything about WebGL or GPU process, since I always block them completely, but I totally agree about the weird fonts. They are blurry and bright. I think people on this forum already noticed those bright fonts. There were a comparison picture posted somewhere with other chromiuims of the same version.
  2. That's because Maxwell has only partial/hybrid HEVC decode. And from what I tried, it fully works for 8bit HEVC only.
  3. How much do you think would be a fair price for e-waste? GTX 680 is 12 years old, Titan is almost 12! Unfortunately electronic components degrade, capacitors dry out, etc. It's electronic waste now. The OP needs to check them carefully before buying, Lots of them could've been repaired several times to this date. P.S. And where you live, do they cost more?
  4. For XP anything higher than Kepler makes no sense, Get something like GTX680, they are very cheap now. About 30 Euro. Or GTX780 for 50 Euro, Titan for 70.
  5. @XPerceniol, hello, I see you type even better than before! So looks like you're all fine. I'm glad with the positive progress.
  6. Hi all, after extensive testings, I'm still sticking with the fantastic 348.01 (pleasant colours), but it's not as good as it supposed to be. Unfortunately, I'm experiencing terrible throttling on all drivers from Nvidia site and on all of the suggested above. Looks like finding the original 348.12 is the only solution. Just like it says here. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/game-ready-drivers/13/292634/throttling-on-all-drivers-from-site-nvidia-laptop-/
  7. I'll make sure to follow the advice. No, I don't. Why? I don't complain, I make scientifically proven observations, which is expected on a forum like this. Period.
  8. lorenzo duchaussoy, Not sure if reposting links to download the latest versions of ex-kernel will make win32 happy, I don't remember he ever did it himself here, just sayin'.
  9. You set the uBlock rules to filter out files with the WebP extension, but they still go right through it because the fake extension is jpeg, but it's not jpeg, it's WebP, now you understand?
  10. You don't even have to download it, it's already in the page (but with another extension). D.Draker suggested you to download it to see it's WebP, not jpeg, like it announces itself! Please enough with the screaming in CAPSLOCK and the red arrows, we are here for a dialogue, please respect the others. It's inappropriate behaviour, it's against the rules.
  11. More detailed explanations: Basically, every website can fool that "fix" into the wrong thinking by simply changing the extension of WebP to jpeg or something else (mp4, for example). Besides, plenty of websites use extension-less WebP, when WebP is there, but without extension or with any other extension to mask the real evil, that's what @D.Draker tries to explain to you.
  12. So, it's not a fix at all, I'd say it's even more dangerous than without it. (feeling of fake safety) If I considered that to be a fix. I'd placed it on the first page of this topic, right after I created it.
  13. Hard to tell, depends on whether they bothered themselves to patch that 1 year old version, which I doubt. On the other hand, there was a patch for even older chrome 109, so who knows. If it's a nightly version, then most certainly - no. Their nightly, I'f I'm not mistaken, started to get these patches in 118.
  14. Well, yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about, it simply won't load the image, it prevents it from loading at all, with many websites using only WebP - this doesn't look like a fix.
  15. I'm gonna the captain obvious! It says the service is "DISABLED".
  16. This simply leads to an empty window, where the image supposed to be. Seems rather desperate, sorry.
  17. There's simply not enough trouble free and fast file hostings.
  18. Is it now fully portable? Did you try already?
  19. At some point in time (2015?), I got a stable Vista x64 RTM on a Haswell mobo, one would need to clean the ISO pretty hard before the install. Defender is one of the things one would need to get rid of first, less black screens without it.
  20. Yes, you're right, I also have the piece of garbage Asus on that rig, with Fujitsu Siemens Haswel board it happened very rarely, but still happened, annoying. Looks like China made boards simply use cheaper timers, seems like a plausible explanation.
  21. No BSOD, no performance drop, but black screen of death, right at the start with anything after RTM, SP2 with updates especially! Only hard reset! With RTM it was a delayed or never started service/services, most common: audio service or some other services like "licensing". Black screen of death also happened with RTM, but rarely, and it could be bypassed via task manager.
  22. Care to share what's so special about thorium? From what is known, it's still based on the last year chrome 109, the last officially supported.
  23. I have the same question, I'm looking for an upgrade path for my 2013 gaming rig. Yes, 2013, don't laugh. The new one would need to run Vista x64.
  24. @Aiek, you better remove that photo with that edition name.
×
×
  • Create New...