We do not provide support related to DX9.
Directx9 and Multicore
|
10-27-2013, 11:05 PM
10-28-2013, 12:19 AM
I understand that sometimes old things tend to be more reliable than new ones (WinXP uses less RAM than 7/8). But there´s also a time that you just have to make changes. Changes to have better experience.
Almost all the programs that you know (and don´t know) need mainly HIGHER amounts of RAM and a kind of MODERN user interface so things can look better. And Windows XP can´t handle more than 4 GB RAM, which for some programs is a sh***t. Rig 1: Windows 10 Home | AMD A6-1450 @ 600/1000/1400 MHz | AMD Radeon HD Graphics 8250 | 4GB RAM | HP Pavilion TouchSmart 11.
Rig 2: Windows 10 Pro | Intel Core i7-2640M @ 780/2800/3500 MHz | Intel HD 3000 Mobile | 8GB RAM | Dell Latitude 6320.
10-28-2013, 12:23 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-28-2013, 12:23 AM by Anti-Ultimate.)
>uses outdated software
>complains about no support mfw You own a high-end i7 processor, a HD5870 (which should still be fine) and then you come over and tell me you use 4GB (most likely even single channel) and Windows XP 32-Bit. Do you even have any idea how much that Windows XP bottlenecks your whole Computer? Please do all of us a favor and get yourself a Windows 8/8.1 64-Bit key. Even a Linux distribution would be faster than XP nowadays. You're not doing your pc any good by forcing it to use a 10 year old os on a 2 year old processor.
WinXP uses less RAM than 7/8 because not using freely available RAM is inefficient. So XP is actually worse than 7/8 in this regard.
10-28-2013, 12:27 AM
Uses less RAM because it has fewer features to manage than 7/8.
And I second what neobrain said. Rig 1: Windows 10 Home | AMD A6-1450 @ 600/1000/1400 MHz | AMD Radeon HD Graphics 8250 | 4GB RAM | HP Pavilion TouchSmart 11.
Rig 2: Windows 10 Pro | Intel Core i7-2640M @ 780/2800/3500 MHz | Intel HD 3000 Mobile | 8GB RAM | Dell Latitude 6320.
10-28-2013, 01:09 AM
Keep in mind that Windows XP uses less RAM because it was designed for an era of computing when 128MB and 256MB were standard RAM sizes in many consumer-grade models, and 512MB - 1GB was considered "top-tier". The OS was catering to what hardware was widely available at the time, so of course it can use less RAM. Dolphin is much the same; DX11 and OpenGL compatible GPUs are everywhere especially with any recent IGP from the past few years.
10-28-2013, 01:16 AM
(10-28-2013, 01:09 AM)Shonumi Wrote: Keep in mind that Windows XP uses less RAM because it was designed for an era of computing when 128MB and 256MB were standard RAM sizes in many consumer-grade models, and 512MB - 1GB was considered "top-tier". The OS was catering to what hardware was widely available at the time, so of course it can use less RAM. Dolphin is much the same; DX11 and OpenGL compatible GPUs are everywhere especially with any recent IGP from the past few years.When WinXP was "the boss" at that time, there was even a rumor that the 64-bit version of it was going to be able to support up to 1TB RAM. And of course, that never happened. Rig 1: Windows 10 Home | AMD A6-1450 @ 600/1000/1400 MHz | AMD Radeon HD Graphics 8250 | 4GB RAM | HP Pavilion TouchSmart 11.
Rig 2: Windows 10 Pro | Intel Core i7-2640M @ 780/2800/3500 MHz | Intel HD 3000 Mobile | 8GB RAM | Dell Latitude 6320.
10-28-2013, 05:35 AM
But it did happen. Well sort of. Win XP 64 bit supports up to 128GB of physical memory and up to 16TB of virtual memory. It doesn't support 1TB of physical memory but then again no system back then had anywhere near 128GB of physical memory.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 10-28-2013, 05:37 AM
(10-28-2013, 05:35 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: But it did happen. Well sort of. Win XP 64 bit supports up to 128GB of physical memory and up to 16TB of virtual memory. It doesn't support 1TB of physical memory but then again no system back then had anywhere near 128GB of physical memory.I thought it was kind of impossible. Well, thanks for the correction anyway, NV. Rig 1: Windows 10 Home | AMD A6-1450 @ 600/1000/1400 MHz | AMD Radeon HD Graphics 8250 | 4GB RAM | HP Pavilion TouchSmart 11.
Rig 2: Windows 10 Pro | Intel Core i7-2640M @ 780/2800/3500 MHz | Intel HD 3000 Mobile | 8GB RAM | Dell Latitude 6320.
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)