Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas Mercer-Hursh who wrote (53401)	1/9/2003 3:26:09 PM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

OT? Thomas, >To me, the difference between having to break for lunch >to get a CAD rendering with the CPU so busy during the >process that the box was almost unusable for anything >else to having that rendering coming out of the printer >in 20-30 seconds is a major change in the way I can work. Yes, same here for some things. But, as I said, I switched from 400 MHz, 256 MB RAM, so I don't know caused the performance boost - CPU, RAM size or RDRAM. I'm still using the old box too. Have two computers on the desk now. :-) It's better than one, since mega-multitasking is not strong suit for Windows. Even with the new box, the CPU is sometimes too busy for even net browsing. :-) >my system also has a GeForce Ti4600 graphics adapter > with 128MB That's what I'm getting for my home FPS machine. :-) >and dual 10,000 RPM ultrafast SCSI disks in a striped >RAID arrangement to optimize disk throughput. Was it worth it? I was never for fast disks - 7200RPM EIDE was always fine for me. My philosophy is that if something needs to go to disk, it's already too slow. :-) And then SCSI setup and maintenance horror stories. :-) Plus cost... :-) And having NTAP shared file server somewhere for backed-up data, which is slow anyway. Local drive almost does not matter. Jurgis - dream machine computer forum?