|
|
thanatoid <waiting@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|>Pennywise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote in
|>news:1ed9a2drh2n70k8d7e9tcbhs1hc89oite6@xxxxxxx:
|>
|>> thanatoid <waiting@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
|>>
|>>|>I run Win98SE Lite on that machine. It has 256MB Ram about
|>>|>140+ of which is always free. I understand up to 64 can be
|>>|>used by on-board graphics, even though it appears I can
|>>|>reserve from 4 to 256MB RAM to "AGP Aperture Size" in BIOS
|>>|>(but I'm not sure if it's exactly the same thing).
|>>
|>>|>I tried a "Fear" demo from "PC Gamer" magazine a few months
|>>|>ago and it said I needed a 3-D card.
|>>
|>> Save your money you can't play F.E.A.R. on your machine.
|>> This is made for a high end game machine.
|>>
|>I don't *want* to play fear, I bought the magazine out of
|>boredom and to see what ridiculous new heights the graphics card
|>technology was reaching. I liked the fear logo so tried it and
|>it didn't run, not surprisingly.
|>
|>What I want to play is another game which is about 3 years old
|>and has very modest requirements (800MHz proc etc). My question
|>regards the graphics side only.
GeForce is a graphics card - if you purchase one, I'd suggest the 6800
as you can hack it to a better card.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/25/2222212
--
man-made satellites in real-time
science.nasa.gov/Realtime/jtrack/3d/jtrack3d.html">http://science.nasa.gov/Realtime/jtrack/3d/jtrack3d.html
-Java popup-
|
|