Wireless Moot

[welsalex]

Excited! MOOT MOOT MOOT MOOT! Hopefully a certain Sargent will inform us. I want info screamed Full Metal Jacket style

 

[deadudea]

Hey all. I've seriously been lurking on these forums for a couple weeks waiting for updates so I figured I'd join and let you guys know how awesome you are. All your knowledge is appreciated. Though registering in the middle of class was a bit awkward with the video Captcha....
Anyways i'm not rooted.. On the latest stock upgrade, .905 I guess. Just waiting....

 

[josh1980]

Here's the three examples I use for my issues with performance of AMD/ATI:

In 2000 I was moving across country. I had an Intel 266Mhz at the time. I pulled out my video card and RAM and took it to my mom's house. My plan was to build her a new computer and use my RAM and video card temporarily so I could play everquest. I ended up buying an AMD 450Mhz CPU. I installed Windows and EQ. But.. the game was choppy and unplayable. Note that I was using the exact same physical RAM and video card, but despite AMD's clear advantage of almost 40% it STILL couldn't cut it.

In 2003 I built a Windows Server 2003 machine. At the time nvidia said no drivers would ever be released for server 2003. So I went to the store and bought an ATI video card. I spent $250 on the card. I only intended to play games that were at least 2 years old so I knew I'd still be fine for performance. I got home, installed my video card, and started installing games. Every single game I tried to play was not compatible with my video card without some custom patch from the game manufacturer. I had 5 games and had to install 5 patches manually to get each to work. Halflife didn't work for squat even after the patch. The menus were unreadable and I couldn't even play the game. A few phone calls and.. sure enough, if you happened to have my video card you were screwed. The video card had some hardware issues that ATI didn't fix.

In 2006 I bought an AMD laptop. They were significantly cheaper than the Intel based laptops. All I wanted to do was be able to take some 720p videos with me and play them during my travels. The laptop could perform fine, until it was unplugged. The second it was unplugged the CPU artificially lowered it CPU speed by 2 or 3 multipliers and movies wouldn't play. I took it back to the store and they couldn't fix it. I called the manufacturer, and they told me it was "by design" this way to prolong battery life. I went looking all over for power management settings so I could set them to maximum performance, but it didn't matter. I went into the AMD forums and everyone complained about the same thing. I asked friends that were avid AMD users and they couldn't help me. Ultimately I ended up returning the laptop and had to eat $150 restocking fee.

So while AMDs may have a purpose for many people, they seem to fail, horribly, every time I try to use them.

Let's not talk about instability issues I've had that were later determined to be problems.. IF you had an AMD CPU. I have a screenshot from years ago in EQ where it had a message at the login screen that if you owned an AMD CPU you couldn't play and that a patch was forthcoming. I LOVE rubbing that in my friend's face that swear by AMD just because I can .

So while friends swear by AMD and/or ATI, I've yet to ever be happy with the performance of an AMD or ATI product. I've lost so much money over the years it's cheaper to "cut my losses" and buy Intel despite the higher price.

 

[herrbifi]

In 2003 I built a Windows Server 2003 machine. At the time nvidia said no drivers would ever be released for server 2003. So I went to the store and bought an ATI video card. I spent $250 on the card. I only intended to play games that were at least 2 years old so I knew I'd still be fine for performance.

Just a question you built a Server 2003 for gaming? :blink: And you are correct in '03 ATI was on the low end of support for gaming and they were not built by AMD at that time either. I am not a fan of ATI because I do a lot of CUDA programming, but I also have nothing bad to say about them in the last couple years either I think they have come a long ways.

 

[josh1980]

Just a question you built a Server 2003 for gaming? :blink: And you are correct in '03 ATI was on the low end of support for gaming and they were not built by AMD at that time either. I am not a fan of ATI because I do a lot of CUDA programming, but I also have nothing bad to say about them in the last couple years either I think they have come a long ways.

I do realize it's odd that I built a server 2003 machine for gaming. At the time it was to kill 2 birds with one stone. The CompUSA store by me had a dedicated ATI salesperson that was there Wednesday through Sunday during peak business hours. He said that this would be fine. I never trusted him again

 

[Lodmot]

I do realize it's odd that I built a server 2003 machine for gaming. At the time it was to kill 2 birds with one stone. The CompUSA store by me had a dedicated ATI salesperson that was there Wednesday through Sunday during peak business hours. He said that this would be fine. I never trusted him again

Lol! xD
I have a media server running on Ubuntu.... and then this that I built:

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dave12308]

I do realize it's odd that I built a server 2003 machine for gaming. At the time it was to kill 2 birds with one stone. The CompUSA store by me had a dedicated ATI salesperson that was there Wednesday through Sunday during peak business hours. He said that this would be fine. I never trusted him again

You know, I remember an article back in the day with a tutorial to make server 2003 into a gaming OS, by default with no roles installed, there is less crap running in the background; so with a few tweaks it beat XP.

I believe the same idea was also used for Windows Server 2008 vs. Windows Vista; turns out Server 2008 is a better gaming OS.

 

[herrbifi]

I do realize it's odd that I built a server 2003 machine for gaming. At the time it was to kill 2 birds with one stone. The CompUSA store by me had a dedicated ATI salesperson that was there Wednesday through Sunday during peak business hours. He said that this would be fine. I never trusted him again

CompUSA :icon_ laughup: God I hated them. My first run in with them was when I was stationed at Ft Hood in Killeen, TX and their salesmen where idiots. My first full AMD build was an Athalon T-bird and that thing ran hotter than hell.

 

[josh1980]

You know, I remember an article back in the day with a tutorial to make server 2003 into a gaming OS, by default with no roles installed, there is less crap running in the background; so with a few tweaks it beat XP.

I believe the same idea was also used for Windows Server 2008 vs. Windows Vista; turns out Server 2008 is a better gaming OS.

The claim is true. I've never seen Server beat the desktop version using the exact same hardware though.

 

[Rahloc]

CompUSA :icon_ laughup: God I hated them. My first run in with them was when I was stationed at Ft Hood in Killeen, TX and their salesmen where idiots. My first full AMD build was an Athalon T-bird and that thing ran hotter than hell.

What I was originally told by a friend who used Compusa a lot what "if you need help deciding, as the sales person what they would do then go in the exact opposite direction for the best performance."

I did that every time and never failed.

 

[herrbifi]

You know, I remember an article back in the day with a tutorial to make server 2003 into a gaming OS, by default with no roles installed, there is less crap running in the background; so with a few tweaks it beat XP.

I believe the same idea was also used for Windows Server 2008 vs. Windows Vista; turns out Server 2008 is a better gaming OS.

Yeah but unless you're pirating, not that that ever happens, god the cost comparison. Especially when you can just go into the msconfig and turn off the services and startups that you don't need.

 

[josh1980]

What I was originally told by a friend who used Compusa a lot what "if you need help deciding, as the sales person what they would do then go in the exact opposite direction for the best performance."

I did that every time and never failed.

Hehe. This representative was an ATI guy. He was paid by ATI and was only there for customer service at the store.

 

[herrbifi]

The claim is true. I've never seen Server beat the desktop version using the exact same hardware though.

Actually when you setup the server if you disable the AD and network hosting services during install it is pretty stripped down and has a fairly low overhead. If you just click through and install all the defaults then it will be slower.

Okay this is turning into too much of a PC thread where is the gossip about the litigation's?

 

[dethzero]

hmmm Too much AMD/ATi hating here hehe. I guess I'm really the only one that has not had any issues with AMD/ATi video cards. I've been using red since my geforce 3 died and replaced it with an ATi 9800xt, then I upgraded to 1800xt, then to hd4850, and now on hd 7870 I do update the drivers every 2 to 3 months though, maybe thats why heh. :blink:

I actually have not thought about Windows Server as a gaming platform. I guess without the roles it's pretty basic. But then again, I've always stripped out stuff from xp, vista and windows 7 installs too. I also remember having Windows 98 stripped down to about 50-something mb. I'm curious about Windows 8 and what I can and cannot strip out of it.

 

[dethzero]

Actually when you setup the server if you disable the AD and network hosting services during install it is pretty stripped down and has a fairly low overhead. If you just click through and install all the defaults then it will be slower.

Okay this is turning into too much of a PC thread where is the gossip about the litigation's?

With the Server 2012 you can also disable the GUI on the fly and when you boot up you'll be in command prompt only mode. I wonder if we can launch games that way hehe. That would be sweet to get rid of the whole desktop environment.