Search Results

Search found 189 results on 8 pages for 'ddr2'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 2/8 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • About the External Graphics Card and CPU usage

    - by Balaji
    Hi, We are Rendering 16 live Streams at our client machine through one of our applications and the resolution of the video streams are as 4CIF/MPEG4/25FPS/4000Kbits. The configuration fo the client machine is below. HP Desktop Machine: Microsoft Windows XP Intel (R) Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00 GHz 2.99 GHz, 1.94 GB of RAM Intel (R) Q45/Q43 Series Express Chipset (Inbuild) The CPU usage of the machine peaks 99% for 16 straems. After some discussion, we had decided to install external graphics card to reduce the CPU usage. So that, we have tried following graphics cards. NVIDIA Quadro NVS 440 - 128 MB Radeon HD 4350 - 512 MB GDDR2 Redeon HD 4350 - 1GB DDR2 ASUS EAH 4350 Silent 1GB DDR2 But the performance wise no difference, even worst. So, what is the pupuse of these external graphics cards? Really it will reduce the CPU usage? What parameters have to check, if we want to reduce the CPU usage? Please do the needful as soon as possible. Regards Balaji

    Read the article

  • About the External Graphics Card and CPU usage

    - by Balaji
    We are Rendering 16 live Streams at our client machine through one of our applications and the resolution of the video streams are as 4CIF/MPEG4/25FPS/4000Kbits. The configuration of the client machine is below. HP Desktop Machine: Microsoft Windows XP Intel (R) Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00 GHz 2.99 GHz, 1.94 GB of RAM Intel (R) Q45/Q43 Series Express Chipset (Inbuild) The CPU usage of the machine peaks 99% for 16 streams. After some discussion, we had decided to install external graphics card to reduce the CPU usage. So that, we have tried following graphics cards. NVIDIA Quadro NVS 440 - 128 MB Radeon HD 4350 - 512 MB GDDR2 Redeon HD 4350 - 1GB DDR2 ASUS EAH 4350 Silent 1GB DDR2 But the performance wise there has been no difference - even a drop in performance. So, what is the purpose of these external graphics cards? Really it will reduce the CPU usage? What parameters have to check, if we want to reduce the CPU usage?

    Read the article

  • Which server requirment for a Redmine, Git and website hosting?

    - by Ephismen
    Me and 9 other students are going to start a project that will last a minimum of 2 years, for this purpose we are looking to host all our work on a server. Here are a few tools we would like to work with: Redmine GIT Hosting a website/blog to show our work Hosting an internal and private development website/blog We haven't decided yet which OS we will install, but we were looking toward Ubuntu or Fedora. Having a limited budget, 300$/year, we would like to have some advices on the following dedicated server specifications: Kimsufi 2G: Hardware: Intel Celeron/Atom, 1.20 Ghz, 64 bits, 2Gb DDR2, HDD 1 To, Backup FTP 100Gb Network: Connection 100 Mbps, Illimited trafic Dedibox SC: Hardware: Dell Nano U2250, 1x 1,6GHz, 64 bits, 2Gb DDR2, HDD 160 Gb Network: Connection 1Gbit/sec, Illimited trafic Will these server be sufficient? Should we host the websites on another platform? Would a virtualized server be more appropriate? Thank you for your answers, Ephismen.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: from Geforce 8800 to three monitors?

    - by lance
    I've got a GeForce 8800 that I've quite happy with. It drives my two 23" widescreen displays well. Now I've got a 19" standard display that I want to stick between the two widescreens. My second PCIe 16x slot is unused (as is the PCI slot below that), and I want to add a card to my Win7 x64 system. This 19" display won't be used for gaming, so I don't need anything fancy. Here are two cards I was considering, but I'm wondering if they're bad choices for some reason? If they're both fine choices, which is better and why? Again, I'm needing to power only the 19" standard display with this card, and it won't play games. I just need 1280x1024 in Win7 x64. NVidia: Galaxy 95TFE8HUFEXX GeForce 9500 GT Video Card - 512MB DDR2, PCI Express 2.0 ATI: ASUS EAH4350 SILENT/DI/51 Radeon HD 4350 Video Card - 512MB DDR2, PCI Express 2.0

    Read the article

  • 64-bit 13.10 shows 1GB less RAM than 64-bit 13.04 did

    - by kiloseven
    Multiple 64-bit versions (Kubuntu, Lubuntu and Xubuntu) once installed on my ThinkPad R60 show 3GB of RAM, not the correct 4GB of RAM. Last week with 13.04, I had 4GB of RAM (which matches the BIOS) and this week I have 3GB available. Inquiring minds want to know. Details follow: Linux R60 3.11.0-12-generic #19-Ubuntu SMP Wed Oct 9 16:20:46 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux r60 free -m reports: _ total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 3001 854 2146 0 22 486 -/+ buffers/cache: 346 2655 Swap: 0 0 0 . . . . . . lshw shows: description: Notebook product: 9459AT8 () vendor: LENOVO version: ThinkPad R60/R60i serial: redacted width: 64 bits capabilities: smbios-2.4 dmi-2.4 vsyscall32 configuration: administrator_password=disabled boot=normal chassis=notebook family=ThinkPad R60/R60i frontpanel_password=unknown keyboard_password=disabled power-on_password=disabled uuid=126E4001-48CA-11CB-9D53-B982AE0D1ABB *-core description: Motherboard product: 9459AT8 vendor: LENOVO physical id: 0 version: Not Available *-firmware description: BIOS vendor: LENOVO physical id: 0 version: 7CETC1WW (2.11 ) date: 01/09/2007 size: 144KiB capacity: 1984KiB capabilities: pci pcmcia pnp upgrade shadowing escd cdboot bootselect socketedrom edd acpi usb biosbootspecification {snip} *-memory description: System Memory physical id: 29 slot: System board or motherboard size: 4GiB *-bank:0 description: SODIMM DDR2 Synchronous physical id: 0 slot: DIMM 1 size: 2GiB width: 64 bits *-bank:1 description: SODIMM DDR2 Synchronous physical id: 1 slot: DIMM 2 size: 2GiB width: 64 bits dpkg -l linux-* returns: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-======================================-=======================================-========================================================================== un linux-doc-3.2.0 (no description available) ii linux-firmware 1.79.6 Firmware for Linux kernel drivers ii linux-generic 3.2.0.52.62 Complete Generic Linux kernel un linux-headers (no description available) un linux-headers-3 (no description available) un linux-headers-3.0 (no description available) un linux-headers-3.2.0-23 (no description available) un linux-headers-3.2.0-23-generic (no description available) ii linux-headers-3.2.0-52 3.2.0-52.78 Header files related to Linux kernel version 3.2.0 ii linux-headers-3.2.0-52-generic 3.2.0-52.78 Linux kernel headers for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-headers-generic 3.2.0.52.62 Generic Linux kernel headers un linux-image (no description available) un linux-image-3.0 (no description available) ii linux-image-3.2.0-52-generic 3.2.0-52.78 Linux kernel image for version 3.2.0 on 64 bit x86 SMP ii linux-image-generic 3.2.0.52.62 Generic Linux kernel image un linux-initramfs-tool (no description available) un linux-kernel-headers (no description available) un linux-kernel-log-daemon (no description available) ii linux-libc-dev 3.2.0-52.78 Linux Kernel Headers for development un linux-restricted-common (no description available) ii linux-sound-base 1.0.25+dfsg-0ubuntu1.1 base package for ALSA and OSS sound systems un linux-source-3.2.0 (no description available) un linux-tools (no description available)

    Read the article

  • No desktop icons after upgrade to 11.10

    - by anjanesh
    I just upgraded from 11.04 to 11.10 and after restart it showed the login screen. After login, only the desktop background shows with ubuntu 11.10 text at the bottom-left corner. Did my GNOME stop working ? My mouse pointer moves though, so its not a system crash. These are my h/w specs : Ubuntu 11.04 x86_64 • Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz 8MB cache 1066MHz Intel MoBo DG33 8GB DDR2 RAM @ 800MHz • 1GB 8600 GT nVidia Graphics Card • Dell SP2309W • LG Flatron L222WS

    Read the article

  • 12.0.4.1 Reboot before install

    - by Cory
    I'm trying to install 12.04.1 and after I choose install or live, it just goes to a blinking cursor or some text, then reboots the machine. I've tried nomodeset, alternate install, dvd install, and usb. Same problem with all of them. I've also tried unplugging unnecessary devices such as my webcam and 2nd monitor. Specs: gigabyte mobo AMD Phenom II 965 @ 3.7 4gb ddr2 1066 AMD Radeon HD 6870 Creative Sound Blaster X-fi xtreme gamer

    Read the article

  • How to know the number of pins on my laptop's ram?

    - by Rajat Saxena
    I am thinking about upgrading my laptop's ram.How can I get to know the number of pins on my ram without opening my laptop? I ran this command sudo dmidecode --type memory and got following info: Handle 0x0019, DMI type 17, 27 bytes Memory Device Array Handle: 0x0017 Error Information Handle: 0x001A Total Width: 64 bits Data Width: 64 bits Size: 1024 MB Form Factor: SODIMM Set: None Locator: DIMM0 Bank Locator: BANK 0 Type: DDR2 Type Detail: Synchronous Speed: 667 MHz Manufacturer: AD00000000000000 Serial Number: 04008104 Asset Tag: Unknown Part Number: 040404040404040404040404040404040404 Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • 12.04, and 13.10 slower than xp on Lenovo thinkpad R61e. Any bloatware to remove?

    - by Alex
    My mom's Laptop is running really slow with 12.04 and 13.10 right after installation. ubuntu claims it should run nice and smoothly for the hardware thats on it. Lenovo ThinkPad R61e: CPU - Pentium Dual Core t2370 1.73ghz x 2 Ram - 1GB DDR2 667mhz GPU - intel 965gm x86/mmx/sse2 HDD - 80gb sata i tried hardware tests and they fail right that the very beginning of the testing. it does the same for bootable hardware tests (on a cd or usb) Is there any bloatware that can be removed that common windows users would never use?

    Read the article

  • blu-ray archiving in vmware ESXi 4

    - by spacecadet77
    Hi, I need some advice about using blu-ray writer for archiving data on vmware ESXi 4. At office we have IBM System x3400 Tower server with ESXi 4 hipervisor and OpenSuse and CentOS GNU/Linux system as guests. Will blu-ray writer work in this setup, and if it will is there any particular model you can suggest. Best regards IBM System x3400 Tower server specification: 1x Intel Quad-Core Xeon E5410 2.33GHz/ 12MB/ 1333MHz (2x CPU max) Intel 5000P chipset, 2x 1GB PC2-5300 DDR2 667MHz SDRAM ECC Chipkill (32GB max) 2x4GB (2x2GB) PC2-5300 CL5 ECC DDR2 FBDIMM (x3400, x3550, x3650) SAS/SATA Hot-Swap Open Bay (0xHDD std, 4xHDD max, 8xHDD optional) ServeRAID 8K dual channel SAS/SATA controller (RAID 0,1,1E,10,5,6, 256MB, Battery Backup) Graphics ATI® RN50(ES1000) 16MB DDR, CD-RW/DVD Combo no FDD GigaEthernet, Tower with Power Supply 835W (opt Redudant) Slot 1: half-length, PCI-Express x8(x4 electrical) Slot 2: full, PCI-Express x8 Slot 3: full, PCI-Express x8 Slot 4: full, 64-bit 133MHz 3.3v PCI-X Slot 5: full, 64-bit 133MHz 3.3v PCI-X , Slot 6: half-length, 32-bit 33MHz 5.0v PCI ports: 4x USB (Vers 2.0), 2x PS/2, parallel, 2x serial (9-pin), VGA, RJ-45 (ethernet ), RJ-45 (sys mgm) HDD 4 x TB 7200rpm / Serial ATA II 3.0Gb/s / 16MB, RoHS

    Read the article

  • Maximum RAM on Biostar P4M8PM7 Socket775 mATX board

    - by Alex Balashov
    I have a server with a Biostar P4M8PM7 ("Pro-M7") board based on a VIA chipset. It's a strange board to put in a server because it seems like more of a desktop board to me, but alas! It takes DDR2-667 (PC5300) RAM. What I can't figure out is the maximum amount I can put in it, as I cannot find the manual anywhere online. I've found a few marketing broadsheets from online retailers that say, "up to 2 GB of RAM!" but I am not sure whether to believe them. They also do not seem to be quite for the same board, as they indicate DDR2 400/533 RAM, for example: http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=P4M8P-M7. The manufacturer's web site says the same thing, but does not elaborate. It's a 64-bit CPU and board; is there a technical reason why the board would not be able to address more than 2 GB? Can someone tell me what sort of that reason that would be? I bought this server from someone really hoping I could put 8 to 16 in it, and wanted to do some research before I gave up. On a related note, it's not indicated anywhere whether it can take ECC RAM; the existing chips are not ECC, but most memory sold in the range I'm looking for (e.g. DIMMs with enough chip density to do 8 GB) seems to be server-class and for that reason ECC. Any ideas? Thank you very much for your consideration in advance!

    Read the article

  • Are These Parts compatible?

    - by ell
    I have never assembled a PC before, although I have taken an old one apart and replaced a few parts in others here and there so I have (very) limited experience. I have been looking to make a pc and here are the parts I might buy: Foxconn P45AL Intel P45 (Socket 775) DDR2 Motherboard (with onboard sound I believe) Gigabyte GeForce GTX 460 OC 768MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card Already have 2 1gb sticks of dual channel DDR2 memory Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 LGA775 'Yorkfield' 2.66GHz 4MB-cache Processor Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB SATA-II 32MB Cache Hard Drive Antec Dark Fleet Series DF10 Gaming Enclosure – Black I already have monitor, mouse, keyboard and DVD/CD drive Akasa Freedom Power 1000W Modular Power Supply I have never done this before so feel free to laugh at me for getting something obvious wrong, forgetting a vital component etc. but is all of this compatible? And have I gone overkill on the PSU, if so, please recommend one. Thanks in advance, ell. EDIT: Added PSU which I forgot to mention EDIT: I would be using this to surf the internet, write e-mails, chat, word process, play games such as team fortress 2 & spring rts (at highest graphics hopefully), some 3d modelling in blender, some opengl programming, and image editing in GIMP.

    Read the article

  • Computer does not boot after ram upgrade

    - by Calmarius
    I have a Dell Optiplex GX520 desktop (it's abount 5 yr old) PC with 512 MB DDR2 RAM. Since my computer always swapping I thought I should upgrade my RAM. I bought a Kingmax 2GB DDR2 RAM. But my system does not boot. The status leds are on 2 and 4. The user manual says 'video card failure' wtf? I put back the original module and everything works. I tried many combinations. When I leave the old 512 RAM in and put the 2GB next to it to the other socket my system completes the POST and I'm able to enter the BIOS menu. It says my system has 2.5 GB installed, one 0.5GB and one 2GB in dual asymmetric channel mode. It's seemingly right. Exiting the BIOS setup GRUB loads successfully, but when I try to boot Ubuntu it crashes with kernel panic immediately. Trying to load Windows XP does not get past the loading screen, it crashes with 0x8E stop error. Does this mean the ram I bought is faulty? Or is it just mean that the memory module I bought is too new to be handled my computer? I this case I may exchange the RAM with my friends. No other computer is in my house (my very old box has DDR1 ram, my systers new box has DDR3 ones. I can't plug my memory in neither one.) I'm going to return the RAM to store to replace it with a better one tomorrow. Is there any hope to get this new module work?

    Read the article

  • Are these three brand new sticks of RAM really dead?

    - by David Brown
    I'm working on a Dell Dimension 4700 desktop for a friend. It came with 512MB of DDR2 RAM (two sticks of 256MB). One morning, it started blue screening on startup with no helpful error messages. It refused to boot into any form of Windows installation, including Safe Mode, original recovery disk, and my custom Windows PE disk. It did boot into the Ultimate Boot CD, so I ran memtest86, which reported errors everywhere. I removed one stick of RAM and the system booted up just fine. I moved the remaining stick into each slot and the system continued to operate normally, so I came to the conclusion that the stick that I removed was dead. I ordered an exact replacement, along with 2 more sticks of 256MB DDR2 (again, exactly the same as the original), bringing the total system memory to 1GB. Upon installing the three brand new sticks, the system blue screened again, this time stating that win32k.sys attempted to write to read-only memory. I inserted my custom Windows PE disk in order to get a better look at the memory dump with BlueScreenView, but it refused to boot and produced another blue screen, but without an error message. I removed each new stick one-by-one, restarting each time. It continued to blue screen until I was left with only the original stick. I then tried inserting the new sticks in various different orders, but this only produced more blue screens. I reinserted all three sticks (along with the original) and ran memtest86 again, which reported errors all over the place. So, now I'm right back where I started. I don't think it could be the slots themselves, because I can plug the original stick into any slot and it works just fine. System setup reports each stick correctly and shows the total as 1GB, however. It just seems strange to me that all three brand new sticks of RAM could be dead on arrival. Is there something I missed? Or should I just go ahead and RMA them?

    Read the article

  • Servers - Buying New vs Buying Second-hand

    - by Django Reinhardt
    We're currently in the process of adding additional servers to our website. We have a pretty simple topology planned: A Firewall/Router Server infront of a Web Application Server and Database Server. Here's a simple (and technically incorrect) diagram that I used in a previous question to illustrate what I mean: We're now wondering about the specs of our two new machines (the Web App and Firewall servers) and whether we can get away with buying a couple of old servers. (Note: Both machines will be running Windows Server 2008 R2.) We're not too concerned about our Firewall/Router server as we're pretty sure it won't be taxed too heavily, but we are interested in our Web App server. I realise that answering this type of question is really difficult without a ton of specifics on users, bandwidth, concurrent sessions, etc, etc., so I just want to focus on the general wisdom on buying old versus new. I had originally specced a new Dell PowerEdge R300 (1U Rack) for our company. In short, because we're going to be caching as much data as possible, I focussed on Processor Speed and Memory: Quad-Core Intel Xeon X3323 2.5Ghz (2x3M Cache) 1333Mhz FSB 16GB DDR2 667Mhz But when I was looking for a cheap second-hand machine for our Firewall/Router, I came across several machines that made our engineer ask a very reasonable question: If we stuck a boat load of RAM in this thing, wouldn't it do for the Web App Server and save us a ton of money in the process? For example, what about a second-hand machine with the following specs: 2x Dual-Core AMD Opteron 2218 2.6Ghz (2MB Cache) 1000Mhz HT 16GB DDR2 667Mhz Would it really be comparable with the more expensive (new) server above? Our engineer postulated that the reason companies upgrade their servers to newer processors is often because they want to reduce their power costs, and that a 2.6Ghz processor was still a 2.6Ghz processor, no matter when it was made. Benchmarks on various sites don't really support this theory, but I was wondering what server admin thought. Thanks for any advice.

    Read the article

  • Diagnosing RAM issues

    - by TaylorND
    I have an old Acer Aspire T180 desktop. The specs are as follows: AMD Athlon 64 3800+ 2.4GHz 1GB DDR2 SDRAM 160GB DVD-Writer (DVD±R/±RW) Gigabit Ethernet 17" Active Matrix TFT Color LCD Windows Vista Home Basic Mini-tower AST180-UA381B According to the information in the computer's documentation the computer comes with 1 GB of RAM. It has two DDR2 SDRAM sticks. I used to have Windows Vista installed. Then I removed it and install Windows 7, and now I have since removed Windows 7 and installed Windows XP. According to Windows XP with both RAM sticks in the computer has 768 MB. Isn't this supposed to be 1 GB of RAM or 1024 MB of RAM? Is the amount of RAM installed only partly used by the Operating System? Is there's something I'm missing? If I remove either one of the RAM sticks I'm left with 448 MB of RAM. These numbers don't seem to add up. If each of the RAM sticks contains at least 448 MB of RAM shouldn't they (both being in) provide 896 MB of RAM. Even then, isn't that less than a GB of RAM? I'm not too experienced in hardware so I thought this would be the best place to ask. As a follow up question, is the RAM I have enough to run/multitask with Windows XP efficiently? I plan to do a lot of computing with the system (although not gaming), should I invest in more RAM?

    Read the article

  • Will Windows 7 work at all on my old toshiba [closed]

    - by andrew
    Windows 7 requires the following specifications: 1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor 1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit) 16 GB available hard disk space (32-bit) or 20 GB (64-bit) DirectX 9 graphics device with WDDM 1.0 or higher driver Will it work at all on my old toshiba Satellite A100 PSAA8C-SK400E Intel® Core™ Solo processor T1350 (1.86GHz, 533MHz FSB, L1 Cache 32KB/32KB, L2 Cache 2MB) Standard Memory: 2x512 MB DDR2 Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator 950 with 8MB-128MB. The main problem I can see is that the graphics is not up to it.

    Read the article

  • Are there any advantages to using windows 7 ultimate? I can't tell the diference

    - by Jack Dawson
    I just upgraded my new desktop which came installed with Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit with a copy of Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit and so far I have not noticed any difference in performance. Even my Windows Experience Index number is the same 5.5 that it was before the upgrade. So what's the point, are there any performance advantages that I'm not seeing? Additional Info My system hardware specs: AMD quad core 2.6 GHZ 1 TB 4200 RPM HDD 8 GB DDR2 RAM ATI Radeon HD 4650 w/ 1GB dedicated video memory

    Read the article

  • What is more important for speed: Processor Speed or RAM?

    - by Jake
    I am about to buy a desktop, I narrowed it down to two choices, both are virtually identical (even in terms of price) but one has 4 GB of RAM and a 3.7 GHZ CPU the other has 8GB of RAM and a 2.7 GHZ CPU Which is the better choice for speed? Also as a side question, what is better: a 2GB stick of DDR2 RAM or a 4GB stick of DDR3?

    Read the article

  • Does more RAM on Mac really improve performance?

    - by Moshe
    I'm coming from a PC, loaded with a Core 2 Quad CPU and 8GB of DDR2 RAM. I was running Premiere CS3. I'm new to Mac so I'm not sure if this will help performance: Will increasing my 21.5" Core 2 Duo iMac's memory from 4GB (DDR3) to 8GB improve performance of Premiere CS4 significantly? I am not impressed with Premiere as it is now. The iMac is the newest one as of this post.

    Read the article

  • Windows Phone 7 Emulator is very long to load

    - by Frederick Marcoux
    I have the Windows Phone 7.1 SDK on my computer with Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate. I have developped an application but when I want to start it in emulator, it takes about 2 hours to load it, and it's just the O/S! The application isn't started! Is there a way to view the Task Managerof Windows Phone to know why it doesn't load? Specs: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz VT-x 2GB of DDR2 RAM (800Mhz) Windows 7 Professionnal SP1 64-bit

    Read the article

  • Weird graphics behaviour while playing games

    - by Ayush Khemka
    When I play any high-end game like NFS Most Wanted or FIFA 12, I get these weird things on my graphics. While playing NFS, my car has various transparent diamonds all over its body, and while playing FIFA I get these weird black lines all over the field. My PC specs are :- AMD Athlon II X2 ASUS M4A785D-M PRO 500GB Seagate HDD 2GB DDR2 Transcend RAM 1033Mhz ATI Radeon HD4350 512MB graphics card Tell me if I need to provide anything else. Please help me. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is the Windows 7 default graphic driver faster than the newest NVIDIA Forceware?

    - by netvope
    Here is my Windows 7 Experience Index using the stock graphics driver: And after installing the newest driver Forceware 197.45, it becomes: The only change is that the "Gaming graphics" subscore drops from 6.4 to 5.2. Is the stock graphic driver more optimized for Windows 7? Or is Forceware 197.45 buggy? Should I revert back to the stock driver? My configuration: Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Asus M2A-VM (AMD 690G, SB600) 6 GB DDR2-800 RAM (only 3.25 GB usable under Windows) GeForce 8600 GT (256 MB) Windows 7 Ultimate 32-bit

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >