fergie
First 30 Member 
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 1, 2009 20:34:18 GMT -6
since i can't fly, due to wind. i decided to sit down at my PC. i added a 3rd HDD and loaded xp pro on it.
so now i'm running vista ultimate 64bit, vista ultimate 32bit, and XP pro 32bit. for a total of 1250 Gigs of HDD space between 3 HDD's
a triple boot!
i just wanted to see if i could do it, so now i can hook my lipo charger to my PC ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by coffinsnail on May 1, 2009 21:01:57 GMT -6
why are you running two vistas? There really is no need for it, unless you have a specific program that only runs in 32 bit ..... nice job, but i would recomend if it does not take much to do this, reinstall xp first, then vista 64. no reason to burn up gigs worth of space for vista 32 when xp 32 will work fine with a program that will not run in vista 64. also you might have some issues if you installed them with xp being the last. as it will try to be the boot manager when vista should be the manager. windows is very picky about order of installation on multi boot system.
wish i had 1200 gigs, i got almost 600 full and another 200 full on my usb drive, time to get me a 1 tera nas hopefully in next couple weeks i will.
|
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 2, 2009 6:55:53 GMT -6
your absolutely right about the vista's coffinsnail, almost no reason to run two vistas.
when i started, i loaded vista 64 cause i was under the impression that the vista 32bit would not recognize any more than 2.50 gigs of ram (not true BTW), it recognizes all 4gigs. and my command & conquer series playes on 32 bit only,along w/some other games i have. but... vista64 ended up being my main drive.
your right. normaly you want xp before vista.
the difference between vista32 & xp pro is that, as i stated earlier vitsa 32 will recognize 4gigs of ram, xp recognizes 2.50, and vista has DX10 for gaming.
so if i had to ditch one it would have to be vista 64bit, which i might do, as soon as i back everything up.
if your curious i'm using, partition magic to do this.
but no issues with this config so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by coffinsnail on May 2, 2009 20:07:42 GMT -6
actually your wrong. xp will see 4 gigs, however the problem lies in how it sees it. xp sees 4 gigs total, but it takes into account your video ram first. IE if you have a 1gig video card, then you can put in up to 3 gig of normal ram, after that amount the number of address used for ram is beyond what xp can dish out. so the ram above and beyond 4 gig is invisalbe. however with vista 32 and 64 they can see above 4 gig, and there is some people saying the cutoff on 32 is 8 gig, while 64 can go up almost infanatly 128gig supposedly is the cap. dont really care to weed that one out, as vista is going bye bye when windows 7 releases.
Also unless you have DX10 games, which there are few out currently, having DX10 installed doesnt do anything as the system will use DX9 to run the games, if you havea DX10 game great, but look around out of the thousands of games made in the last 2 years, there are less then 20 with DX10 implemented.
Also i have yet to try it but there is a group that has ported DX10 over to xp it is no way perfect but does work from what i have been told.
(sorry been gaming for over 10 years lol, and pc geek for a while)
Anyways to make it simple for anyone else.
Windows XP can only address 4 gigs of ram, so this means video+system Ram will stop at 4 gig and not go beyond.
Windows Vista, Is suppose to allow for up to 128g of ram addressing but some users seem to find a bottle neck around 8g in vista 32, but in Vista 64 they seem to have no issues.
DX10 is great if you have a game that uses it, but even Vista special looking Aero Glass uses DX9, IF you have a DX10 game but run xp, there is a way to add DX10 but its not official so may crash.
I love Partition Magic, and if your going to ditch a OS, id Ditch Vista 32, keep Vista 64 as it will maximise your Processor if its a 64 bit chip.
|
|
McKrackin
First 30 Member
First 30 Member
Flippin' the bird!
Posts: 3,720
|
Post by McKrackin on May 2, 2009 20:12:42 GMT -6
You guys suck!!!!! I want a better PC. I understand helis,how can I get my PC like you guys?  |
|
kiwi1080
First 30 Member
First 30 Member
Posts: 382
|
Post by kiwi1080 on May 2, 2009 20:21:44 GMT -6
Fergie, you lost me after "since I can't fly due to wind..." My thingamy processes at 50 jiggitybytes per second ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by coffinsnail on May 2, 2009 21:24:42 GMT -6
mc pcs are easy....
all you need to know are the parts and where they go.
Motheboard holds everything, cpu is the brains, while the ram is the heart, and the hard drives are just the long term memory. PCs are not that difficult really unless you need to do very specific things with them. If you want a super good PC made for gaming you yourself can build one for less then 800 bucks.
|
|
McKrackin
First 30 Member
First 30 Member
Flippin' the bird!
Posts: 3,720
|
Post by McKrackin on May 3, 2009 4:20:05 GMT -6
I thought I was cool for upgrading the RAM in my lappy to 4 gig.lol.....
I have a Gateway desktop I'd like to set up for games.
80 gig hard drive.1 gig RAM.Single core Pentium.
Can this PC be set up for gaming?
|
|
BTCat
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
BT Cowboys Cruiser
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by BTCat on May 3, 2009 6:40:34 GMT -6
I thought I was cool for upgrading the RAM in my lappy to 4 gig.lol..... I have a Gateway desktop I'd like to set up for games. 80 gig hard drive.1 gig RAM.Single core Pentium. Can this PC be set up for gaming? May I suggest Pong? |
|
McKrackin
First 30 Member
First 30 Member
Flippin' the bird!
Posts: 3,720
|
Post by McKrackin on May 3, 2009 7:37:48 GMT -6
lmao....Think maybe even "Duck Hunter" ? |
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 3, 2009 7:51:03 GMT -6
actually your wrong. xp will see 4 gigs, however the problem lies in how it sees it. xp sees 4 gigs total, but it takes into account your video ram first. IE if you have a 1gig video card, then you can put in up to 3 gig of normal ram, after that amount the number of address used for ram is beyond what xp can dish out. so the ram above and beyond 4 gig is invisalbe. however with vista 32 and 64 they can see above 4 gig, and there is some people saying the cutoff on 32 is 8 gig, while 64 can go up almost infanatly 128gig supposedly is the cap. dont really care to weed that one out, as vista is going bye bye when windows 7 releases. Also unless you have DX10 games, which there are few out currently, having DX10 installed doesnt do anything as the system will use DX9 to run the games, if you havea DX10 game great, but look around out of the thousands of games made in the last 2 years, there are less then 20 with DX10 implemented. Also i have yet to try it but there is a group that has ported DX10 over to xp it is no way perfect but does work from what i have been told. (sorry been gaming for over 10 years lol, and pc geek for a while) Anyways to make it simple for anyone else. Windows XP can only address 4 gigs of ram, so this means video+system Ram will stop at 4 gig and not go beyond. Windows Vista, Is suppose to allow for up to 128g of ram addressing but some users seem to find a bottle neck around 8g in vista 32, but in Vista 64 they seem to have no issues. DX10 is great if you have a game that uses it, but even Vista special looking Aero Glass uses DX9, IF you have a DX10 game but run xp, there is a way to add DX10 but its not official so may crash. I love Partition Magic, and if your going to ditch a OS, id Ditch Vista 32, keep Vista 64 as it will maximise your Processor if its a 64 bit chip. man coffinsnail, it seems you are right i did some lookin up on this subject. not that i didn't believe you. thank you for setting me straight on this. it seems i've been misinformed on this subject. but acually i have only 6 games that are DX10 grid assassin's creed crysis crysis warhead world in conflict flight sim X but i'm really not intrested in the DX10 xp thing. but how do i tell if my CPU is 64 bit? it dosn't say in my paper work. or maybe you might know, it's an intel Q6600 core 2 quad 2.4 Ghz OCed to 3.2 ohh... and also rumor has it that windows 7 is DX11? and the only vid card supporting this so far is ATI? is this correct? |
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 3, 2009 7:59:45 GMT -6
Fergie, you lost me after "since I can't fly due to wind..." My thingamy processes at 50 jiggitybytes per second ;D LOL, sorry kiwi ;D i've never heard of a jiggitybyte  |
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 3, 2009 8:02:47 GMT -6
You guys suck!!!!! I want a better PC. I understand helis,how can I get my PC like you guys? maybe coffinsnail MIGHT agree w/ me on this one. but once you build afew it can be easier than building a heli. IF everything goes smoothly ;D |
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 3, 2009 8:05:14 GMT -6
lmao....Think maybe even "Duck Hunter" ? LOL thiers allways solitare also |
|
fergie
First 30 Member
FIRST 30 MEMBER
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by fergie on May 3, 2009 8:42:38 GMT -6
here you go coffinsnail you might enjoy these pics    and here's some specs: case: thermaltake amor+ MB: EVGA 780i CPU: intel Q6600 core 2 quad 2.4 Ghz ~ OCed to 3.2 (lapped) RAM: mushkin 800Mhz ~ 4 gigs (4-4-4-12 2T timings @ 2.0v) GPU's: nvidia XFX 8800 640 MB (each) sli enabled PS: corsair HX1000W monitor: dell 22in wide screen i know it's kind of old timein for todays standards, i've been running this setup for almost a year now. no issues i'm lovin it |
|
