check your mail! :) 

make what? There already is a compiled Aquirre's vis for gaylords. I think you could quite easily compile that linux one on windows too.

Btw what are people's experiences of single core vs dual core vs quad core processors? Any help when doing some demanding work (what demanding work do you do?) 

This maight be hard for you to understand, but I'll try it anyway:

I dont have the slightest idea how to do that.

As for processors:

I have experience with dual cores, core2s, P4s, an Athlon 64 and a Phenom 64 (Quad Core).

I would say that the P4 (3.2Ghz) and the Athlon 64 (1.7), the P4 pisses all over the Athlon, and I use it on my admin PC, with 6+ spreadshoots and Sage Accounting software simnultaniously, and never have and slowdown at all!!! The PC is rarely used for anything else, but its "old" now.

Dual Core vs Core2Duo:

Both Intel, the Dual core is older, 2.3Ghz, the Core2Duo is a newer model, the 6750, clocked at 2.66Ghz (no overclocking done on any of my processors btw.)

The Core2Duo is REALLY REALLY GOOD!!! :) :) :) And pretty cheap now also! I use it for gaming, and with the exception of Crysis (which does<>30 fps on "very high" 1280x1024) all games are on max settings and resolution at 60hz. That's with a GTS 88000 512Mb, 800MhzDDR2 2Gb. And whilst playing Crysis at 30hz I am often running other stuff behind it, internet, WC, browsers etc. Norton virus scanning maybe. And there is very little ussues with slowdown. As long as I keep the disk defragged.

The Dual Core I do see slowdown, and games run slower, I dont feel its anywhere neer as good. I mean the graphics card isn't as good either, but when when just running internet browsers and emails it can slow down a bit. But its not TOO bad I guess....

The Phenom Quad Core runs about the same as the Core2Duo. If not slower. But that machine has Vista32 and 4GbRAM. Still very little slowdown, I actually think that the 2 cores in the Core2Duo 6750 2.66Ghz do a much better overall job than the QuadCore Phenom64 @2.3Ghz, by a fairly large margin.

Intel processors have bigger caches than Athlons. This is why they are faster. My Core2 has 4Mb, but the newer Core2s (the 8200-8500s) have 6Mb. And the crazy Quad Core Intels have more than that (but you pay for them). The Q6600 is a 4Mb cache slightly older Intel, @2.4Ghz with 4 cores, and it has a reputation for being VERY cost effective, although for the same money you could maybe get a 6Mb Core2Duo at 3Ghz+ (8500s) and I bet that would feel faster :) but if you have $5-600+ (US) I would go for an expensive Core2Xtreme thingy from Intel with 4 cores and 12Mb cache + :D

Don't bother with Athlon, they are slower. 

 

I dont have the slightest idea how to do that.

Ricky, you don't have to do anything - aguirRe's tools are already compiled for windows. They're talking about porting them over to linux. 

but, yeah, ricky, the reason you've already compiled and released maps is because the compilers already work in your OS :) 

...I'm mis-understanding everything!

Originally I think Necros was talking about Willems fantastic Multi-Threaded Vis, which so far cant be done in Windows. Boo-hoo for me. And anyone else who has Windows and want's to use their processor to its full potential, and half those vis times.

I love Aguires vis, its possibly one of the most influential tools of all time! Think of all the maps we never would have seen because vis wouldn't take the brushowrk :P

I need to be carefull saying that, because the maps are obviously sub-standard if only AguirRe's tools will work on them.....





(***not***) 

I assume you mean you want the multithreading for the Windows version.

Since atm we have two versions, one of which is Windows-specific, you should perhaps ask AguirRe for it.

In the meantime, someone could take Willem's vis and try compiling it on Windows, and then we will at least know if it works.

If it does work, a future multithreading *NIX version could theoretically be compiled for Windows (and Mac), and then we'll all be happy.

I hope. 

Aguire? Metl? Lunaran? Preach? (if I tried to make a list of all of the people who might know where to start, I'd be here all night...)

I dont know anything about how to do it :( 

I dont know anything about how to do it :(

Same here. I don't even have Windows.

Btw I didn't learn this stuff at college, either. You might google for "compile" and "Windows". I'm pretty sure there are free C compilers for that. Install one and RTFM. The principle isn't that hard to grasp. And YOU do have Windows :) 

Normally it is the other way around - Windows people tell that to us. 

Hey, was just wondering if anyone had a copy of, or link to, a Q1 map that I made ages ago called paddydm1.bsp - crazy shenanigans. HD that it was on failed, and I wouldn't mind having a look at it again.

email - sjoh079
gmail
com

Much appreciated. 

I found it on the MPQ archives, awesome! 

Who all wants to discuss the LHC??? 

so fucking stupidly portrayed in the US news media it's beyond belief. 

haven't actually seen anything about it in the news, have to go to like BBC or other websites to get any useful, new or interesting info on it. I myself am not really worried about the world ending, I just wanna see what cool physics stuff comes out of it. 

A bunch of bible-thumpers would prefer if we still ate our meat raw and lived in caves. </shrug>

Expanding particle physics is the normal progression of technology.

And I for one will be happy to be called up as a soldier when it rips open an inter-dimensional portal to the nether realms and releases horrors beyond the imaginings of mankind ready to devour the human race. 

lay off the caffeine dude 

Then I'll never finish it all. 

Zwiffle, I bet you know all about Large Hardon Colliders. 

u clever boy









Yes I do, btw. 

 

Wannacome back to my place for some experiments? 

damn near killed her! 

http://celephais.net/board/view_thread.php?id=870&start=1082&end=1082