Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 29th Nov 2005 21:42 UTC
Permalink for comment 67134
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
> Watch the video.
Are you seriously suggesting that a 16-18 fps video of a 320x200 (or somesuch) video (encoded in who knows what format) is supposed to show that the CPU in question is capable of displaying common video files (e.g. 512x384 XviD and 720x576 DVD) at 25-30 fps? Oh, c'mon!