Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st May 2007 14:20 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 242020
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 Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-09-21
At $100 USD, at least it is at an "I can afford to buy this for entertainment" price. And if it actually turns out to be useful, all the better!
I do agree that measuring speed by MHz alone, or even by MHz and RAM, is pretty lame. I play with old computers, and can tell you that there is a lot of stuff that you can do on them that most people think is impossible with anything less than a modern computer. Then again, some algorithms are naturally CPU and RAM intensive -- so just make sure you're buying what you think you're buying.