you using the full Screensaver type Seti@Home or the Faster more Compact CommandLine Version? the CLV does complete a packet in about 90Mins on my 3.0 system. try ftp://alien.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/setiatho...nnt-cmdline.exe
even though it says i386-winnt... it runs awesome on my P4 3.0 win WinXP. Hope that helps
Oh man. lets see. When i first was getting into PCs, I purchased an IBM Aptiva P1 133. It had like a 1GB HDD and 8MB Ram with a Trident 1MB Video, not to mention that ultra fast 28.8 Modem. That set it all off for me. My next 'big' pc purchase was a custom system from a local pc shop. It was a Celleron 366, with 64MB Ram and a whopping integrated SiS 8MB Video (shared) that rulled. But as far as best GXF card experiance, it has to be my 'old' Ti4600. I had seen it on TechTV and all i talked about was getting the LeadTech WinFast Ti4600 w/128MB video. I read every article in print and on the web for juicy tidbits of info, pics, and benches. Finnaly i had ammased my cash (400+$) and purchased a BFG-Tech Asylum Ti4600 from my local BestBuy. When I got it home, I had to take a break from my card installation cause i was physically shaking from the excitement. I gamed, and benched all day and night, and when it was time for me to sleep...i gamed some more. Of cource that card didnt go into my last described system, I had a new one at the time but because this is a gfx discussion i didnt want to go into all the details of my pc specs. That Ti card did however replace a GF4 MX440.
with the 52.16 on my 5900 Ultra...all benches i ran showed good improvement...however on BattleField 1942 w/ DC MOD...was terrible...loss of textues all over the place...unplayable. went back to the 44.03s
Well me thinks i find an error on that 'First .13 Micron" statement... I would say It's SiS' Xabre600, a DirectX 8.1-compliant GPU. dont get me wrong..the card cant hold a candle to todays gpu/vpu but i think it rightly holds the title as "First". SiS might seem like an unlikely candidate to have the first 0.13-micron desktop GPU, but they were also the first to support AGP 8X with the Xabre's initial launch, so they're no stranger to pushing the envelope. Unfortunately, the Xabre's initial launch was plagued by poor performance, application incompatibilities, and questionable driver shenanigans that largely overshadowed SiS' unique graphics offering.
That SiS was able to move the Xabre600 to a 0.13-micron process before graphics heavyweights like NVIDIA and ATI is impressive, but don't expect this chip to take on high-end offerings like the GeForce FX. The Xabre600 is positioned against more mid-range offerings like the Radeon 9000 Pro, which is why you won't find it running at 500MHz with a Dustbuster strapped on its back. :o
i have best of both worlds...an FX5900 Ultra (BFG Tech Asylum) and an ATI 9800Pro XT. I bought the 5900 first and it did well...very well. easy to OC also. I posted an awesome 50K+ in AquaMark3 with that card. but when enabling FSAA and AF in some games...the picture looked ok...(text was real hard to read in game though) so i thought screw it, ill try an ATI. well after installing the ATI and jacking up the quallity to 6x FSAA and 16x AF, my games looked awesome! even the text was readable, clear and crisp. My 5900 Benches better than my ati in 3dmark 03, but the tables are reversed in 3dmark 01. my nvidia benches more in aquamark3 than my ati. now keep in mind that the diff in bench scores with the 3dmark tests is withing the 100s (ie 6700 vs 6400 in 03 and 18000 vs 17600 in 01) sept for Aquamark3..the 5900 was 50,000+ and the ati pat was 45,000+...5000 pts. I love them both, and if i had to loose one...id be hard pressed to choose.
i have 3 very like systems. what makes them diff is the gfx cards. in my oldest system (p4 2.8 533fsb 512PC2700) ive a Ti4600. in my other system, same specs but a FX5900 Ultra. In my third and newest system, ive a P4 3GHtz 1024PC3200 9800Pro XT. my ti4600 seems to play bf1942 smother than my 5900Ultra system. my 9800PXT system runs it best, smooth with 6XAA and 16XAF. Swaping out my 5900Ultra and my 9800proXT in my newest sytem for benching purposes...the ATI part scores better in 3dmark 01 (ati-18,000+ compared to nvidia-17,500+), and in 3dmark 03 (real close, both 6,000+ but the ati was higher overall than the 5900. In Aquamark bench...the Nvidia part scores best (50,000+ compared to 45,000+) so as i sit, i run the 9800pxt in my 3GHtz system just cause of pic quality. i havent really messed with the Unreal benches so ive no input there. also i havent tried halo. Call of Duty seems to run awesome on all 3 systems. as far as bottlenecks go...ive notice steady increases in bench scores when either a)new gfx card b)new faster ram c)new mobo with 800FSB and 8xagp. d)new processor P4 2.8(533) TO p4 3.0 (800) my 2 cents.