How powerful is the computer you use to go on GFF with?

I've got an Athlon XP 3200+. I've had this since winter of 2003, and have had no problems whatsoever with the entire system, not even hard drive issues or virii.
Over this time however, I have upgraded my memory from 512MB of PC2700 RAM to 1GB of 3200 RAM.
Right now, I have a Nvidia 6600 Graphics card in my system, which I thought would be an excellent card. Little did I know that I totally got ripped off with a crappy card. I've notice the GeForce4 card that I originally had in it works much better than this piece of shit. I really should think about getting a new one.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by spikeh

What is wrong with a nVidia 6600 graphics card? It should easily outperform any Geforce4 series card, even the Titaniums. If its instability, it could be heat issues or driver issues.

Well, I have noticed that performance takes a severe hit when I have the card take on the sole task of graphics acceleration. However, if I reduce that to the next highest level of acceleration, my computer jumps up in speed. This is not a problem when I have the GF4 card though. I can have full confidence in full graphics acceleration with that baby.
It is not instability though. I am obsessive about heat, and I make sure that sort of stuff is taken care of.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

How can 1GB not be enough RAM for Firefox?!? The most I have ever seen FF use on my computer was about 100 MB, and this was with insane browsing/cross-referencing/writing going on.
Do you have 60 or so processes running in the background or something? If so, then stop using Norton.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I've already consulted help desk about this with two different topics.
It always ended up with people basically saying "Huh, that is weird. Go buy yourself a 6800GT" (that last sentence almost always Arainach)

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by PUG1911

I'm amused at all the people listing their video though. I mean, it sure makes a difference when browsing the forums eh?

We're not just comparing a man's length here, but also the girth.
:doggy:

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Trench

I have 7 computers. The slowest runs at 3.6 GHz. I'm using the one that runs at 6.8 GHz though.

That is physically impossible. At least, for now. At that frequency, the manufacturing process should be at a resolution of 4 nm. Otherwise, the wavelength would exceed the length of the electron transmission medium, and cause all sorts of interferences (not to mention a lack of ability to process anything).

NOTE: 3.4 GHz dual core processor != 6.8 GHz processor

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?