Ah ok... there is also a much nicer way that you could have said that.Originally Posted by '-silencer-',index.php?page=Thread&postID=103528#post103528
It depends on what operating system is he going to use. If he is going to use anything that is not 64 to would be better to go for speed then size. Only windows 64 can see (edit) memory that is 3.5g or more. Faster speed means faster access. Having more memory then speed is the equivalent of trying to obtain water from a large bucket through a tiny pin-hole!Originally Posted by '-silencer-',index.php?page=Thread&postID=103528#post103528
Did i ever say anything about DDR3. No i did not. You know that there are faster memory in the DDR2. I did not say DDR3, nor would i have said you should go DDR3. DRR3 is new and it is not cheap, not only is the memory not cheap the motherboard is not cheap. I would never say get DDR3 unless you have the money that you would like to waste on that.Originally Posted by '-silencer-',index.php?page=Thread&postID=103521#post103521
It is not faster to have just 2 separate HD. Raid0 is much faster then 2 separate HD. You tell me that i do not know anything, but here you are saying that 2 HD is faster then Raid0. Maybe you need to look at what you are typing.Originally Posted by '-silencer-',index.php?page=Thread&postID=103521#post103521
There was no need to attack me the way that you are. If i am wrong then you can explain why i am wrong, and if it makes sense then i will admit that i was wrong and i will take away some new knowledge, but attacking me like this. there was no need for it.
Connect With Us