User Controls
Building a PC to mimick mid 00s era computing
-
2018-10-16 at 3:30 AM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL With asynchronous RAM, the entire chip must be read to locate the desired data, therefore the smaller the chip, the faster the reads will be. That's the way I like it.
What the fuck kind of machine are you using that uses unclocked DRAM for main memory? What DRAM unit are you using? I don't think we were even still using that garbage tech in 2005.
-
2018-10-16 at 3:58 AM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 2:20 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny
What the fuck kind of machine are you using that uses unclocked DRAM for main memory? What DRAM unit are you using? I don't think we were even still using that garbage tech in 2005.
I made a mistake. It's actually DDR2 SDRAM. But nothing is "garbage" if it works fine. Over the years, people spend thousands of dollars on completely unnecessary "upgrades". I was able to save those thousands by being satisfied and continuing to working with a reasonably trouble-free system. For some people, enough is never enough. -
2018-10-16 at 2:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL I made a mistake. It's actually DDR2 SDRAM. But nothing is "garbage" if it works fine. Over the years, people spend thousands of dollars on completely unnecessary "upgrades". I was able to save those thousands by being satisfied and continuing to working with a reasonably trouble-free system. For some people, enough is never enough.
Are you my dad? What the fuck. -
2018-10-16 at 2:29 PM UTCGo to goodwil,buy mid 90’s compaq for 3$
No building needed.
I have a presario in the basement somewhere... -
2018-10-16 at 2:34 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL I made a mistake. It's actually DDR2 SDRAM. But nothing is "garbage" if it works fine. Over the years, people spend thousands of dollars on completely unnecessary "upgrades". I was able to save those thousands by being satisfied and continuing to working with a reasonably trouble-free system. For some people, enough is never enough.
So basically it doesn't matter how bad something is if you don't know any better? -
2018-10-16 at 2:40 PM UTCMy first computer was a Tandy TRS-80 Model 1 I bought from Radio Shack in the late 70's. 4 KB of ROM. It ran on BASIC. I also had a Commodore Amiga I bought in the mid '80's. It had a 7 MHz CPU and 256 KB of RAM.
-
2018-10-16 at 2:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2.0 - The GMO Reckoning So basically it doesn't matter how bad something is if you don't know any better?
No. Quite the opposite. I've been building computers since the '70's. I know all about them, and I know all about the latest hardware and the latest machines. It's just that I deliberately choose not to buy into the crony capitalists' little games. -
2018-10-16 at 4:26 PM UTCDosbox, job done.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2018-10-16 at 4:27 PM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 6:12 PM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 6:19 PM UTC
Originally posted by PrettyHateMachine You were like … 9 or 10 in 2005.
Shut the fuck up
What does it matter how old I was in 2005? It doesn't change the fact that consumer PCs were not using unclocked RAM in 2005.
Originally posted by -SpectraL I made a mistake. It's actually DDR2 SDRAM. But nothing is "garbage" if it works fine. Over the years, people spend thousands of dollars on completely unnecessary "upgrades". I was able to save those thousands by being satisfied and continuing to working with a reasonably trouble-free system. For some people, enough is never enough.
Fair enough, I have no problem with low end computing and I don't have any particular complaint about that era of DRAM technology. It does, however, invalidate this point:
Originally posted by -SpectraL With asynchronous RAM, the entire chip must be read to locate the desired data, therefore the smaller the chip, the faster the reads will be. That's the way I like it.
as access times on SDRAM are not dependant on total memory, either on the chip or installed in the system. Access time is determined by the module's cock rate, regardless of capacity.
-
2018-10-16 at 6:22 PM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 7:01 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny
What does it matter how old I was in 2005? It doesn't change the fact that consumer PCs were not using unclocked RAM in 2005.
Fair enough, I have no problem with low end computing and I don't have any particular complaint about that era of DRAM technology. It does, however, invalidate this point:
as access times on SDRAM are not dependant on total memory, either on the chip or installed in the system. Access time is determined by the module's cock rate, regardless of capacity.
You looked like this when With Teeth came out
your balls just dropped yesterday -
2018-10-16 at 7:27 PM UTCI was 5 years old when I got my first computer, a windows 98.
I remember using it to look up porn not long after that -
2018-10-16 at 7:30 PM UTCI was like 8 or 9 when I got my first navi
Before that a friend sent me a printed page of two teen girls showing off their vaginas .. .that was the first ever time I saw explicit pornoraphy like that ... I kept it with me for years until I was like 14 when I ejaculated onto it and tore a hole right where they vaginas were -
2018-10-16 at 8:09 PM UTCI was a camwhore when I was 10 years old and showed my penis in AOL chatrooms because I thought it was funny.
Nowadays they would lock the kid up for producing and distributing child porn -
2018-10-16 at 8:10 PM UTC
-
2018-10-16 at 8:14 PM UTCI'm young enough to remember when Napster was hip and cool, what's even funnier is windows media player copied their code
-
2018-10-16 at 8:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by PrettyHateMachine You looked like this when With Teeth came out
your balls just dropped yesterday
I was pretty cute back then huh? I guess the years of drinking really did a number on me.
I don't know why you're getting salty that I know more about 2000s era computing than you despite being younger. Like why would that bother you? I know more about medieval philosophy too, no reason to get upset over it.
