HTC PRO 2 Proper 2d/3d Drivers

[MordyT]

Originally Posted by jethro_static

Whats the difference between xp and vista?

vista may be a resource hog, done properly, vista can run faster then XP simply because it can support more resorces (think 3.15 gb cap on xp 32 bit - vista has a 4gb - so it begins to equel out.)
btw, threadjack, XP ftw

[pbeaul]

Originally Posted by jethro_static

It's not a bait. 6700 run a lighter os that is why it performs better.

Which is exactly what I was referring to... No one that is half way knowledgeable in benchmarking would consider comparing different CPUs/OSs/GPU at the same time... and conclude that one GPU is more powerful because X.

Anyways, I guess I'll go sulk in the corner knowing that I won't be able to make the next Star Wars on my TP2.

[jethro_static]

Originally Posted by Exil3d

Its been done. Runs almost 1 to 3% faster or slower than running 6.1 . Except for 2d and 3d are cripple . This only points to the missing drivers. FACT.

a 6700 running wm5 and a tp2 running wm5. even thou it cannot run wm5, no.
6700 running 6.1 and tp 6.1, maybe
6700 running 6.5 tp running 6.5 no.

[Exil3d]

Originally Posted by MordyT

clarify.
faster or slower. which one?

WM 5.0 runs 1 to 3% slower on the Pro1 but you really see a 70% drop in performance when you play with multimedia like 2d and 3d apps. XDA has guys that have done it for fun.

[MordyT]

Originally Posted by jethro_static

Does your better than PS3 gaming rig still performs the same after 8 hours of continuous use?

might require a reboot to get it back to where i like it. (*thoug more then 8 hours but i see ur point there) what is your point?
i acknolalge that os slows it down. but not to the point where it is now.

[Exil3d]

Originally Posted by jethro_static

Does your better than PS3 gaming rig still performs the same after 8 hours of continuous use?

Absolutely.. I know its not directed to me.. but mines does. BTW.. I am still waiting for a answer.

[jethro_static]

Originally Posted by MordyT

vista may be a resource hog, done properly, vista can run faster then XP simply because it can support more resorces (think 3.15 gb cap on xp 32 bit - vista has a 4gb - so it begins to equel out.)
btw, threadjack, XP ftw

Vista just simply fail. It's too heavy for a UMPC running 1 gig memory.
Windows 7 address that. But tell U what, XP is slightly better than W7 on benchmark

[Exil3d]

Originally Posted by MordyT

vista may be a resource hog, done properly, vista can run faster then XP simply because it can support more resorces (think 3.15 gb cap on xp 32 bit - vista has a 4gb - so it begins to equel out.)
btw, threadjack, XP ftw

XP 32bit caps at 4gig but will only use 3.25 gigs due to the OS.
XP 64bit caps at 128+ gigs

same for Vista and WM7

HAHAHA Hax04! I used to be one of those XP FTW guy. Then I stumbled into W7. OMG! Its Vista like it should have been. Runs flawless! Alsomt 99.99999% at XP level.

[jethro_static]

Originally Posted by MordyT

might require a reboot to get it back to where i like it. (*thoug more then 8 hours but i see ur point there) what is your point?
i acknolalge that os slows it down. but not to the point where it is now.

That is my point. U gotta reboot to refresh. That is why it is no way near a gaming console.

[MordyT]

Originally Posted by Exil3d

XP 32bit caps at 4gig but will only use 3.25 gigs due to the OS.
XP 64bit caps at 128+ gigs

same for Vista and WM7

HAHAHA Hax04! I used to be one of those XP FTW guy. Then I stumbled into W7. OMG! Its Vista like it should have been. Runs flawless! Alsomt 99.99999% at XP level.

i know this. all i am saying is that vista (may it die) has better support for newer chipsets. therby, you can get goood performance out of it.

btw, i have been testing win7 since before public beta. It is the way of the future. But i'll always be a xp guy