atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#3573: Okay, fine--I bit the bullet.

Ordered the card recommended by Wonderduck because, WTF, it won't kill me to try a geForce card in El-Hazard, and he made some good points in his comment.

Someone left a review of that card which said it worked fine for Diablo III, which is pretty graphics-intensive.

If it works for D3, theoretically it ought to be okay for WoW.

The processor in El-Hazard is a dual-core Atom running at 1.2 GHz. The Windows Performance rating for the processor is 4.3; it's 4.8 for the processor in Cephiro, my desktop, which has a Pentium D running at 3.0 GHz. Yeah.

The limiting factor for El-Hazard is its graphics adaptor, which is on the motherboard. It's an Intel cheapo graphics chip without much 3D power, and it turns in a 2.4 on the old "Windows Experience Index" meter. It's the weakest link; all the other parameters (hard disk, memory, processor) turn in solid 4.x ratings. (In fact, the hard drive rates at 5.3, which is the highest rating of any of the parameters.)

I don't really object to this since the damned motherboard cost $40 with processor; if you go lowball you have to expect to give up something and El-Hazard works famously well at any task other than gaming. If I were building a system for someone who was going to do business stuff, I'd build a system like this one. It's got more than enough power to run Excel, Word, and Powerpoint, and to do e-mail. Heck, as it sits right now I can even play videos on the dang thing.

(Cephiro's weakest link? The processor; it's rated at 4.8. Everything else is no lower than 5.6 and the graphics and hard drive are all rated at 5.9.)

Anyway--if this video card that I ordered today turns in about a 4 on El-Hazard, I'm going to be ecstatic. That'll put the graphics performance in line with the other parameters, and it'll then run WoW just fine. (Not as well as Cephiro does, mind you, but fine nonetheless.)

* * *

On my way to run an errand this evening I saw a unit train of windmill blades.

I took pics with my cell phone, which is why the quality is abysmal, but I didn't have time to run home and grab my camera.

...admire the amazingly crappy quality! My cell phone camera is not very good.

But there were a hell of a lot of them. I thought to count them but lost count pretty quickly, as they were moving very slowly. The way they have to ship these things, they can't exactly move them at 90 miles an hour even if the track is rated for that speed--and let me tell you, the track through the Fungal Vale ain't rated for that kind of speed. (It sure as hell ain't.) So they rolled past at perhaps ten miles an hour.

Each blade is about 1.3 times the length of the flatcar carrying it, so the end has to hang over the next car. They staggered them so some were angled up and some were angled down.

I thought, "It's a unit train of angel's wings!" That's what they looked like.

What a pity they're the least efficient way to generate power that we have.

* * *

Remember when the Chinese were shipping hard drives with malware pre-installed?

So Chinese manufacturers are installing pirate copies of Windows on computers made there, and the installs also come with malware pre-installed for your convenience.

It's like those Chinese are ahead of the curve or something.

* * *

Anyway, doing a bit of WoW before bed. Whee!

  • #7858: It must be true.

    Fatzbuub is "fact-checking" the hell out of the "green truck" story, so it's probably the truth: California's dumb econazi laws are causing a real…

  • #7857: Useless, worthless.

    So, the transportation secretary, Pete Buttplug, is on "paternity leave" with his husband, because they adopted two highly unfortunate babies, and…

  • #7856: Ah, so now they have produced a scapegoat.

    Boeing, I mean: Former chief technical pilot for Boeing 737 MAX project has been indicted. Boeing is throwing him under the bus so that none of…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment