Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (
More info?)
I wouldn't go that far. Since 1993 we've executed more that 400 projects
with a construction value of over 800,000,000.00 dollars. Our video cards
may be substandard. But our work isn't. Sorry. Just the proud part of me
took offense at the last part of your sentence.
"Bruce Tyler" <top@bottom.au> wrote in message
news:ip5670541biriujpt1db2rl8cuv1qumr33@4ax.com...
> This sort of backward thinking is typical of companies which base
> everything on such categories as "cost effective" or "budget"... Most
> of them can't see exactly what the hell they are actually doing.. The
> nett result is that their products are usually of the same standard...
>
> On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 08:06:56 -0500, "Greg" <ghays@aw.com> wrote:
>
> >Tell me about it. The company refuses to buy us half way decent video
cards.
> >We have Hyperthread 2.6 P4's with a gig of ram. Yet they continue to
skimp
> >on the video cards. We use AutoCAD Architectural Desktop. Seems they
would
> >go with a GL card of some type. Instead of the entry level kind.
> >
> >
> >"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
> >news:RFlcc.193676$Cb.1735576@attbi_s51...
> >> Sorry to hear that those are your only choices. They're both slowww.
> >>
> >> --
> >> DaveW
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Greg" <ghays@aw.com> wrote in message
> >> news:RqKdnaULftXjI-zd4p2dnA@arkansas.net...
> >> > Which would you say is better for desktop use. Also using AutoCAD.
> >Mostly
> >> 2D
> >> > stuff. Some 3D rendering. The FX 5200 or the MX 440. Both have 128
meg
> >or
> >> > ram and are 8X AGP. I have the option to use one or the other.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Greg
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>