I can't ever get tired of these.
Let's go.........RANDOM!
Spamatic wrote:I bet 'xander' doesnt have a girlfriend...
You are entirely correct. I do not have a girlfriend. I imagine that my wife would be rather upset if I had a girlfriend. However, that brings to mind a joke:
A doctor, a lawyer, and a mathematician are all hanging out at the bar. They all went got their undergraduate degrees from the same institution, so they have been good friends for quite while, but their interests were a bit divergent. Somehow or another, they get to talking about relationships. The lawyer proclaims that, while he is not married, he has a beautiful mistress.
"It is far better to have a mistress than a wife," he says. "A mistress is never going to divorce you and take your money, and if you get tired of her, you can dump her and find someone younger and more attractive. I don't understand why anyone would ever want to get married!"
The doctor responds, "I must say that I disagree. I have been happily married for 15 years, and I just can't see any other way to live. I have my wife's nearly unconditional love, and she is there for me whether I am healthy or not. She takes care of me, and I take care of her, and there is no chance that she is just going to leave me one day. I would much rather have the steady, warm relationship of a wife than the flash-in-the-pan mistress."
The mathematician comments, "You are both wrong. It is best to have both a wife and a mistress. Then you can tell your wife that you are with your mistress, tell your mistress that you are with your wife, and you can go into the office and get some work done."
Spamatic wrote:or a life
That may be true. I am once again a full-time student (I'm working on improving my teaching credentials), and am on the university campus three days a week, and on the middle school campus five days a week. I only ever see my wife on Monday and Friday evenings, and on the weekends. :(
On the other hand, this semester is the worst I have had, or will have, and it will only be four months long, so I will probably have a life again by the end of May.
xander
-
- level4
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:58 pm
- Location: Kashyyyk / Cambridge (commuting)
-
- level5
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 10:09 pm
- shinygerbil
- level5
- Posts: 4667
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
- Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
- Contact:
- shinygerbil
- level5
- Posts: 4667
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
- Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
- Contact:
- NeoThermic
- Introversion Staff
- Posts: 6256
- Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 10:55 am
- Location: ::1
- Contact:
jelco wrote:Another note: IGN are saying that they got a pretty solid framerate on their system (quote: "GeForce 8800 GTX 768 MB,2.4 GHz Quad CPU, 2 GB RAM, Vista 32") with highest quality textures, shading and effects plus 4x AA on 1920x1200. However, SSAO had to be turned off because it affected the framerate too much. This amuses me, since my system (Radeon HD4850 512MB, 2 GHz Athlon X2, 3 GB RAM and XP SP2) manages to put down a solid 50 FPS on 1280x1024 with all settings maxed, including 8x AA and SSAO on. I realize the resolution is different, but seriously, a notch higher on the AA and SSAO on and I get better results than they do with an (in theory) inferior system? What is going on here?
Well, duh? 1920x1200 is 993,280 pixels more than 1280x1024. SSAO is a per-pixel operation, so in each frame it was already doing 993k more operations than on your rig. Don't forget that SSAO is a pure GPU operation, ergo the HD4850 is better suited for it. (The 4850 having 800 stream processors vs the 128 of the GTX)
NeoThermic
- shinygerbil
- level5
- Posts: 4667
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
- Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests