leliel Mirihi

I download the latest development snapshot every time I log in and I almost never have problems.

I have a Core i5-750 with 8GB of ram the GTX 560 Ti and a 650w power supply. The power supply is more than I need, I could easily get by with a 500w unit. Your Phenom x4 is just a little slower than my CPU (depending on the model) so you should get around the same performance as I do with the 560 Ti. There is such a thing as too much power. The 560 Ti has a TDP of 170w and my CPU has a TDP of 95w, add in around 50w for everything else and we're at 315w. Bump it up by 20% for a safety margin and future upgrades and we're still under 400w. The main reason to get a relatively high wattage power supply is because most low wattage ones are cheap and unreliable. I would say look for something around 500-600 watts. Check the web sites I linked to in the other thread for reviews of power supplies, there are lots of good ones in that range for only 50-75 dollars.

You can enable lighting & shadows because technically the HD 4200 does support the necessary features. You're getting such low frame rates with it because the HD 4200 is just a rebadged HD 3200 which was just a rebadged HD 2400, in other words a 5 year old worthless low end chip. To expand on what Gyphon said. I have a GTX 560 Ti and my frame rate can go from 280 fps on low to 40 fps with everything enabled.

Create an issue in jira for it.

KatyaFiregirl wrote: SSE2 is certainly not in every CPU made since 2003. I have a Compaq Presario sr1303wm (bought in 2005). OS: WinXP 32-bit (meets recommended) CPU: AMD Sempron 3000+, 2GHz (released in 2004, no sse2) (exceeds recommended, which doesn't mention SSE2 until you actually try to install it) Memory: 2 GB (exceeds recommended) Video: 1280x1024, ATI 9600XT (exceeds recommended) The main viewer worked last year, but coming back to it I need to run a third party viewer? Yay, another set of controls to learn. Or maybe I'll just punt secondlife and do something else with my time. Your machine uses the last CPU made that doesn't support SSE2. It's AMDs Barton core, first released February 10, 2003 as the Athlon XP.

FrankiePalmero Actor wrote: Ok, I researched the specs on the GTS 450, and it seems like I would need to upgrade my Power Supply as well (currently 300w). The Minimum Recommended System Power is 400 W, while the Maximum Graphics Card Power is 106 W for the above model. I call NVIDIA support and the guy says GeForce GT 430/400 fall into what I'm looking for since the Power Supply on my PC is 300 W. How good are those cards? Can I still install the GTS 450 without problems? You can get a high quality and high wattage power supply for $50, just make shure it's actually high quality. I would recommend reading reviews on some good sites like hardware secrets or hardocp. (Note: a good power supply review will disassemble the unit, identify the parts and list their specs, then hook the thing up to an oscilloscope to see how clean its output is. )

Penny Patton wrote: Video card creators tend not to support OpenGL as much, focusing on DirectX performance with OpenGL as more of an afterthought. Nvidia makes a lot of money selling professional level graphics cards for running OpenGL based CAD/CAM programs. ATI doesn't make nearly as much money in that market. And lo and behold which company is widely regarded to have the better OpenGL drivers?

The performance tab tells you how much resources are being used for every program running on your machine. Look at the processes tab for info on an individual program.

Penny Patton wrote: It also uses OpenGL instead of DirectX, meaning it lacks a lot of features that make high end games run better. Such as?

LiveReport wrote: look at my pic. if you only had 5GB you would crash tonight. I am using 5.09GB. :matte-motes-yawn: Your whole system is using 5GB. I kind of doubt the viewer is using even half that considering it's a 32bit program.

Catwise Yoshikawa wrote: I don't need to buy a new computer each year to work with 3d or video editing, so why should we need to buy a new computer each year just for SL? no sense, sorry. Would agree updating a 5 year old pc, but they can't ask people to update computers each year... Who said you have to update every year? The only people I hear say that are using it as an excuse to not update at all. Most gamers don't update that often. Games certainly don't need the latest and greats to run. It's a myth spread around by luddites to make themselves feel better about not updating.

zzyzxroad wrote: So far secondlife residents have overwhelmingly voiced their thought by their choice of viwers. currenly 60-70% Phoenix, 15% Firestorm, 15% V2.x and a few V1.23, singularity, etc. Where did you get these numbers from?

Jo Yardley wrote: Myth #1: holding your cursor over a texture makes it load faster... The viewer does raise the priority of the texture under the cursor, you can see this in the texture console. Whether or not that makes it load faster is debatable. The last time I know of that some one tried to test this was back around 2008 and it showed minimal improvements. However the viewer and server have changed a lot since then. Myth #2: megaprims cause lag Years ago megaprims did cause physics lag but that was fixed a long time ago.

Canoro Philipp wrote: i understand that second life in itself is not a game. but it can be turned into a game by the user actions and intentions, a game that can have other games inside, like if im playing a game that im a cowboy playing cards with other cowboys. That I think is just a play on words. Which side you sit on in this debate seems to depends on whether you believe an object is the sum of its parts or if the object is more than merely what it is made of (i.e. holism or emergent systems).

Peggy Paperdoll wrote: I might be able to answer here. I've been reading these games vs real arguments for almost 6 years now. And there are always two sides to the issue (no real middle ground). You have what I call the "purist" (they include many different 'sects" within the SL resident population). Then you have everyone else (including the likes of myself). We view SL as a game (not your typical game, but a game) and we are implied to be "brain damaged" (as I was just a while ago in this thread). I've been in so many of these discussions I know the hot button words and phrases to use to get the "purists" panties all wadded up..........it's a game for me.:matte-motes-big-grin: If I'm in the mood (now now) I keep stirring it up............sometimes I think "purist" actually cry. I mean their collective shouts all boil down to "How dare you call my SL a game". But they also, in the same post call you an idiot (or brain damaged) if you don't agree. It's always funny to see people make complete fools out of themselves.............I love it.:matte-motes-big-grin: Maybe if you stopped looking down on these so called purist whom you believe are so immersed that they are no longer sane and actually listened to what they were saying you wouldn't keep getting into this argument. You have so consistently and repeatedly missed the point of what I was saying that I'm not going to bother saying it any more. The fact that you refer to me as a purist shows that you have no idea what I'm talking about. You came into this conversation with preconceived notions what the other side believed before you even read what they had to say, twisted their words to fit your view, then laughed at them for it.

Peggy Paperdoll wrote: If it's not a game, then it must be real.........at least that's what I'm hearing. That's really beyond the pale. Next you'll be telling that that Picaso painting is real too...........no, it's a real piece of art but it ain't real. And the movie "Avatar" is real too? Come on, you need to get "real" in your own life..........it's the immersion that causes many to loose sight of reality. And that's not healthy. A theatre is real but the play performed in it is not. A television set is real but the show you watch on it is not. If my immersion is causing me to loose sight of reality then your stubborn insistence in only seeing the world in black and white is causing you permanent brain damage.

Canoro Philipp wrote: i am not saying that SL is a game for everyone all the time and thats all that it is, i say that second life with its flexibility, it can be a game if the user decide it so. "A game is a competition within a controlled environment for the sole purpose of deriving please." a game don't need competition to be one, there is a card game called solitaire that is not designed to compete against anyone, we have a controlled environment and for some users its sole purpose is deriving please. a game is a form of entertainment in which you interact following some objectives under certain rules, which makes talking to your friends, watching tv, not games. admiring art, or use it as a tool to express aesthetics or ideologies makes art not a game. you make it what you want it to be, you have the elements in front of you to be used, why not it can be used as a game? to be a vampire and bring blood to your clan, or become an explorer and walk across the grid, to be a reporter and write notes about events in second life, i am not implying that is a game to everyone, it is a game for the people that use it that way. This just shows that you completely missed the point of what I was saying. Yes you can play games in SL, just as you can play games in RL. But that doesn't mean that SL is a game any more than RL is a game. Look at your list of games people play in SL..and oh wait there's the answer right there in how I phrased it; games in SL. None of them are SL itself, they are things we made from within.

Canoro Philipp wrote: the perception of second life is subjective, for some people it is a game, they play it as a game because they wish it so, it is many things for many users, for some is a way to make money or to study abroad, second life can be multiple things to a user, between those things a game. if it is a game then is a very unusual one. nothing that we are used to, like having an objective or collect some points. its one of the most incredible abilities of second life, to be all those things at the same time. I think the reasoning behind this argument is that SL is entertaining, therefore SL must be a game. Which is silly. Music is entertaining yet no one would call it a game, TV is entertaining yet no one calls it a game, talking to your friends is entertaining yet no one calls it a game, painting is entertaining yet no one calls it a game. What magical property of SL makes these activity suddenly become games when done in SL? A game is a competition within a controlled environment for the sole purpose of deriving please. There is only one form of competition in SL (selling things) and you can gain more than merely pleasure from it. Therefore SL fails to meet the definition of a game. I think the problem is that people have trouble detaching the platform from the activities they do within the platform. Just because there is a game show on TV doesn't mean the TV is a game. Just because I play a game in RL doesn't mean that RL is a game. Like wise, just because I do something within SL that is entertaining or even a game doesn't mean that SL itself is a game.

Peggy Paperdoll wrote: People who refuse to recognize the fact that SL is a game have some fantasy about it being some creative world where you have a parallel "Second Life".............and isn't Linden Lab glad you folks think that way. I've read all the definitions that those purists (I tend to think of them that way) throw at you.............and it's still a game. It uses a gaming platform with some major additions (such as nothing is stored locally on your computer, users can "create" their own environment, and there's not clear "goal". What about all those merchants? Isn't their goal to play as some shop owner making their fortune, the estate owners (Monopoly, anyone?)? How about those who build their fantasy home (I used to play with my dolls in my doll house)? It's a game. Pure and simple. A unique game to be sure............but just a game. When you shut down your computer, it's over until the next time you log in. Immersionists crack me up. :matte-motes-big-grin: People who refuse to recognize that the word game has a specific meaning are living in a fantasy. By your definition one could say that just about anything is a game, even life itself.

I know, I started with an 800MHz G4 with a Radeon 8500 which was just below the minimum system requirements of the time and I averaged 3fps. But a lot of people still login with this archaic junk. Look at indra/newview/tests/gpus_seen.txt in the source tree, it lists all the video cards people have logged into SL with in the last 6 months. You'll see a lot of cards that I would have thrown away years ago in it, even the Geforce 2.

DanielRavenNest Noe wrote: Runitai Linden wrote: 2. Nvidia GeForce 6100 I don't think you should be catering to systems that are below your own systems requirements page for SL. That calls for a Geforce 6600 minimum: The system requirements page is a little conflicting. The minimum ATI and Intel chips listed as supported are significantly slower than the Nvidia chips listed. Except for on OSX where the minimum card supported is listed as the 11 year old Geforce 2, which you can't even use in any supported Mac. Basicly LL hasn't really bothered to update that page in 6 years.

The GX 260 SFF is too old and too small to be worth upgrading. But if you really want to you need a low profile AGP card which limits your choices to 6+ year old low end cards. Something like this is the best you can hope for. I personally would not spend any money on that machine, $300 will get you a brandnew lowend system that's 10 times faster.

Chelsea Malibu wrote: The best way around this is a lot of RAM (12 GB is optimal) The viewer only uses 1.5GB of ram at most so why would you need 12GB? I also do not recommend the ATI built cards though their drivers are good, their hardware is not. ATI stopped making video cards 7 years ago. And epic lulz at thinking their drivers are good. People have been complaining about ATI's drivers since 1992.

Actually I wasn't really recommending overclocking for SL. I meant the GTX 560 Ti in general was worth it. Altho I got things a bit mixed up, the DirectCU II is based on the 560 not 560 Ti. Anyway here is a non SL benchmark of that card. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4344/nvidias-geforce-gtx-560-top-to-bottom-overclock/1

Knowl Paine wrote: $270 pounds or dollars? It's a GTX 580 :smileyhappy: You're right, you can tell by the back plate. The 570 is $359 and the 580 is $529 in USD.