The AMD Duron Gets A Home - Sort Of 80
Techman writes "AnandTech has put together an in-depth analysis of the SiS 730S chipset for AMD's Socket-A platform. What's so special about this 730S? Well, it turns out that one of the reasons that AMD's Duron hasn't been selling well in retail markets is that it doesn't have a cheap platform to run on. The 730S from SiS is an attempt to solve that problem. Unfortunately as it is SiS' first attempt at an Athlon chipset, the 730S does not perform as well as you would hope it would. And in many cases, the Duron loses its luster when combined with the 730S."
Re:Etymology of Duron (Score:1)
In french P4 is an abreviation which means that you have been exempted of military duty because of psychological problems.
Cheers,
--fred
Re:A return reply to K6-2 (Score:1)
SiS video cards (Score:1)
SiS appears to be the worst designer of video/graphics chipsets; I own a computer that has a SiS 6326 video card in it, and I have to say I'm displeased with it and SiS in general. Not only does it appear that the 6326 is the cause of many random crashes in my machine, SiS's support email doesn't even work.
And don't get me started about the lack of acceleration...
Re:A return to the bad old days of AMD. (Score:1)
Who's this "we", white man?
Intel almost got it right. (Score:2)
Cheap and bad are relative (Score:2)
"Bad", of course, comes in when you try and stick a real AGP card in that AGP-shaped slot on most Super7 motherboards. Turns out they provided enough power through that slot for my Millenium II, but not nearly enough for even a Voodoo 3, let alone the GeForce I bought last summer. Feeling the undersized power transistors become excruciatingly hot was not encouraging. Having the computer crash, in Windows and Linux, after a few minutes use, was less encouraging. Having to upgrade my motherboard, processor, and case months before I'd intended to, to use a video card that was supposed to work in the original system, sucked.
I went to a Duron after checking out compatibility issues, BTW.
The original Athlon itself got a mostly-undeserved bad rep for this reason; there were a some early motherboards that had the same half-assed AGP compatibility problems.
Duron losing its luster (Score:5)
Serious accusations towards SiS (Score:1)
That reports that SiS has been using partial-frame skipping in it's onboard video chipsets. While true that most serious buyers wouldn't buy such a mobo with an onboard video chipset, it does raise questions about SiS cheating at benchmarks to raise their value and reputation.
Re:Why?? (Score:1)
Re:Durons (Score:1)
yeah, I guess AMD isn't going that direction.
Or like the backwards compatable and full-speed nature of the 32-bit compatability of the hammer series?
yeah, AMD is pretty much slacking all around and never do anything right and they suck and they're just copy-cats and they couldn't speed up processors fast enough and they're always behind intel and everything amd is bad...
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Not a performance chipset (Score:1)
The main marketing (I can't think of a technical advantage) advantages of the Celeron is the ability to sell really cheap systems with chipsets that integrate sound/video/network on the motherboard. By integrating, they could knock off $50 or so from the price of the box.
Up until now, there were no Duron motherboards with all of these functions integrated. Duron is clearly technically superior but had trouble competing at the extreme lower end to which it was targetted.
I wouldn't (and most on
Why? 'Cause they can't lay a trace. (Score:3)
That leads to an industry that's got zero interest in innovation and zero responsiveness to change.
If you can't convince a chassis maker, who's got a thousand mom-and-pop sweat-shop box builders besides you (so he couldn't care less about you or your idea,) that you need something different and it would behove him to make it, you're going to buy off the rack the same as everybody else and slit your own throat on price alone since you can't come up with anything different, never mind better.
The same goes for the PC board makers, the case makers, the component makers.
You don't stand a chance if your pin-outs aren't 100% compatible.
You don't stand a chance if your instruction set isn't 100% compatible.
You don't stand a chance of you cabling isn't 100% compatible (What the [expletive deleted] is the deal with these parallel/serial port "USB cable" kludges. Apple had the balls to make a port for it on their iMacs.)
This industry has [expletive deleted] itself to death. You the consumer have squat-all input in the process or the product because, even if you were willing to pay more, the people who want you to by only to sell you the same boxes as everybody else.
Face it. The reason Apple's designs look different is that the Mac buyers are paying what good design costs. I don't see a cool looking ultra quiet Cube on my office desktop anytime soon because my boss cares more about bucks than about me. But my den would make you drool.
Apart from Apple, computers have become so boring, you want them to be invisible, except that they aren't and you rip your knuckles open installing anything. Used to be the desktop was where you worked, now its the space occupied by the monitor and the beige box. There's no room left to work.
Duron not selling 'cos.... (Score:3)
...people who don't know any better (Score:1)
I just don't think that it's significantly worse than the Athlon, and it kicks the pants off of a celeron at equivalent clock speed for a comparable price.
Re:Asus (Score:1)
I love asus. Abit gets the most press, but I will be an Asus dude forever. Got the K7v now, will have A7v soon with new computer... Built-in ata-100... gotta love that.
__________________________________________________ ___
A return to the bad old days of AMD. (Score:2)
Also remember that SiS is the company that can't seem to make standardized video cards/video chipsets. e-machines is a huge customer of SiS (as was their parent company, TriGem America; back in 1997 they sold my school about 15 Pentium 166 computers with 16MB of RAM and a SiS integrated video chipset that stole 2MB of the system RAM for itself; fortunately, Windows 95 could run just fine on 8MB, let alone 14).
Re:Not really (Score:1)
You want a machine that people will look at and say "WTF?!". You explain to them that it runs at 1Ghz. They say "So what, I just bought a 1Ghz TBird". "Well, yeah, but this CPU is only rated at 600Mhz." Then you show them the stacked peltiers, then 120mm card coolers, hard drive coolers, blue orb on the video card, then smack them in the head with a huge "I 0wn eWe" sticker.
It's not trouble, it's satisfaction.
Re:Durons (Score:2)
Durons are just the amd version of the celeron so it doesn't matter much anyway most geeks would buy the athlon anyway.
This Duron + SiS 730S platform isn't aimed at geeks, it's aimed at the goddamn-cheap market, the people who flog crappy PCs at low prices via full-page ads in the newspaper with lots of exclamation marks!! I think it has a lot of potential there - Anand says [anandtech.com] the 730S will cost $6 more in bulk than the Intel 810E, but that's no great hardship given that low-end Duron CPUs (obviously such machines use low-end CPUs) retail for $18 - $24 less than same-clocked Celerons (pricewatch [pricewatch.com]).
Now of course these machines will suck, because even if the 730S is OK, and (as we all know) Durons are cool, every other component will be complete ass. Nasty 15" monitor, crappy case, cheapest drives in the world, etc. But anyway, it's more sales for AMD, helps fund their work on nice CPUs that geeks will love..
Re:Durons (Score:1)
You may not want to cut that corner when you're buying just one machine, but consider the situation I was in recently. I had $5000 to build 8 machines for a science lab. I could choose any parts I wanted, but I could spend no more than $5000. And, on top of that, I had to purchase from "reliable" vendors like buy.com, outpost.com, etc.. So, rather than inflate my system $40-50 a machine by going for a 750MHz. Athlon, I chose a 750MHz. Duron. As far as this lab is concerned, it won't make one bit of difference, as the Duron has been shown to have 80-90% of the speed of an Athlon at the same price. Therefore, why spend 50% more money for only 10% more speed? It just doesn't make sense, especially when you're on a budget. The Duron is the perfect chip in these situations. Combined with a KT133 motherboard, I doubt anyone can tell the difference between a Duron and an Athlon at the same clock speed (unless you're running Q3 or UT at some high resolution).
Re:It's a lowend solution... (Score:1)
I would. Not for playing games on, but for most things it is more than adequate.
Considering that the SiS730 board with an AGP card got "only" 90+ FPS in QuakeIII at 1024x768, I don't think that most geeks would complain. A lot of them are at college or younger anyway, and can't afford a board double the price.
And my Grandma is known as "Ace Dog Btch" on her ISPs game servers. (okay, I made that bit up, give me some slack here)
What is more intersting is that this chipset will be *ideal* for FlexATX motherboards (and MicroFlexATX motherboards
Re:Durons (Score:1)
CPUs are really not the limiting point now. If you want a fast and inexpensive system, buy an "slow" cpu like duron 800 or thunderbird 850 and than put much ram in it and buy fast harddisks(raid may be an good idea if you do video cutting and things like that) and videocards.
Re:via (Score:2)
Rich
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:1)
733 Celeron: $114
750 MHz Tbird: $98
Wow! where did you get these prices from?
But a more important question is: why the hell did they price TBird so low?? It's sooo much better than P3 but it costs less than Celeron???
___
Re:Why?? (Score:1)
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:2)
The additional cost of those other components more than make up for the the cost difference for the proc.
--
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:1)
The problem is that there are no low cost Socket A motherboards full stop. Integrated chipset or no. Please point out where I can buy a $65 dollar socket A motherboard. Integrated graphics, ATA100, etc need not apply.
Once Socket A motherboards cost $65, then you can put a helluvva lot of real hardware in for the cost differential between a Celeron and a Duron at the same performance level.
Still, I would like someone to review systems against each other based on price. Put a $500 AMD system up against a $500 Intel system. Put a $1000 AMD system against a $1000 Intel system. I think we know who the winner will be every time. Integrated graphics will just shave off $10 or so - allowing another 50MHz or a faster DVD or CD drive.
Re:Reference board pic (Score:1)
Check the address before you click if your scared of a redirect.
Re:Asus (Score:1)
Re:Asus (Score:2)
My main system is apparently hopelessly outdated (Abit BH-6 C-300a@450, Matrox G200, 512MB registered ECC), but it gets the job done... my gaming box is due for an upgrade soon... those 1GHz+ with a GTS2 sounds like a plan... hmmm...
--
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:3)
I was playing a little bit of Devil's advocate there... I haven't ever used a board with integrated sound/video that's been better than a temporary solution until one can put the new hardware in...
>The problem is that there are no low cost Socket A motherboards
Yes, that's my point - the people trying to hit the $300-500 price point don't care nearly as much about anything else. Of course, the people that buy end up getting them at BestBuy or Radio Smack, and hope it comes with that Microsoft Netscape thing, that lets you download the Internet (fits conveniently on a Zip disk!)... An extra few bucks is usually worth the money, especially on motherboards...
--
Re: Duron (Score:1)
First came the (Classic) Athlon. The classic Athlon spawned two CPUs. The Duron is the classic Athlon with a cut down chip size, but with almost all of the power of its predecessor. The Thunderbird is an improved Athlon, faster then a Duron (or a "classic" athlon), and is the CPU that AMD is still selling under the name of "Athlon". The Thunderbird compares very favorible to the PIII, beating it in more then a few benchmarks. The Duron is also a fine CPU, running at a 100 mhz bus, while the celeron runs at a 66 mhz bus, which makes the Duron easily beat the Celeron, although both are known for their overclocking ability.
Re:A return to the bad old days of AMD. (Score:1)
Of course, I don't have this problem. I just bought an Athlon with a *real* mobo. But there could be problems elsewhere...
Re:...people who don't know any better (Score:1)
(Yes, the DNS is necessary. My ISP's DNS machines are out about 20% of the time.)
Re:A return to the bad old days of AMD. (Score:1)
"inexpensive" != "cheap-ass"
Put them on decent motherboards and they deliver sufficient performance for most people's needs. I have a gang of K6-x processors at home (K6-200, K6-2-300, K6-III-450) that have done a great job under Win9x and Linux. At the time, they were decent buys (mostly...the K6-III was a little bit spendy, but it was still cheaper than forking out for an Athlon, which would've also needed a new motherboard and a new case, as my K6-III is on a VA-503+ in an AT full-tower case). More importantly (at least to me), they weren't from Intel, home of the processor serial number.
Durons (Score:1)
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Eh... (Score:1)
In the meantime, the rest of us will be waiting for multiprocessor boards for the Athlon...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Etymology of Duron (Score:3)
Is Duron supposed to give someone a hardon? It's not workin' for me.
-Nev
Wait (Score:1)
Why?? (Score:2)
Re:Durons (Score:1)
My flatmate has a duron (I am upgrading soon now that I've seen it) it's an all round great machine, compiles the kernel quickly, no problems (that I've heard of) and I would recommend one to anyone. Surely cheaper computers are something to be cheered anyway, bring them to everyone I say.
They did it backwards (Score:2)
Instead now the fast mobo is the norm, and pushing people into the mindset of paying less for the "wimpy" mobo.
Stability is still the main concern! (Score:2)
Stability is the most important thing even for value users on a low budget. Speed comes in second - everytime (well that's my opinion anyway)
What scared me was this sentence
"The 730S claims support for both the 100 and 133MHz DDR FSB frequencies (effectively 200/266MHz). While we could get both settings to work, the 133MHz setting was noticeably less stable even to the point where none of our Windows 2000 tests would complete. Chances are that the issues will be sorted out in future revisions of the chipset if not simply requiring a BIOS update on our particular test board."
I mean it's not as if asus produces low quality boards being it pre-release boards or not. Hopefully it's just a bios issue but could be more than that i fear. Well only time will tell....
Re:Why?? (Score:2)
You also shouldn't buy a computer from Radio Shack, either, but people do...
(well, unless it's a Tandy...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
It's a lowend solution... (Score:3)
Basically the chipset meets it purpose, it's an inexpensive chipset for an inexpensive processor to make inexpensive, entry-level, low-end pc's. I guess it would be the equivalant of the 440zx chipset. Grandma only checks her email, types letters, and researches our family tree. She doesn't need 23500000000000000 fps in quake 3
Now don't flame me because I put the duron in the lowend group, remember that's what it was designed for. I realize you hardware buffs will want to buy them because they perform well and are very overclockable like the celeron, but would you really buy a cheap motherboard to overclock on? I didn't think so, but then this chipset wasn't made for you.
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Given the chance, AMD would do no different than Intel. They probably have.
Money makes all the difference, and as AMD gets more market share, I am sure that they will become more greedy.
But my point is more general here, on
What happens when AMD/Linux stumbles? I bet there will be a bunch of posts stating "I never cared for AMD."
Re:Eh... (Score:2)
If you're doing a lot of rendering/graphics work, x86 probably isn't the platform you should be using if you need that much speed.
Distributed.net/Seti@Home? Don't make me laugh. Anyone who buys dual procs just to run these apps has their priorities out of whack.
SMP for x86 is useful for maybe 1% of the computer buying population, yet it's mentioned all the time here. WTF?
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
Re:Duron not selling 'cos.... (Score:1)
___
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:1)
--
technical terminology (Score:3)
Re:Eh... (Score:1)
I started getting annoyed with Intel slightly before the Pentium release, but I loved my 386; I had that thing for years, and it ran great. Well, ok, jpeg decompression was slow, but come on. My Pentium 133 was pretty decent too.
As for AMD, I was satisfied with my K6/300; I got it for the value and the integer performance, but the slow cache definitely hurt.
However, now that I've got an 800Mhz Thunderbird, I'm happy as a clam. It's faster than I need at the moment, and a pleasure to use. And I won't have to worry about slow cache performance for a while yet.
So, yeah; Intel makes decent chips, although they've been messing up lately. AMD has beaten them in the short term. But basically Intel is a sore loser, and has been acting more objectionably for a long time. If Intel dies and AMD takes over, I'll be happy. If AMD starts to abuse their newfound power, well... there's always Transmeta, right?
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Re: (Score:1)
Only Bad because you dodn't know any better (Score:2)
I've got two K6-2 systems myself, have built half a dozen for friends and family, and know a bunch more who've built themselves K6-2 systems.
All of them are rock solid and perform great for the money that was put into them.
Of course, I didn't go out and but the cheapest motherboard available when for a $10 more a stable, good performing was available.
You may think that the K6-2 is "cheap" and "bad", but informed people know better.
The Duron is the same way. I've got a Duron 700 sitting here on my desk. I didn't chimp on the motherboard. It runs great (fast and stable) the the speed is indiscernable from an Athlon 700 and saved me $80 in the process. When I need a speed boost in a year or so, I'll drop in a 1.2GHz Athlon (which should run about $100 by then) and run for another year with no other changes.
SiS 530 not that fast, either (Score:1)
Kris
Kriston J. Rehberg
http://kriston.net/ [kriston.net]
Re:Only Bad because you don't know any better (Score:1)
Re:It's simple, really (Score:4)
AMD chips are
This is bad engineering? Our Durons are running smooth as silk, thanks.
Re:Why?? (Score:1)
If you want more ports then you're in the wrong market. Of course you'd want to add a modem and FireWire... but nothing beats an all-in-one computer for a server or internet terminal.
Kris
Kriston J. Rehberg
http://kriston.net/ [kriston.net]
Re:Celeron? So what? (Score:1)
Kris
Kriston J. Rehberg
http://kriston.net/ [kriston.net]
Re:Asus (Score:1)
Re: You're wrong on the Duron part. (Score:1)
You mean that you couldn't chimp on the motherboard. Right now (well, before the SiS offering), you can only get a VIA KT133 as a Socket A board. Therefore, your entire Duron argument is null and void.
via (Score:1)
Anyway, given Via's kickass track record with AMD I would think they would get more coverage than this (to me, anyway) no-name company.
__________________________________________________ ___
Sure it does! (pic) (Score:1)
Not really (Score:4)
The duron will SMP (Score:2)
Re:Duron not selling 'cos.... (Score:1)
need to archive this (Score:1)
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use
qANQR1DBwU4DaFTCpmmUYTkQCACCVnwHSvnWSH8UAn07rQ6
w1qBjOS6nLyw4SRSPi4VCFwPaHGj1SIzined1FcM83K4Mx8
Ac+RdJ4PAgsiR6dPfTud7gN1mAeCdTjnLG9zrpRRkCcYSJk
SaZatzjg+DwOzn3uSFTxYTNddD2jfdORoinibiNUDSKSdi1
akFK7kkmEg0bEg7TBzdU4wJk4VYHKfydPkB/z8D8QPtp5Fm
H7nH2ITco1aWgEClK1YOe+EaKhsoBi3n3V7mNGCxSP2Regz
CLaht/fB3aGgokNeC16QakdDTlXDGSin+5+v0o8LmaVcnoc
O/sJ55UZCsA70lRJNPZ6Z18X338NoCOcwVld3l+OcTZKR0e
UCqMCRu2bERMK0taBQ4O6GQUyWytGeRBEJV2OWn61+vvbKt
uiypCM/oabgOjCxNTXbRL4B+fKmBwKannpT/A8jo5gZsJN/
u+nUXYVL8IINmA6AiDyeI2PoiEuETjUMOWDPrBe5+Qiwt00
ieriexWWycQkOK2JCmcCJFXJNNGSg0MKTIspNwY7GsbJVR7
0CFxi9xHrY54GMKC9elEt/R28hEmEZI4oIRlCmzyGMmW1ng
9BHEsNiCKTVrdPooCCJybyPGJAh85LL3yr+anX7rfC4WXIj
ijFav+o0/+XtTvppBvc4OJUdga6Zo4NsxsjcSYoM3e+OrRu
Jc4es+hNgCkTLF/yNakMLqmkKa6FXH5cDNbK/K2u/+o8pkh
mB0YgKW+uYvon2gGH8ekFXg653Dw+giQtvtcXNTsFfQw9ry
mtIViWHUd2MujhMiXeu2fAHz7L/N0DkV/5B+rS+7EKv4rOn
jTNAmc1Ch8GX0PMMUVTmnvRBuQy3Q8dUj6gz16f/zSjM9ED
SvCiHaJ3IQ6IJoEOWBxLfKu/eoriooUj8aqd4JyBnekkLk0
O1ImRu8v3+TZbPM1isIqmmz5DgRMIBlN/5trggsvcNVa9tC
aYac80Ogp7L7m4uCzqnG4uhrvf6NxdHLWMIIDXReWZEKHF+
dE1Wwu/Hfegfn6avKHzfzExCgLIJW1GQBnmBhCHY8Tni0ix
jtSDiuxUDoE7nre64rUacpkoD5FSyhAx+zK9lnE2Qh2wtJP
gJ4BQADoq/GcDigZsWEvDnta8QJ1Ug9NmYGk94+ReWepzCG
6GOn/mmZo1a7a5poI4ss/qZkx1SeFqATcF7+27qSnFYA0Iu
wBG84d6lEwuPSXcdBclpfOCRON6YR5r9vmefBAAS9/ad/8w
huQGYyQtnYf34pYrZP7zru9GQFMnN11HY4GgGq9DEzrrad1
2IGxLNRTVtpRglc7zXf3xBuIqp4Uh3kHG314iEmgffbXqVq
IuD+o4AJgxT4pIOf7B9XI52DgDNg/WhIwbP6HRxezdFG0ec
7rc38PvJheE9zd42Xil6q8uUUbnO9Y9FqF9r2IDV86KZ0ub
ujKHRtb/9nIIJ6rkUT6q2FJddwrVNk5BnnWXYaUUx2BgfOU
SHhh7ZAHK0igRNU3B0AwIYNe2y1foO9qLI+TLp2KNNWDb81
mCcW/poGn87ROE073hxJd01FG0i1yHfi7ON6TjjFBkBZp3w
7xvDVw3/n3u3ve7zFg3oZHUwVW8l69Sgk8X+CJkKtb4kRzi
GRod3kdgrO6Iyryj1IujljXAwmlNium5t86VVICPebYJEkD
/7C1by0Hyyz0dxwjkRnr2hIKCzLBN23F23PBOY3CpGtyplS
IM50sXJ5k1MSSVz29Q==
=wvz1
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
__________________________________________________ ___
Where you can buy Durons.... (Score:1)
http://www.egghead.com/category/inv/00046627/0359
This is a barebones type of thing -- but most geeks can handle that, right? Current bid (at time of writing) is $142. Cheap!
Re:Why?? (Score:1)
Re:Duron not selling 'cos.... (Score:2)
Individual system builders are still IMO unlikely to go for a Duron when for $50 more you can have a full Athlon system. Both are cheaper than an equivalent Celeron or Pentium III system.
With Athlons, you get the same or better performance than an equivalent Intel processor, so there's a reason to buy. A Duron, whilst it offers reasonable bang per buck, just does not seem to offer the same type of 'bang'. System upgraders probably see little point in upgrading to a Duron when the full T/Bird is within their price band.
Celeron? So what? (Score:3)
750 Mhz Duron: $63.
733 Celeron: $114
750 MHz Tbird: $98
Thunderbird costs less than Celeron at the same clock. When building a low-end system, the real choice is between Tbird and Duron; Celeron isn't even a factor. Maroberts' point was: with the Tbird's extra cache only costing $35, it is hard to justify the purchase of Duron.
---
Re:Why?? (Score:2)
Certainly, a cheap motherboard can cause problems. No USB is almost criminal these days. But some people don't need that stuff!
The problem comes in when someone doesn't know what they really want and they go out and buy the cheapest system they can find. And then they find out later that they cannot upgrade it or that it doesn't provide the functionality they really want. But the solution isn't to refuse to manufacture low-end motherboards. The solution is in better education.
Re:Duron not selling 'cos.... (Score:1)
Individual system builders are still IMO unlikely to go for a Duron when for $50 more you can have a full Athlon system. Both are cheaper than an equivalent Celeron or Pentium III system. System upgraders probably see little point in upgrading to a Duron when the full T/Bird is within their price band.
This is why a chipset like this is so important! Individual system builders will be willing to spend a little more for an Athlon, usually. System upgraders too. So the target market than the Duron desperately needs to nail is the ultra cheap-ass system mass producers market. These guys do NOT give a damn that a Duron is 90% of the speed of an Athlon - they wouldn't give a damn if it was 50% of the speed! They care only that they can shave $50 off the cost of their systems while still uttering the magic words "700MHz", "800MHz" or whatever.
These guys do not build systems without integrated video/audio - there's just no way they could be ultra cheap-ass if they did. So without a chipset like this SiS one, Duron was never going to sell to this market at all, surrendering it entirely to Celeron. That left only the individual system builders and system upgraders, who, as you pointed out, are more likely to go for a full Athlon.. hence the poor Duron sales..
Thanks Anand! (Score:1)
I now know where to go to fulfill all my Nepalese cannabis resin needs.
--Shoeboy
Asus (Score:1)
so it isn't cheap.. its fast and stable.. but a7v+duron is about as "cheap" as an celeron+some motherboard.. and a lot faster!
Re:Durons (Score:1)
__________________________________________________ ___
:P (Score:1)
'course, I like my games on the 36" tv, not on the 17" computer screen.
But it seems pretty satisfied with Oracle to keep it busy.
--mandi
Baaah Humbug. Sheep! [saveoursheep.com]
Re:Not really (Score:2)
__________________________________________________ ___