Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

Mr. Wookiee wrote:

They'll just make the games need more power - so the loading times will stay the same. is there any difference in loading times between now and 5 years ago?

2142 loading times actually take longer than 1942, especially after a graphics setting change.

It sounds weird but actually, my 1942 loads slower than my 2142... Both are on high settings/1280x1024.

Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

Well either way there is an obvious change between the loating times of now and X many years ago. tongue

Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

have to say: but OLD!!
heard and seen it a few months agow already..

Beta: Latin for "still doesn't work".
http://www.anime-planet.com/images/users/signatures/SirMarkus.jpg

Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

as did i. got a friend whos dads working on them

Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

Talon1579 wrote:
Y8 wrote:

Omg cant wait..no more loading time

They'll just make the games need more power - so the loading times will stay the same. is there any difference in loading times between now and 5 years ago?

I can remember waiting up to 45 mins for my commodore 64 to load games and half the time nothing happened at the end of it.So dont start complaining about a few seconds wait these days.I spent the best part of my child hood watching loading screens, so count yourselves V.lucky we've progressed since those days.:)

Guns don't kill people,Stormtroopers do.

Re: 80 Core Processors(No, not a typo!)

Mr. Wookiee wrote:

Well either way there is an obvious change between the loating times of now and X many years ago. tongue

When X=1 it sure isn't very different....  tongue;)

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a202/ty2d2/fsprsig2.gif
"Munchkin: One who, on being told that this is a game about politics and intrigue in 17th century Italy, asks to play a ninja."
Andrew Rilstone