TigerDirect News

34 Responses to “Tiger In Box: The Cure for the Common Question.”

1. scullyy on Oct 5th, 2007 at 5:11 pm

   [..YouTube..] logan must have hit his head when he fell off his bike

2. uncleho01 on Oct 5th, 2007 at 5:32 pm

   [..YouTube..] hehehehehe

3. tecguy2 on Oct 5th, 2007 at 9:00 pm

   [..YouTube..] logan is da man

4. halo3d on Oct 5th, 2007 at 9:21 pm

   [..YouTube..] owned

5. keeba29 on Oct 6th, 2007 at 12:07 am

   [..YouTube..] agreed!

6. xavier425942 on Oct 6th, 2007 at 2:30 am

   [..YouTube..] lol “if you like buttons”

7. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 6th, 2007 at 7:46 am

   [..YouTube..] YEY he answered my quaestion, Im camisashotasfire XD XD XD

8. lhuser on Oct 6th, 2007 at 11:16 am

   [..YouTube..] A Quad core is actually good if you’re a heavy mulitasker, like when you create a video, burn a CD, listen to music, all this at once. That’s when a Quad core is good.

9. CRAKIZGOOD on Oct 6th, 2007 at 2:01 pm

   [..YouTube..] ?? barely a a diffrence !!
   ive seen bioshock on DX9 and DX10 there was alot of diifrence smoke ,shadder etc
   + dont get a nvidia GPU there are alot of problems with it freezing etc even with new drivers alot of people in the nvida forum had problems get a 1900xt 1GB
   2×1900xt 1gb is faster than a ultra running is sli

10. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 6th, 2007 at 3:12 pm

    [..YouTube..] lol man I dont think so, if you crossfire 2X ATI X1950 XTX with 512MB of GDDR4, that mite be more powerful then a GTX or as powerful as an ultra, but umless if you are quad SLI’ing nothing beat 2 8800 ultras

11. CRAKIZGOOD on Oct 6th, 2007 at 4:23 pm

    [..YouTube..] opps i meant 2900 xt

12. Kevdak on Oct 6th, 2007 at 6:14 pm

    [..YouTube..] 600 x 480, jebus thats low

13. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 6th, 2007 at 10:58 pm

    [..YouTube..] lol right, that makes alot more sense, 2 X 1GB HD2900XTs are much more powerful then an ultra, but 2 ultras are still just abit more faster. But I dont know what makes the ultra so fast, if you compare the specs the 2900XT looks way better.

14. Xmeagol on Oct 6th, 2007 at 10:59 pm

    [..YouTube..] shut the fuck up fanboy

    nvidia is a s good as ATI, their both good

    one without another is shit for us

15. Xmeagol on Oct 7th, 2007 at 5:59 am

    [..YouTube..] shut the **** up fanboy

    nvidia is a s good as ATI, their both good

    one without another is crap for us

16. stubs13 on Oct 7th, 2007 at 2:26 pm

    [..YouTube..] They had to cut the part when he sniffed the coke

17. thedestroyer007 on Oct 7th, 2007 at 3:00 pm

    [..YouTube..] dude, its the truth. for some reason, most of the games are “nVidia optimized” and even though the ATI looks faster on paper, it does not run as fast when u play with it

18. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 7th, 2007 at 3:23 pm

    [..YouTube..] yes that is correct, heck crysis is optmised for nvidia, company of heroes is, bioshock is, supreme commander is,halo 2 is. just about allmost every high profile game is being optmised to run on nvidia based GPUs. wich is weird, though really nvidia video card get better FPS with most games, and ATI card get an average across a line of games.

19. drucom on Oct 7th, 2007 at 9:11 pm

    [..YouTube..] The Unreal 3 engine is optimized for ATI. This means Rainbow Six: Vegas, any other games using this engine, and Unreal Tournament 3 (2007) has been see to run much better on the ATI cards, so that’s good news, since it’s a high-profile game.

    But it is true, NVIDIA has monopolized everything and it sucks. I’m probably going to go for NVIDIA, even though I like ATI more.

20. stubs13 on Oct 7th, 2007 at 9:26 pm

    [..YouTube..] They had to cut the part when he ************

21. FreakingLogan on Oct 8th, 2007 at 9:23 am

    [..YouTube..] hahah… your screen name cracked me up!!

22. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 8th, 2007 at 9:53 am

    [..YouTube..] thanks, btw: i used to play street fighter at the arcades, used to draw a big croud, im also so hot I somtimes burn myself :P

23. xxAlucarDraculax on Oct 9th, 2007 at 5:49 pm

    [..YouTube..] LOL

24. RenegadeFury on Oct 9th, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    [..YouTube..] You should have adressed the nvidia application drivers supports 4 cores so that will benefit your graphics card.

25. RenegadeFury on Oct 9th, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    [..YouTube..] Also the x1950pro is not the fastest agp card there is the x1950xt

26. demonicwarrior1 on Oct 11th, 2007 at 6:54 am

    [..YouTube..] no the 1950XT was realease only for PCIE, the only X19 card for AGp was the 1950 PRo

27. RenegadeFury on Oct 11th, 2007 at 8:20 pm

    [..YouTube..] /sigh the x1950xt is for the agp…. check newegg

28. RenegadeFury on Oct 11th, 2007 at 8:21 pm

    [..YouTube..] Edit to that a specific version to the x1950xt ^_^ not in general only 1 version

29. reeged on Oct 13th, 2007 at 11:05 pm

    [..YouTube..] hahaha love this video XD WOOO!!!! I JUST FELL OFF MY MOTORBIKE!!

30. wildwolves8 on Oct 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm

    [..YouTube..] who’s gonna play bioshock with 7300 gt,it’s suicidal.

31. wildwolves8 on Oct 14th, 2007 at 1:44 pm

    [..YouTube..] agp still alive.

32. Mustang on Oct 15th, 2007 at 1:32 am

    *INBOX*

    Hey Logan, I ahve a few questions I’d liek to ask. I was looking into building a new gaming rig(my socket 754 is reaching the height of its upgrades) I am going with one of the 8800 GTS cards, but I’m unsure which processor, and socket to go with. I’ve been a diehard AMD fan. The new quad core AMD looked more like they were meant for use in servers(hence the Operton Name) Also, would it be better to do with a dual core Intel? I’m leaning towards the AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400 processor, would it be better to go quad core, or stick with dual? Also, I’d rather not get Vista, will Direct x10 work with XP?

33. halo2windows on Nov 30th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

    [..YouTube..] An ATI Radeon X1300Pro works great on Bioshock at 720×480 on Medium

34. Cylon7x on Jan 28th, 2008 at 7:27 pm

    [..YouTube..] thats great news

Leave a Reply