-- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] I don't see where that benchmark shows "that it was indeed slwoer than AMX (in addition to being heavier on cpu)."
On 4/13/06, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In response to message below... > > That benchmark is rubbish. AMXX has focussed on making the scripts run > faster. Yet they do not mention the increased CPU overhead that means > that > AMXX is heavier on the CPU than AMX. AMXX has a history of highlighting > all the good points without mentioning the bad. Since it was launched, > AMXX has said how much better than AMX it was yet this benchmark shows > that > it was indeed slower than AMX (in addition to being heavier on cpu). > > AMX may not have the activity of AMXX but doesn't need it. Plus AMX 2005 > is > lighter on CPU than AMXX > > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:58:31 -0500 > From: Hell Phoenix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > Subject: Re: [hlds] Issues with Bots. > Reply-To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com > > Seriously though why are you still using AMX? The project is practically > dead. AMXX runs so much faster and the help and support for it FAR > surpasses AMX. > > Check this out: > http://www.amxmodx.org/bench/ > Pretty crazy. Its pretty easy to port AMX scripts to AMXX too if you cant > find something like you already had. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > -- _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
