posted
All righty then peeps, here it is. My computer is run by a reasonable 500MHz Celeron processor (I thought it was a speed demon last year), and I want to make this machine faster. I want to put in a fast but cheap Celeron 1.0 - 1.2 GHz processor, to make my machine XP ready, if I ever do decide to buy it. It has a 100mhz bus speed, and if you all MUST know, it is a Compaq Presario EZ2200. Just a few specs that I have altered is that the OS is WinME, a DVD drive in place of the CD drive, and 96 MB memory.
[ October 27, 2001: Message edited by: Jack_Crusher ]
-------------------- Fry- How will we get out of this? George Takei's head- Maybe we can use some kind of auto-destruct code like one-A, two-B, three-C... (Bender's head blows up) Bender- Now everybody knows! -Futurama's obligatory Star Trek episode
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
Charles Capps
We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.
Member # 9
posted
Compaq hardware is rarely upgradable, especially the CPU.
If you really want to make things faster, get more memory. 256+ megs.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Charles Capps
We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.
Member # 9
posted
You changed your OS to WinME? Why? What did you have before, '95? 3.1? Anything better, and I don't know if I'd consider that an upgrade...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Indeed, that'd be more like a downgrade.
Windows versions are typically better served by (lots of...) memory than by CPU speed (although they insist on maintaining a freakin' huge swapfile even when there's enough available RAM to load the OS into memory completely). 96 MB is really pushing it, especially for 'ME or XP. With prices being at an all-time low, I'd quadruple that amount first.
A 1 Ghz Celeron processor does exist, but I'd avoid that type of CPU like the plague. They are what you might call 'braindead'; severely crippled. The Celeron is intended as a low-end, low-budget alternative to the regular P2 / -3.
If you really want to beef up your PC so that it'll last you another year or two, I'd recommend that you buy a new motherboard (faster bus, plus better upgradability) as well. A midrange P3 or Athlon will suit you just fine... and XP will be much happier too.
posted
Memory does seem to be about a tenth of the price it was a year ago.
Quick question. PC100 memory works fie if you've got a FSB running at 66mhz, right? It just means that it can cope with faster speeds, not that it has to run at faster speeds. So, can PC133 memory work on a FSB of 100mhz? And can you mix PC133 with PC100?
I've got a PIII 450, TNT II, 128mb, and other standard stuff. The next upgrade I was going to do was get a GeForce II MX, but now I'm going to wait for that NVidia NForce motherboard, and get that and an Athalon (probably about 1 gig). That'll give me a fairly decent computer that'll last at least a year, for around �300. I think.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
quote:PC100 memory works fine if you've got a FSB running at 66mhz, right?
Yes.
quote:So, can PC133 memory work on a FSB of 100mhz?
Again yes.
quote:And can you mix PC133 with PC100?
That is a different matter. You can mix DIMM types, as long as the FSB isn't faster than the slowest DIMM of the bunch. Otherwise, you'd end up rating your (say) PC100 chips 33% above their intended maximum. Only very few DIMMs (generally produced by quality brands, such as Kingston) can be safely 'overclocked' to such a degree. Most others will simply fry (and if you're unlucky, take the motherboard with them).
posted
I am dead set on getting a celeron because they are a) cheap and b) have built in 3D graphics acceleration. and I had windows 98 before I upgraded to ME.
-------------------- Fry- How will we get out of this? George Takei's head- Maybe we can use some kind of auto-destruct code like one-A, two-B, three-C... (Bender's head blows up) Bender- Now everybody knows! -Futurama's obligatory Star Trek episode
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Point a) is quite valid. Point b), however, is complete and total nonsense. You've probably read one of those pro-Intel adds that completely overhype the Celeron product in grand terms.
If you want your graphics accelerated, get a dedicated graphics accelerator card like the ATI Radeon or the GeForce 2. No CPU upgrade can ever match the performance boost one of those boards give your PC, period.
posted
"You can mix DIMM types, as long as the FSB isn't faster than the slowest DIMM of the bunch."
Cheers. I always knew that, but for some reason, I'm sure I read somewhere that you can't put PC133 RAM into the standard SDRAM slots you get on old 100mhz FSB pcs of about a couple of years ago.
Oh well. I was going to wait until I got my new motherbaord anyway, since a 1gig Athalon would probably appreciate DDR SDRAM.
(Actually, that's another knock against the P4. Looking in a mag from last month, 128mb of SDRAM was �13, 128mb of DDR SDRAM was �14, 128mb of Rambus memory was about 70 quid).
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
quote:(...)I'm sure I read somewhere that you can't put PC133 RAM into the standard SDRAM slots you get on old 100mhz FSB pcs of about a couple of years ago.
Certain older motherboards (or rather the single-side memory slots on them) can't cope with recent PC133 DIMMs, as almost all are double-sided. But the days of SDR-DRAM are over anyway... DDR modules (which, however, are not backward-compatible) are faster and don't cost much more.
Rambus RIMMs are still so expensive because they will only work with a P4 (which was plagued by a variety of problems during and after its release), and because they require a completely new production process. The memory architecture significantly differs from standard DIMMS - meaning special assembly lines have to be built for it.
[ October 28, 2001: Message edited by: Mojo Jojo ]
posted
Aren't they also a propriety format, meaning that you have to pay Rambus for making them?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Saltah'na
Chinese Canadian, or 75% Commie Bastard.
Member # 33
posted
The New Athlon XPs are supposed to achieve speeds of up to 2.0GHz. And you don't need a new board, existing DDR boards with 266 FSB should handle the processor provided you get an BIOS upgrade for that.
And don't get me wrong, Intel was the first to break the 2.0GHz mark, but the chip runs with a benchmark of 1.4 GHz from what I hear.
AMD Forever. Down with Intel.
-------------------- "And slowly, you come to realize, it's all as it should be, you can only do so much. If you're game enough, you could place your trust in me. For the love of life, there's a tradeoff, we could lose it all but we'll go down fighting...." - David Sylvian FreeSpace 2, the greatest space sim of all time, now remastered!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
