Author Topic: sshhhhh - Nobody tell Mike... (Read 2829 times)

Brad Johnson · « **on:** July 19, 2007, 08:42:32 AM »

Did a bit of tech support this morning. One of our agents was running XP Pro on a machine with only 128 meg of RAM. Add to that a very non-tech-savvy user who kept as many things loaded as she could possibly fit on the task bar. It ... was ... a ... little ... slow ... sometimes.

A gig of RAM later and it runs like a new.

Brad

K Frame · « **Reply #1 on:** July 19, 2007, 09:14:08 AM »

A gig of ram for a machine running XP is appropriate as a baseline.

However, if you're going to even think about opening MS Word or any other office application, 80 to 100 Gig is a minimum, and even that's on the shy side.

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 19, 2007, 10:43:11 AM »

I have sinned. I bumped up my machine to 2 Gig, running XP Pro.

(It's running SETI@Home, four work units at a time, 700 credits a day, so I figure it's for a good cause) grin

http://www.boincstats.com/stats/user_graph.php?pr=sah&id=8664996

Cromlech · « **Reply #3 on:** July 19, 2007, 12:48:51 PM »

I upgraded to 4096Mb a month or two back. Sure, I don't really need it, and only a few applications can use it, but I thought "What the hell!". Battlefield 2 maps especially seem to load a lot quicker.

Paddy · « **Reply #4 on:** July 19, 2007, 01:16:19 PM »

Quote

However, if you're going to even think about opening MS Word or any other office application, 80 to 100 Gig is a minimum, and even that's on the shy side.

OK. Compaq Presario AMD Sempron 2800+ 2.00 GHz 448mb RAM. XP Home Edition and I run MS Word all the time. neener neener. It takes about 15 seconds to load, though. After that no problems.

Nick1911 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 19, 2007, 01:55:56 PM »

Quote from: Cromlech on July 19, 2007, 11:48:51 AM

I upgraded to 4096Mb a month or two back. Sure, I don't really need it, and only a few applications can use it, but I thought "What the hell!". Battlefield 2 maps especially seem to load a lot quicker.

http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

Ron · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2007, 03:20:51 PM »

My Adobe Photoshop Elements 5 was slow while working in RAW or with many layers.

So a month ago I bumped my system up to 1 1/2 gig of ram.

Not sure the slight performance increase was worth the money.

I think Adobe products are just system hogs. I'm running XP Professional w/service pack 2, btw.

How slow/fast is my system nowadays compared to most? I have an AMD Athlon 64 processor 3400+ 2.41 GHz

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2007, 04:12:36 PM »

Let us see here.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-core 4600+ AM2 (1MB L2 Cache, 2.4GHz, 1066 FSB)

Running XP Pro x64 edition

2GB 533MHz DDR2 memory

That is the computer I just built and ordered online. Been told that it will scream.

Cromlech · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2007, 04:56:22 PM »

Quote from: Nick1911 on July 19, 2007, 12:55:56 PM

http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

Yeah, I am well aware of that. You are talking to a bloke who went out and got XP Pro x64, just for laughs. grin

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:01:57 PM »

You guys are running faster stuff than my big IBM brick. I currently run dual 2.4Ghz Prestonia Xeons, 400Mhz FSB, 512Mb L2 cache on each processor, with Hyperthreading turned on so Win XP Pro SP2 sees a total of 4 processors in the Task Manager. I've got the memory daughtercard maxed out at 2Gb of PC-800 RDRAM. I may eventually get a pair of 2.8Ghz Gallatin Xeon MPs, with 1 or 2Gb of L2 cache, but they aren't giving those away, as I discovered when checking the prices on eBay and Pricewatch.

Cromlech · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:05:03 PM »

Oh, and yeah, that rig looks tasty wmenorr67.

My setup:

Intel Core2Duo E6600 @ 2.60Ghz Air cooled (9x288)
Abit AW9D-MAX
4096Mb Corsair XMS2 6400 @ 361Mhz (DDR2 723) - 4-4-4-12
2x Raptor 74Gb, 2x Maxtor 300Gb, 2x Seagate 750Gb
Gainward Bliss 8800GTX @ 576Mhz GPU - 1800Mhz VRAM
Enermax Galaxy 1000w
Lian Li PCV-2000 Black
19" CRT - Viewsonic Graphics Series G90f+ @ 2048x1536 60Hz
4 Megabit Per Second Broadband

I do have a copy of Vista Ultimate lying about, but I'm not really too keen on making the jump completely, until after service pack 1. A dual-boot is tempting me, however.

Ron · « **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:06:16 PM »

Can you guys dumb it down for a minute and tell me where I am at in relation to whats available and what is common.

I know just enough to be dangerous when it comes to my computer, although XP Pro hasn't required a fraction of the attention my old Windows 98 system did.

Cromlech · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:13:04 PM »

That's a fairly good system, for pretty much any task. For hardcore gaming, you would need an upgrade, but that's only the latest games, really.

Bogie · « **Reply #13 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:20:17 PM »

To me, it seems like photochop goes to the hard drive too easy... Still plenty of free RAM, and I'm hearing chainsaw noises...

Ron · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2007, 05:21:20 PM »

Quote

To me, it seems like photochop goes to the hard drive too easy...

I concur, that is probably where I am losing speed.

S. Williamson · « **Reply #15 on:** July 21, 2007, 01:54:04 AM »

Windows XP.

128 meg of RAM.

And it uses RAMBUS. sad

I'm screwrd. Thanks be to teh Almightee that I've got a new notebook.

Barbara · « **Reply #16 on:** July 21, 2007, 09:09:59 AM »

What were you doing on my computer???

Iain · « **Reply #17 on:** July 21, 2007, 12:59:18 PM »

I've boasted about my free upgrade before, I'm presently running

AMD 6000+ dual core (ordered a 4800+ and got the 6000+ at no extra cost)
1gb 667mhz RAM (with shared graphics that drops to 883)

I'm using ubuntu. I've yet to really push anywhere near the ram limit.

Cromlech · « **Reply #18 on:** July 21, 2007, 01:58:43 PM »

Shared graphics are the spawn of the Devil.

Nick1911 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 21, 2007, 05:07:48 PM »

Athlon 64 3000+
2Gb Ram
200gig mirrored disks
Cheap, no-name power supply
Cheap ATI 9550

It runs great for development.

My Database, web, backup (via Samba) server is a 133mhz Pentium box. And it works fantastic for these roles.

Iain · « **Reply #20 on:** July 22, 2007, 02:18:03 AM »

Quote from: Cromlech on July 21, 2007, 12:58:43 PM

Shared graphics are the spawn of the Devil.

Only if you play games. I have one installed, and that is based on the Quake 2 engine.

Cromlech · « **Reply #21 on:** July 22, 2007, 06:22:31 AM »

If I didn't play games, I'd probably also be using something like Ubuntu, like you are. As it stands, unless I want to piss around with Wine, or other programs, I need XP for my games.

mountainclmbr · « **Reply #22 on:** July 22, 2007, 07:12:38 PM »

Apparently someone told Mike. Maybe it would be better to post on Democratic Underground, though I suspect Mike spends much time over there with his friends. grin

Brian Williams · « **Reply #23 on:** July 23, 2007, 10:58:42 AM »

Dell Optiplex, 500Mhz, 768m ram, 20gig HD, Windows XP... Smokin'

RevDisk · « **Reply #24 on:** July 23, 2007, 11:10:59 AM »

My machine is middle of the road. Not too fast, not too slow. 20.1" Widescreen WSXGA+ flat panel, 256 meg ATI Radeon X1800 graphics card, 150G on a RAID1, 7.1 surround sound with a sub, Core2 Duo 2.33GHz, two gigs of RAM.

Oh yea. Forgot to meantion, it's a laptop. grin

News:

Author Topic: sshhhhh - Nobody tell Mike... (Read 2829 times)

Paddy

Ron

Ron

Ron