My HP Pavilion Desktop already has 512 MB Ram (max according to
specs)

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/d...name=bph06796#

What can i do to make this old beast go faster? Other than put it on
the Acela, i don't know what to do. What would happen if i put 2 x
512 MB memory sticks in place of the others? can i "piggyback" them?
Can someone please advise?

Rich

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> My HP Pavilion Desktop already has 512 MB Ram (max according to
> specs)
>
> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/d...name=bph06796#
>
> What can i do to make this old beast go faster? Other than put it on
> the Acela, i don't know what to do. What would happen if i put 2 x
> 512 MB memory sticks in place of the others? can i "piggyback" them?
> Can someone please advise?
>
> Rich

I'm afraid the answer is "buy a new beast". I have a Tualatin 1.4GHz
processor, and that is about as fast as they got (mine is an S370
chip, but I have a Slot 1 adapter so I can use it on a Slot 1
computer).

So slapping in a faster processor, would make the machine faster
in name only. You'd likely not even notice the difference. The rest
of the machine could hold such a processor back. SDRAM running
at 100MHz, isn't exactly "fast". Modern memory, like DDR3-2000,
transfers data at 20x of the rate. (Modern memory still has
poor latency characteristics, so not all speed factors scaled
as well as the bus rate did.) Modern memory has also supported
much larger quantities of memory. The largest desktop DIMM might
have been 4GB in a single stick of RAM, whereas the sticks you're
using are 16x smaller.

Overclocking would be your best option, if you lived on a
island and has no other options at hand.

Ten years ago, there were people doing stuff like this. Running
their computer bus at 150MHz, instead of 100MHz or 133MHz. Actually,
it turns out, that as of today, you could find memory chips
of that type and operating voltage, that run at 200MHz. So
eventually, faster memory chips were made. But the thing is,
the "wheels would fall off the computer" if you did that.
I doubt the chipset could keep up if you tried that, and
it would crash.

http://www.tipperlinne.com/p2b-s150.htm

If you scroll to the bottom of this page, you can see the
best platform of its generation. This P2B-DS motherboard
has two Slot 1 processors, each running at 1.5GHz. The
memory is 768MB running at 150MHz. And just about any
$300 Walmart computer would blow the doors off this now :-)
It's still pretty to look at though. Ten years ago,
this would have been drool-worthy.

http://www.tipperlinne.com/p2bmod

Paul

There really isn't much that you can do. The machine can only handle
512MB of RAM, you can't change that. The Celeron 1.1 GHz/100 processor
is not exactly the newest or fastest thing out there. All that you can
do is make sure that the machine is clean and free of pests and to make
sure that there are no unnecessary processes running in the background.
If money is tight you can look for a secondhand/refurbished machine,
you can pick up a P4 3.0+ GHz machine with 1 GB of RAM or more and
Windows XP Pro preinstalled for about $200, not a bad deal for a machine
that could easily serve your purpose for a few more years!

John

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> My HP Pavilion Desktop already has 512 MB Ram (max according to
> specs)
>
> http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/d...name=bph06796#
>
> What can i do to make this old beast go faster? Other than put it on
> the Acela, i don't know what to do. What would happen if i put 2 x
> 512 MB memory sticks in place of the others? can i "piggyback" them?
> Can someone please advise?
>
> Rich

On Nov 22, 12:21*pm, John John - MVP <audetw...@nbnot.nb.ca> wrote:
> There really isn't much that you can do. *The machine can only handle
> 512MB of RAM, you can't change that. *The Celeron 1.1 GHz/100 processor
> is not exactly the newest or fastest thing out there. *All that you can
> do is make sure that the machine is clean and free of pests and to make
> sure that there are no unnecessary processes running in the background.
> * If money is tight you can look for a secondhand/refurbished machine,
> you can pick up a P4 3.0+ GHz machine with 1 GB of RAM or more and
> Windows XP Pro preinstalled for about $200, not a bad deal for a machine
> that could easily serve your purpose for a few more years!
>
> John
>
>
>
> richs...@aol.com wrote:
> > My HP Pavilion Desktop already has 512 MB Ram (max according to
> > specs)
>
> >http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/d...n&cc=us&docnam...
>
> > What can i do to make this old beast go faster? *Other than put it on
> > the Acela, i don't know what to do. *What would happen if i put 2 x
> > 512 MB memory sticks in place of the others? can i "piggyback" them?
> > Can someone please advise?
>
> > Rich- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Thank you both for your good advice. sounds like it's time to
upgrade. this "old faithful" desktop has been great but 9 yrs is like
63 in dog years. hope i live that long.

On Nov 22, 8:07*pm, richs555 <richs...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 22, 12:21*pm, John John - MVP <audetw...@nbnot.nb.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > There really isn't much that you can do. *The machine can only handle
> > 512MB of RAM, you can't change that. *The Celeron 1.1 GHz/100 processor
> > is not exactly the newest or fastest thing out there. *All that you can
> > do is make sure that the machine is clean and free of pests and to make
> > sure that there are no unnecessary processes running in the background.
> > * If money is tight you can look for a secondhand/refurbished machine,
> > you can pick up a P4 3.0+ GHz machine with 1 GB of RAM or more and
> > Windows XP Pro preinstalled for about $200, not a bad deal for a machine
> > that could easily serve your purpose for a few more years!
>
> > John
>
> > richs...@aol.com wrote:
> > > My HP Pavilion Desktop already has 512 MB Ram (max according to
> > > specs)
>
> > >http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/d...n&cc=us&docnam...
>
> > > What can i do to make this old beast go faster? *Other than put it on
> > > the Acela, i don't know what to do. *What would happen if i put 2 x
> > > 512 MB memory sticks in place of the others? can i "piggyback" them?
> > > Can someone please advise?
>
> > > Rich- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Thank you both for your good advice. *sounds like it's time to
> upgrade. *this "old faithful" desktop has been great but 9 yrs is like
> 63 in dog years. hope i live that long.

9 years is an "eternity" in computer years. You maxed out the
hardware and really maxed out the years.

Its true that 9 years is a long time these days, but we should be more
demanding of our Operating Systems. Instead, everyone just rolls over and
says, "OK, I'll buy a new computer". Almost every update that Microsoft put
onto our computers, particularly .NET-related stuff, just eats into
hard-disk capacities and adds extra layers of unecesary gumpff to slow down
our PCs.

Same is true of rubbish put into the HKLM>Software>Microsoft>Windows>Current
Version>Run folder and Services and Startup folder by random software
producers, like Google and Adobe.

Is it really that much to ask that a great machine bought today is a good
machine in 10 years' time and a decent machine in 20? It wouldn't be if the
OS was lean and mean.

There is a lot you can do yourself, though, by cleaning up those areas
mentioned above.

Alain

"smlunatick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:1e185e5f-6b4b-432c-9d9d-(E-Mail Removed)...
On Nov 22, 8:07 pm, richs555 <richs...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 22, 12:21 pm, John John - MVP <audetw...@nbnot.nb.ca> wrote:
>
> Thank you both for your good advice. sounds like it's time to
> upgrade. this "old faithful" desktop has been great but 9 yrs is like
> 63 in dog years. hope i live that long.

9 years is an "eternity" in computer years. You maxed out the
hardware and really maxed out the years.

On Dec 1, 4:11*pm, "Alain Dekker" <abdek...@NOSPAM.fsmail.net> wrote:
> Its true that 9 years is a long time these days, but we should be more
> demanding of our Operating Systems. Instead, everyone just rolls over and
> says, "OK, I'll buy a new computer". Almost every update that Microsoft put
> onto our computers, particularly .NET-related stuff, just eats into
> hard-disk capacities and adds extra layers of unecesary gumpff to slow down
> our PCs.
>
> Same is true of rubbish put into the HKLM>Software>Microsoft>Windows>Current
> Version>Run folder and Services and Startup folder by random software
> producers, like Google and Adobe.
>
> Is it really that much to ask that a great machine bought today is a good
> machine in 10 years' time and a decent machine in 20? It wouldn't be if the
> OS was lean and mean.
>
> There is a lot you can do yourself, though, by cleaning up those areas
> mentioned above.
>
> Alain
>
> "smlunatick" <yves...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1e185e5f-6b4b-432c-9d9d-(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Nov 22, 8:07 pm, richs555 <richs...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 22, 12:21 pm, John John - MVP <audetw...@nbnot.nb.ca> wrote:
>
> > Thank you both for your good advice. sounds like it's time to
> > upgrade. this "old faithful" desktop has been great but 9 yrs is like
> > 63 in dog years. hope i live that long.
>
> 9 years is an "eternity" in computer years. *You maxed out the
> hardware and really maxed out the years.

The only problem is that Windows is constantly demanding more
processing "horse-power." When the current PC can no longer be
upgraded, we must consider the "ultimate" upgrade of a complete PC
replacement. Otherwises, you will need to use a less "resource hog"
operating system.

Alain Dekker wrote:
> Its true that 9 years is a long time these days, but we should be more
> demanding of our Operating Systems. Instead, everyone just rolls over and
> says, "OK, I'll buy a new computer". Almost every update that Microsoft put
> onto our computers, particularly .NET-related stuff, just eats into
> hard-disk capacities and adds extra layers of unecesary gumpff to slow down
> our PCs.
>
> Same is true of rubbish put into the HKLM>Software>Microsoft>Windows>Current
> Version>Run folder and Services and Startup folder by random software
> producers, like Google and Adobe.
>
> Is it really that much to ask that a great machine bought today is a good
> machine in 10 years' time and a decent machine in 20? It wouldn't be if the
> OS was lean and mean.
>

If all you wanted was a reliable machine to run a group of programs
competently for many years get a Unix system. What is killing the
performance of computers is the constant requirements for more graphics,
etc. I have programs that are over 20 years old that still do the job
they were designed for quickly on older hardware. If I gave in to the
mentality that they required all kinds of windows and drop downs the
programs would probably quit being as reliable or easy to use and
require a huge increase of computer power to run.


> There is a lot you can do yourself, though, by cleaning up those areas
> mentioned above.
>
> Alain
>
> "smlunatick" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:1e185e5f-6b4b-432c-9d9d-(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Nov 22, 8:07 pm, richs555 <richs...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 22, 12:21 pm, John John - MVP <audetw...@nbnot.nb.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Thank you both for your good advice. sounds like it's time to
>> upgrade. this "old faithful" desktop has been great but 9 yrs is like
>> 63 in dog years. hope i live that long.
>
> 9 years is an "eternity" in computer years. You maxed out the
> hardware and really maxed out the years.
>
>