FYI performance improvement

[KristleBawl]

Yes, even my 512MB RAM rates higher than my Graphics. <g>

KB

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

 

[Jay Somerset]

That's it! You are both gone. Thank goodness for kill filters!!!

 

[Paul Pedersen]

All I did was post a little information, and the thread fills up with
flames. Jeez.

 

[Paul Pedersen]

Hi Peter

Thanks for the update. Based on what we discussed before (ie using machine
as non-dedicated file server etc) I believe this is a very worthwhile
increase in performance; it was definitely a good move!

Good luck with the new machine, hope it all works out well.

Thanks. Yes, it does seem to have improved quite a bit. For desktop
applications and a file server, it's fine.

Kind of a shame that the manufacturer didn't give it at least 1 GB to start
with though. That was by far the slowest part of the machine. They saved a
few bucks and seriously hurt performance.

 

[Paul Pedersen]

Sorry, but Microsoft's so-called "performance score" is for all
practical purposes can be misleading.

Presently the highest score you can get is 5.9 which I get for both
memory and graphics with a little less for Processor, hard disks.
Overall my system gets a 5.5 which isn't a average of the five test
areas but is the lowest of the five according to Microsoft. Anyway you
look at it a pretty fast system.

Presently I'm overclocking my CPU, a Intel Dual Core 6400 rated at
2.13GHz, a modest amount. Being in a playful mood I rebooted and
entered BIOS and turned off all overclocking. If the "performance
testing" actually did something you would expect to see performance
drop like a rock with overlclocking turned off. It didn't budge at
all.

Next I rebooted after restoring my overclocking setting to what they
were then I brought up CPU-Z (nice tool everybody should download)
that shows how well your CPU and memory and key things like your front
side bus speed (FSB) are actually doing. According to CPU-Z my 2.13
GHz CPU is actually running at 2.5 GHz with overclocking in part
because the FSB is pumped up to 1,239 MHz. Clearly if Vista was doing
any real "testing" it should have been reflected in some difference
between running at just the CPU's rated speed and overclocked. It
would seem all the performance test does is read the rated value of
the CPU rather then test it like CPU-Z actually does under load. By
the way to really get a realistic report I was rendering a video, one
of the most intensive tasks you can ask any computer to do during the
testing. ;-)

Vista's performance tester may not be perfect, but it's better than the one
that comes with XP.

I checked out CPU-Z. Nice little tool.

 

[Adam Albright]

That's it! You are both gone. Thank goodness for kill filters!!!

Bravo... the sticking your head in the sand approach always works.
Remain ignorant, nobody gives a crap. ;-)

 

[Lang Murphy]

Yes, even my 512MB RAM rates higher than my Graphics. <g>

KB

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message

Well... no doubt your system, or any system, would benefit from another
512MB stick... That is a perceived performance improvement that, I think,
overshadows the video score.

And... that brings up a good, if not great, point: if the WEI is rating your
video lower than your memory, well, throw its results out the window because
I think the additional RAM is going to benefit your perceived performance on
day-to-day tasks much more than an upgrade to your video card. And that
opinion is coming from someone with a fair amount of experience running
Ultimate on a box with 512MB RAM. No more, thankfully!

Lang

 

[KristleBawl]

Oh, I fully intend to increase to 2GB RAM, but first we're saving up for the
second new pc. After increasing RAM on both, a larger monitor for one, and a
digital camera to share.

Life on a budget.

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

 

[Lang Murphy]

Oh, I fully intend to increase to 2GB RAM, but first we're saving up for
the second new pc. After increasing RAM on both, a larger monitor for one,
and a digital camera to share.

Life on a budget.

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message

Oh, I understand! I'm dying to buy a server to run Windows Home Server on...
but cannot justify the cost. But even 1GB RAM is going to run Vista WAY
better than 512MB RAM. And that would be less expensive than 2GB's, right?

What are you looking for in your "...2nd new PC"? Curious minds are, well,
curious! LOL!

Lang

 

[KristleBawl]

Based on my experience, and the intended use, another eMachines OEM Vista
Home Basic will do the job, if we increase RAM asap, but we need a much
bigger monitor, partly to compensate for vision problems.

On my machine, 512 is currently adequate. After we get the other one, more
RAM on that one will be slightly more imporant. The large monitor is more
preference than necessity. Use a 21" CRT long enough and a 17" Widesreen LCD
just doesn't look big enough! <g>

KB

in message

 

[Lang Murphy]

Based on my experience, and the intended use, another eMachines OEM Vista
Home Basic will do the job, if we increase RAM asap, but we need a much
bigger monitor, partly to compensate for vision problems.

On my machine, 512 is currently adequate. After we get the other one, more
RAM on that one will be slightly more imporant. The large monitor is more
preference than necessity. Use a 21" CRT long enough and a 17" Widesreen
LCD just doesn't look big enough! <g>

KB

<snip>

KB,

Interesting... I must assume your first (or previous) eMachines was an OEM
delivered Vista Basic box? No problem with CrapWare? Drivers?

I had a 21" NEC CRT for a number of years. It died last year and I've gotten
used to 17" LCD's. I do have one 19" LCD, which is pretty scha-weeet. But
even the 17"ers' aren't bad. I haven't had the priviledge to check out any
widescreens, but a 17" widescreen is, what? more like a horizontally
stretched out 15" screen? (I was laid out a couple of months ago and had to
pull a mattress into my work area so I could lie down [back problem...
getting old sucks, btw... LOL!] and I had to change the font size on all of
my PC's so I could see the screen from 2-3 feet away. Not the optimal
solution, to be sure, but an option... budget -rules- in the Murphy house
these days! Sigh...)

Lang

 

[KristleBawl]

Yes, eMachines W3619, um, $499, I think, at Walmart. Crapware? "eMachines
Games Console" No problems, though. It just links to their game site, hoping
to draw in more $ub$criber$. <g>

Well, I was wrong, it is 15", actually about 14.5" x 10.5" or so, at 1280 x
768, which is "wide" compared to a traditional CRT. I'm discovering more
settings for LCD that I might start experimenting with, like adjusting the
dpi. I'm exploring the Control Panel almost every other day. Plus, trying to
help others in these groups adds to my knowledge.

Although I use the default settings, the one with the vision problems can't
read most websites on it and prefers a 21" CRT at 800 x 600, wearing
glasses.

KB

in message news:[email protected]...

 

[Lang Murphy]

Yes, eMachines W3619, um, $499, I think, at Walmart. Crapware? "eMachines
Games Console" No problems, though. It just links to their game site,
hoping to draw in more $ub$criber$. <g>

Well, I was wrong, it is 15", actually about 14.5" x 10.5" or so, at 1280
x 768, which is "wide" compared to a traditional CRT. I'm discovering more
settings for LCD that I might start experimenting with, like adjusting the
dpi. I'm exploring the Control Panel almost every other day. Plus, trying
to help others in these groups adds to my knowledge.

Although I use the default settings, the one with the vision problems
can't read most websites on it and prefers a 21" CRT at 800 x 600, wearing
glasses.

KB

<snip>

KB,

I've got an eMachines PC that was delivered with XP Home. It had a -ton- of
crapware on it. Most of which was uninstalled "right quick" as the natives
say here in Georgia. Can't wait to upgrade it to Vista... have to get the
funding for a new video card first, though... sigh.

I, too, benefit from reading this ng. I attempt to assist others when their
problems fall within my "sphere of knowledge." And sometimes I take a stab
at assisting even when I'm not sure if my response will be of value, but I
do my best to -not- post incorrect info, always throwing in a disclaimer,
usually, that my response is a SWAG.

Ah... "...the one with vision problems..." so... you must accomodate another
user's needs in your setup? I must admit I've not done much, well, any, to
be truthful, messing around with different settings for different accounts.
I suppose I should, just to have the experience of it.

Lang

 

[Lang Murphy]

All I did was post a little information, and the thread fills up with
flames. Jeez.

<snip>


SOP in -this- ng... sad to say, but true.

Lang

 

[KristleBawl]

We have separate computers, so once it's set up, I don't have to do much.
With Vista, I'll hardly ever need to do more than say, "Don't forget to
leave the computer on tonight." LOL

KB

"Lang Murphy" wrote in message

 

[Lang Murphy]

We have separate computers, so once it's set up, I don't have to do much.
With Vista, I'll hardly ever need to do more than say, "Don't forget to
leave the computer on tonight." LOL

KB

<snip>

Ah... sounds familiar!

Lang