Need help in finding the slowest component

[Hansi2]

Hello,

I can't bear it anymore... I need to upgrade my system, but don't know the right component.

Here is my actual configuration:

Duron 1300
256 MB DDR CL2 (Infineon)
Asrock K7VT2 (Lan, Sound AC'97) with VIA KT266A
Geforce 2 MX 400 64MB(MSI)
HD1 (System): Seagate ST360020A 60GB, 5400 RPM, Ultra-ATA/100
HD2 (Backup): Quantum Fireball lct1520 19GB, 4500 RPM, Ultra-ATA/66)
Windows XP

Last week I upgraded memory from SD to DDR, and I was surprised of the increased performance. But now I want more... MORE! ;-)
Lets say, I can't spend more than 120 EUR.

Now I don't know, what to buy:

(- the highest CPU my mainboard support: Athlon XP 2400+ (80 EUR)

or

- a new up-to-date HD)

and possibly

- additional 256 MB DDR (40 EUR)


Most of time when my PC hangs for a while, the HD is working very hard...
But with CPU-Monitoring I see the processor works again and again for short times at 100%, while power-using of course most of the time...

I would be very pleased for any serious advice. Please remember, I can't buy all the things I would really need...
and I don't need a playstation, all I want to do is working with many apps and doing some simple multimedia purposes - but all of them at the same time.

And does somebody know a benchmark-tool which can say: this is the weakest link in the chain?

Greetings
Hansi

 

[tsparmer]

The rule of thumb... particularly with MS OS's is they will take as much memory as you can throw at them AND want more. Before you up'ed the CPU, you should install as much memory as your motherboard will handle. The overhead for XP is HUGE!! 256MB RAM is what you need for the OS with NO PROGRAMS running! Undoubtedly much of your hard drive activity is memory swapping and no matter how fast a hard drive you have, it will NEVER come close to the speed of RAM. (You've put a Ferrari engine with a VW beetle 3-speed stick transmission in a HUGE box truck...)

A SMART drive doesn't do anything faster or slower - it "only monitors some parameters and predicts failures" and the overhead taken up by it is nothing compared to XP.

Make sure you have the latest MANUFACTURER drivers (not MS) installed for your devices and get rid of any unnecessary background programs (the more you share time between all the programs, the less EACH program has! )

 

[Grunt2002]

Oops,

I am sorry... seems my information was not strong enough.
I was sure it has an negative impact on performance (it is reported to have one in my mobo's manual).

Sorry for having b*llsh*tted people, I only wanted to help.
So please forget about this. I'll will investigate a bit more before posting, next time.

Cheers,

Grunt

 

[norty303]

@grunt2002

If you read back you weren't far wrong. A smart drive won't do it's job any quicker or slower with smart enabled HOWEVER the polling will cause some system resources to be used however slightly so there will be a performance hit somewhere.

And don't think paparazi singled you out, he does it to everyone lol

 

[Grunt2002]

I am no paranoiac and also know paparazi is a pure expert, he helps so many people (check for the stars ;-))
So do many people on tek-tips forums, and when reacting too fast without thinking before, there's always someone to correct one's assertions, always friendly and professionally, like a good teacher would. So even when I think I help, I get helped myself, 'cause knowledge sharing is the rule around here.

Cheers everybody.

Grunt

 

[cdogg]

tsparmer,
"[blue]Before you up'ed the CPU, you should install as much memory as your motherboard will handle[/blue]"

Well, I agree with you that XP does need more than just 256MB if you plan on doing any real multitasking. Most benchmarks show that 512MB is XP's sweet spot for many applications. It can't hurt to go any higher, but more than 512MB gives diminishing returns in performance gain. With many motherboards supporting up to 2GB of RAM or more nowadays, it would be a waste to buy too much before upgrading other components such as the CPU or hard drive.


~cdogg
[tab]"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources"
[tab][tab]- A. Einstein

 

[Hansi2]

Hello again

I sold my old SDRAM for the price of DDR...
And yesterday I got cash unexpectedly - what a feeling! Dealer, I'm coming!

I decided to buy a new hdd and additional ram. And I was so curious about the ram, that I bought it first yesterday.
Now it seems my engine has enough oil for optimal functioning: With all apps working in the systray, dvd-playback is excellent!
And the overall-behavior is also much better. Now I recognize in every single action the new cpu.
And I tested the game "enter the matrix": with emule in the background, for the first time I can play with the highest quality-settings - unbelieveable!
Unfortunately, I forgot that today is an official holiday. If it weren't, I had bought the new hdd...

But this gives another chance to ask for your opinions: would you recommend the following or another hdd:
[ul][li]western-digital caviar special edition 800jb[/li][/ul]

Although wd is my favorite, I fancy with a samsung: the sp1614n because of this reasons:
- same properties but ata133 instead of 100
- 160 GB for the price of a 120 GB-hdd (120 EUR)

I have read about the ata133, which gives no advantage to ata100, because every hdd today isn't fast enough...
Isn't that a fair swindle?
Anyway, I wouldn't spend my money for any 120 GB-hdd. But if I get 40 GB for free...

All the time, everywhere, one has to make so much hard decisions... ;-)

And there is yet another decision to make:
I am thinking about to use "dynamic" disks and make a (software) stripeset with my old hdd: wouldn't that increase the perfomance furthermore?

Thank you all, and let me affirm, that every post/opinion is very welcome, regardless of its "brillance"!

Greetings
Hansi

PS: My S.M.A.R.T. is disabled.

 

[paparazi]

As you are buying a "normal" ATA drive (not SATA) then it's pretty well known that one of Western Digital's 8meg cache Special Editions will provide the best performance, closely followed by IBM (Hitachi)GPX120, Maxtors Diamondmax Plus9 and then Seagate Barracuda, I think the Samsung Spinpoint falls somewhere middle to bottom in terms of performance.
I guess you have to ask yourself why you are buying a new drive and if the answer is speed then the SE Western Digi is the way to go.
I have to add though that the Seagate Barracuda range are in my experience the most reliable of the four makes, so if drive integrity is your main priority you may want to go with a Barracuda 7200.7 Horses for Courses :>)
Martin

Replying helps further our knowledge, without comment leaves us wondering.

 

[cdogg]

Unless you are forming a RAID array of hard drives (each hard drive should have the same specs), then there is no need to go with ATA/133 over ATA/100. For single drive performance, there is no real advantage.

The special edition 8MB cache WD drive would be a good choice.


~cdogg
[tab]"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources"
[tab][tab]- A. Einstein

 

[ceh4702]

If that motherboard is capable of running at 266Mhz with Athlon CPU's, then you might be able to go as far as a XP2400+ processor. Yes a 7200 rpm drive would help. I did not see a mention of a Video card. A video card can also make a computer appear to run slower when running programs like games. It can be as different as night and day.

If you do not like my post feel free to point out your opinion or my errors.