Ruel Smith wrote:

Franklin wrote:


(OPTION 1) MEMORY REPLACEMENT
My Syntax mobo will take DDR or SDRAM (definitely it will.) The
question is ... very approximately how much faster would my system
run if I replaced the 786 MB SDRAM with 768 MB of DDR. 10 percent?
25 percent? 50 percent? 100 percent?


It'll only be noticeable when running games or something similarly intense.
Memory is so fast, that during normal activity like writing a letter in
Word or surfing the net, you wouldn't notice the difference. When you run a
high powered game like Far Cry, you'll notice the difference in the
smoothness of your animation and the speed at which the screen redraws at
higher resolutions and FSAA. It would also be noticeable if you were doing
video or image editing.


(OPTION 2) UPGRADE CPU
If upgrade the cpu to a Athlon Thoroughbred-B (maybe a 2400+) and
keep mobo and memory the same then, very approximately, what sort of
increased power or throughput might I expect? Extra 100 percent?
Extra 200 percent? More?


Big time. It's better that you read the charts and see for yourself:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/index.html

In the Office/Internet Performance benchmark in Sysmark 2002, the 2400+ was
2.75 times as fast as the Duron 900. In the PCMark 2002 - CPU benchmark, it
was 2.6 times as fast. That means there's even more of a gap between your
Duron 700 and the 2400+. Sounds like a good upgrade to me... However...see
below.



(OPTION 3)
UPGRADE MOBO AND MEMORY. As a higher-cost option I could go for an
ASUS A7N8X-VM/400 with the nVidia nForce2 IGP chipset giving onboard
sound and graphics. I would need to get DDR memory - maybe 512 MB.
Is that roughly the right amount?
http://uk.asus.com/prog/spec.asp?m=A...M/400&langs=11

(3A) To save money, I might keep the crappy old Duron
700 MHz cpu even though it is worth very little.

(3B) Or I could go for a Athlon Thoroughbred-B as before.
Maybe a 2400+. I know this is going to be faster but costlier.

I know it's hard to say exactly but roughly how much faster would
option (3A) be than my old system? An extra 200 percent faster?
Extra 300 percent faster? Even faster?

What about option (3B)? Is it roughly an extra 300 percent? Extra
400 percent? Extra five hundred percent?


Well, here's where it gets hairy. In order to use the Athlon 2400+, which is
the best option, IMO, you will either have to overclock your current
motherboard to use the faster 333MHz FSB that it requires

The 2400+, 2500+, and 2600+ all come in 266 FSB versions.

to achieve its
speed, or get a motherboard that will natively support that FSB. That may
require memory upgrades as well. Also, remember that a faster processor
usually requires more power, so you have to make sure your power supply is
up to snuff. Does your motherboard support overclocking the FSB? I'm not
familiar with your brand.


(OPTION 4) ?????
What else might I do to get a faster machine at a cost effective
price? Obviously, I am not keen on a new mobo plus graphics card
plus processor plus memory unless it really turns out to be good
value.


It's not, unless you game a lot. Then, it makes a huge difference. For
everyday computing. you won't need all of that faster hardware to achieve
your goals.

The biggest bottleneck in the system you've described is the Duron. Other
than that, you might look at your HDD. If you're running a 5400 rpm hard
drive, you may want to consider upgrading to a newer drive with denser
platters, 7200 rpm spindle speed, and 8MB cache. I'd look at a 160GB drive,
which would undoubtedly have 80MB platters. Storage is the biggest
bottlneck in any system.