HELP - advice please on options for upgrading Duron system

If you don't have any idea how to set the date and time on your
computer, then what makes you think you would have any credibility on
any other aspect of computers?

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.

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

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



There are different versions of each Athlon chip. There are different
desktop versions (XP) and mobile versions (XP-M) .

- XP 2400+ Thoroughbred-B and Thorton cores, both 266FSB.
- XP 2500+ Barton core, 333FSB.
- XP 2600+ The (rare) 266FSB version has a Thoroughbred-B core. The
readily-available 333FSB versions come in Thoroughbred-B and Barton cores.

- XP-M 2400+
- XP-M 2500+
- XP-M 2600+ All are unlocked and 266FSB as standard, and usually default
to a low multiplier on desktops. If your BIOS doesn't have incremental
multiplier, FSB and voltage settings, you could be stuck with a very slow
CPU.

The SV266A probably doesn't have incremental settings, so an XP-M may be out
of the question. The 333FSB XPs won't be able to run anywhere close to
their abilities on a 266FSB motherboard. The 266FSB XP 2600+ is difficult
to find, so an XP 2400+ is the best option.

On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:18:36 -0400, Ruel Smith wrote:

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 to achieve its
speed, or get a motherboard that will natively support that FSB.

The 2400+ runs on a 133MHz FSB (266FSB if you prefer), not a 166MHz FSB
(333FSB).

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 19:27:27 -0400, Dee wrote:

If you don't have any idea how to set the date and time on your
computer, then what makes you think you would have any credibility on
any other aspect of computers?

You're hardly one to complain about how others post. There's no quote in
your reply, so no one knows who the hell you're talking to. And if you are
going by local time posted, I suggest you learn about the 24 time zones
and the Internatinal date line.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

Dee wrote:
If you don't have any idea how to set the date and time on your
computer, then what makes you think you would have any credibility on
any other aspect of computers?

Following someone around on usenet posting off-topic flame because they
pointed out that you were wrong is just plain lame ...

--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open

Ruel Smith wrote:


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 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.

It can take an AMD processor with a 266 FSB...hence the 266A chipset.
That's why he wants a TBred co they use 266 not 333 and go up to the
XP 2400+ model. After that it's a different TBred with 333 or a Barton
core. No overclocking is necessary.

--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo