"At home, I have a 500 MHz. Horribly slow. It's pathetic."
I think you should already learn here that the moniker
"500" or "2500" does not define much of the system
performance. You fail to mention what kind of platform
are you using (chipset, FSB speed, is it 100 or 133,
which memory is there, CAS/RAS/etc settings, type
of hard drive, its buffer size and access latency, does
it really use UDMA, do you use compressed/encoded disk
partitions, what is your disk cache policy and where your
swap file is located, do you really use AGP drivers,
in proper mode, does your registry file of reasonable
size, do you keep your files defragmented regularly,
do you use "windows animation" effects on your desktop,
etc, etc.).
As an example, my kid was complaining for a while that
his benchmark scores are way too low as compared to other
similar systems. After upgrading to super-duper-DDR-twice-
processor-frequency, the results were the same,
to severe disappointment. It appeared that he was using
some older hard drive, 40GB Quantum lct20 series,
as his system drive (this is a very quiet 4200 rpm
drive but with 128kb buffer, which I bought to hold his
low-bandwidth MP3 files). After upgrading the system
disk to a not-most-recent Maxtor DM+ 7200 drive, his hard
disk system benchmarks jumped up by a factor of 10,
and all other become up to "world-class" level. Go figure.
"At work, I'm called the Speed Queen. I'm always wanting to do stuff that pushes my PC past its limits. For me, a PC's speed is good for about a year, then it's all downhill from there. I find it very frustrating, although every time I get frustrated with my PC, I just tell myself this is a good thing for my INTC."
What is pathetic is that a vocal poster like yourself does
not have a clue about PC performance. Sorry to discover
this.
- Ali |
