marquess Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Hi everybody I have a computer that is just over six years old now: Windows XP Service Pack 3 (all the updates) Intel ® Pentium ® D CPU 3.40GHz 3.41 ghZ, 293 GB of Ram. Now from what I recall when I had this computer built, the motherboard is supposed to be quite niffty. I basically want to increase the processing speed of the computer especially when playing back HD files as well as the general speed for everyday things. Which CPU should I go for: Intel Core i3-3220 Ivy Bridge 3.3GHz LGA 1155 22nm 55W Dual Core CPU w/ HD2500 Retail or Intel Core i3 2130 3.4GHz 2x256KB L2 3MB L3 Cache 32nm 65w Dual-Core LGA 1155 CPU Retail Are there any other recommendations and what kind of possible improvement am I looking at? Thanks everybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamypoko Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Don't think an I3 will 'fit' Check here for possible upgrades. http://support.asus.com/Cpusupport/List.aspx?SLanguage=en&m=P5B%20Deluxe&p=1&s=22&hashedid=bswT66IBSb2rEWNa or http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-ASUS/P5B_Deluxe.html Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsetBkk Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 293 GB of Ram. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiu-Jitsu Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 If you are going to be using the same PC, forget about the CPU. You just need a 1000 baht graphics card(if you don't already have one) and to confirm that you have ample RAM. Example, this Radeon HD5450 or step up to the GeForce GT610 I have a similar spec PC and the addition of the graphics card and upgrading of the RAM did the trick. Now running Windows 7 Ultimate and playing Full HD material. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 I have to agree with the two posts above this. You'll see more gain from a bunch more RAM. Your computer can probably see only 4 GB, but that's enough. Ram is the cheapest upgrade you can do with the most bang for your buck here. It doesn't matter how fast your processor is if you're short of RAM. The video card is next if yours doesn't have a bunch of its own ram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 I have to agree with the two posts above this. You'll see more gain from a bunch more RAM. Your computer can probably see only 4 GB, but that's enough. Ram is the cheapest upgrade you can do with the most bang for your buck here. It doesn't matter how fast your processor is if you're short of RAM. The video card is next if yours doesn't have a bunch of its own ram. Problem is that his MB probably only takes DDR2 and has 2 slots - so he would need to get rarer-than-hens-teeth-and-a-dam_n-sight-more-expensive-to-boot 4Gb DDR2 dimms to lift it up. Probably better to get a DDR3 friendly MB and 8GB on 2 X 4Gb dimms and this of course will most likelyt mean a CPU upgrade too (unless can match the slot - is there any point???). So, I'd go with the new graphics hard, clean up the HDD (maybe move the pagefile on to a second drive) and stick a thumb drive in a USB2/3 port and use readyboost (windows 8/7/Vista needed). Also if he's on 32Bit XP (most likely) then he can only see 3Gb max anyway. Never underestimate how much cleaning the main HDD can help too - especially with XP (Win7 does automatic defrag). Wise Disk Cleaner and reg cleaner are both free and very good and include slimming servbices which remove crap that the OS doesn't need (like Chinese language odds and sods - old install files/win update files - themes - etc) on approval from yourself - it also has a better defrag than Windows (especially XP) comes with. Do a disk check too - before the defrag but after the clean up - this will clean up and mark any damaged sectors on the HDD which can slow down VM a lot. (http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/chkdsk.mspx?mfr=true / http://www.wisecleaner.com/wisediskcleanerfree.html / http://www.wisecleaner.com/wiseregistrycleanerfree.html) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 (edited) I have to agree with the two posts above this. You'll see more gain from a bunch more RAM. Your computer can probably see only 4 GB, but that's enough. Ram is the cheapest upgrade you can do with the most bang for your buck here. It doesn't matter how fast your processor is if you're short of RAM. The video card is next if yours doesn't have a bunch of its own ram. Problem is that his MB probably only takes DDR2 and has 2 slots - so he would need to get rarer-than-hens-teeth-and-a-dam_n-sight-more-expensive-to-boot 4Gb DDR2 dimms to lift it up. Probably better to get a DDR3 friendly MB and 8GB on 2 X 4Gb dimms and this of course will most likelyt mean a CPU upgrade too (unless can match the slot - is there any point???). So, I'd go with the new graphics hard, clean up the HDD (maybe move the pagefile on to a second drive) and stick a thumb drive in a USB2/3 port and use readyboost (windows 8/7/Vista needed). Also if he's on 32Bit XP (most likely) then he can only see 3Gb max anyway. Never underestimate how much cleaning the main HDD can help too - especially with XP (Win7 does automatic defrag). Wise Disk Cleaner and reg cleaner are both free and very good and include slimming servbices which remove crap that the OS doesn't need (like Chinese language odds and sods - old install files/win update files - themes - etc) on approval from yourself - it also has a better defrag than Windows (especially XP) comes with. Do a disk check too - before the defrag but after the clean up - this will clean up and mark any damaged sectors on the HDD which can slow down VM a lot. (http://www.microsoft...k.mspx?mfr=true / http://www.wiseclean...leanerfree.html / http://www.wiseclean...leanerfree.html) Well, we don't know that he has 64 bit version of XP, so odds are that his computer can only see 4MB of RAM anyway, and that's enough. He can still easily buy 2GB sticks of DDR2 for $25 each (1000 bht) or less. Then he can plug in a video card with gobs of onboard ram and for less than $100 total easy, he's golden. I'd have to consider a new computer before I put too much into an older one. For instance, we don't know how much power supply he has but we're talking about adding drives, etc. He didn't say it, but his question is a "budget" question, so let's get him going as cheaply as possible, what say? I sure can't disagree with a defragger with a scheduler. A box will slow to a crawl. He doesn't need to put the swap file on another drive, especially if it's on the same physical hard disk. Simply making another partition (drive) on the same disk and putting the swap file there could even slow it down. Buying another physical hard disk costs money and again we don't know if he's already pushing his luck with his PS, and we're thinking budget. He's talking about playing HD files and everyday tasks, and what he has, if he's really showing 293 MB of ram has a serious bottleneck right there. (It is possible for Task Manager to show 293 MB of ram from a 512 stick.) Otherwise, his computer is fast enough by far. I'm still going with Jiu-Jitsu and JetsetBkk on the RAM issue. Edited January 26, 2013 by NeverSure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 Oops. I saw the 293 GB and thought MB. We need to know how much ram he has. Marquess, press your ctrl+alt+del keys and bring up an option to see your task manager. When it pops up, click the performance tab and see how much physical memory it's reporting please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I previously had the ASUS P5B Deluxe and it was one of the best boards of its period. Based on reviews and my own experience. I only upgraded as I needed to go to the next generation i7 processor. It is DDR2 and at Invadeit.com lists 2GB at 940 baht. http://www.invadeit.co.th/category/memory/ddr2-800/. If less then 4GB then an increase would be a good idea. Might even consider a SSD as it can be migrated over later if a new system is decided on. Video card can certainly make a big difference in overall performance. Also, that uses a LGA775 socket not a LGA1155 so alternate CPUs may be difficult to find now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marquess Posted January 26, 2013 Author Share Posted January 26, 2013 I have 2.93 GB of Ram there are two sticks at 2.GB but it is only showing 2.93 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 Oops. I saw the 293 GB and thought MB. We need to know how much ram he has. Marquess, press your ctrl+alt+del keys and bring up an option to see your task manager. When it pops up, click the performance tab and see how much physical memory it's reporting please? Yeah I assumed he meant 4Gb (2X2GB) - don't know why, just thought most people would have upgraded the RAM first before thinking 'CPU'. That's why I said on an non-64 XP machine, more RAM will make no difference (and 4GB DDR2 dimms are rare and expensive). As Twais said, its a 775 slot, so neither CPU he mentions would fit anyway (a Quad would - like Q8400 for example - which would possibly be better for multitasking, but no real help with HD). We all agree a better gfx card is the order of a day (and a spring clean). Second drives can be externally powered too (think that mb only has USB2, but does also have 4 SATA slots, so with a bit of fiddling could power externally and data cable direct to the board - I do this as I have 4 drives on my main machine). PSU's here are all so low powered it seems to me - go into IT City they are mostly 350/400 W's - in the UK all my boxes had super cooled 600+ W. Modern gfx cards (especially when running dual boards) can eat that up easily - extra HDDs definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I have 2.93 GB of Ram there are two sticks at 2.GB but it is only showing 2.93 Yes, this is because you have XP 32 - it can only see 3Gb of useable phyical RAM (it simply doesn't have the address space to use more). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsetBkk Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I have 2.93 GB of Ram there are two sticks at 2.GB but it is only showing 2.93 Yes, this is because you have XP 32 - it can only see 3Gb of useable phyical RAM (it simply doesn't have the address space to use more). Not so - my XP 32 bit has 1x4 GB stick and XP reports 3.48 GB. Can't think what he has fitted that is using up all that address space... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 (edited) I have 2.93 GB of Ram there are two sticks at 2.GB but it is only showing 2.93 Yes, this is because you have XP 32 - it can only see 3Gb of useable phyical RAM (it simply doesn't have the address space to use more). Not so - my XP 32 bit has 1x4 GB stick and XP reports 3.48 GB. Can't think what he has fitted that is using up all that address space... Sorry, you are correct - 4GB limit (not 3GB) - confusing myself now It is likely that one Dimm is dieing now (this can slow the system down too). It is a good idea to remove one dimm (while powered off) and see if it gives 2Gb and then swap them (using slot 0 both times) - this should identify the failing Dimm. They last about 2 years on average I have been told (running constantly at standard temp - less perhaps in Thailand!) - DDR3 lasts longer, especially quality stuff as its less packed for the same mem. Edited January 26, 2013 by wolf5370 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiu-Jitsu Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I have 2.93 GB of Ram there are two sticks at 2.GB but it is only showing 2.93 So what do you have fitted in the way of Graphics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommoPhysicist Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 Memory size and processor speed are irrelevant to video playback HD or SD. The graphics card is ALL that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marquess Posted January 26, 2013 Author Share Posted January 26, 2013 My curent graphic card is: HD 2600Pro Super 512MB/128bit/DDR2 Dual-link DVI, HDMI. Thanks for all the advice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiu-Jitsu Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 My curent graphic card is: HD 2600Pro Super 512MB/128bit/DDR2 Dual-link DVI, HDMI. Thanks for all the advice Is that an AGP card or PCI Express? If AGP, you should move to a PCI Express x16 card. Such as those indicated in my earlier post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 My curent graphic card is: HD 2600Pro Super 512MB/128bit/DDR2 Dual-link DVI, HDMI. Thanks for all the advice Is that an AGP card or PCI Express? If AGP, you should move to a PCI Express x16 card. Such as those indicated in my earlier post. The P5B doesn't have an AGP slot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommoPhysicist Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 My curent graphic card is: HD 2600Pro Super 512MB/128bit/DDR2 Dual-link DVI, HDMI. Thanks for all the advice You don't need to upgrade anything, that card can handle HD video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf5370 Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 My curent graphic card is: HD 2600Pro Super 512MB/128bit/DDR2 Dual-link DVI, HDMI. Thanks for all the advice You don't need to upgrade anything, that card can handle HD video. Which kind of kills your earlier post that its only the card that makes the difference, eh? I mostly agree though - however, system slow down will affect video playback, there is still plenty of CPU usuage going on even if the rendering is being handled well by the card. I still think he has faulty Dimms - they are registering too low, and faulty memory is a big cause of system slow downs - also, as said earlier, disk maintenance may hep too (not with video of course, but with general system speed). I think the Op needs to do a mem check.(http://www.memtest.org/) as XP has no built in memory test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 OK, I'm finally coming out from under the ether. I really apologize for misreading the OP. I don't see where he needs to upgrade anything for the purposes he stated. I agree with doing the RAM test, but it may be OK. If not it's cheap. I might go for a video card with more memory but I don't think he needs it. If that was my box I'd first run defrag, reboot and run it again. Then I'd run all of the common free malware tools. I'd install a scheduling defragging proggy. If the HDD is clean and defragged, I can't see why that box isn't fast enough for what he stated he wants to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ1 Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 Even though its a old system it should still handle HD. I would check your dpc latency and see if you have any problems with driver conflicts. Get it from here http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSixpack Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) OP didn't say clearly that his computer has a problem and that he NEEDS something. He does WANT to speed up things not just for HD but also for "everyday things" and he asked about a CPU upgrade. Good points have been made about trying a tuneup first. I would add, OP, that you need to get autoruns (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb963902.aspx) and check all your startup programs and stop anything unnecessary or suspicious. Also check scheduled tasks and services at least. If you take out the RAM sticks, clean the contacts w/ pencil eraser and wipe before putting back in the slots. After 6 years, cleaning is in order. Same w/ your graphics card. It may not be worth it to upgrade the CPU. Most people (especially HERE) would just upgrade the whole computer. Yet that mainboard may last another 5 years or so; who knows? Look over the capacitors and see if if they all look in good shape. Upgrading the CPU is doable and a faster CPU will make a difference. Now that 775 is obsolete, a lot of old 775s can be had cheap--a lot cheaper than they were orginally, to be sure. And the power requirements of Core 2 Duos are much lower, resulting in savings over time from your Pentium D, a notorious hog. A couple years ago I upgraded a cheapskate friend's CPU from an old Celeron to a used Pentium 4 for about $10 and she was much happier. If you want to try that route, check ebay and geeks.com: http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=cpu+775&_rdc=1 http://www.geeks.com/products_sc.asp?cat=1137 Check that your BIOS and mainboard will accept the upgrade; mamypoko gave you some links above. Discussions of such an upgrade here: http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/250808-28-core-e6400-pentium http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/319302-28-pentium-3ghz-dual-core-e5200 Benchmarks where you can compare your Pentium D; video playback included: http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu-charts-2008-q1-2008/benchmarks,16.html Edited January 27, 2013 by JSixpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 As I mentioned before I had essentially the same board, P5B-E Plus and I never had a problem with it running full 1080 HD. I did have a good video card, 8800GT, 4GB memory but I was running Windows 7 and would suggest the OP does the same as it does disk and memory management much better then XP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommoPhysicist Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) As I mentioned before I had essentially the same board, P5B-E Plus and I never had a problem with it running full 1080 HD. I did have a good video card, 8800GT, 4GB memory but I was running Windows 7 and would suggest the OP does the same as it does disk and memory management much better then XP I'm running the same mobo with a 2.8GHz dual core, 4600 generic video card and 2Gb of memory. It handles HD video perfectly well. Although ...... I have never found video playback from a computer entirely satisfactory, much better to buy a media player and network it. Cheapest and most flexible option too. WD Live and WD Live Hub work well. Edited January 27, 2013 by TommoPhysicist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSixpack Posted January 27, 2013 Share Posted January 27, 2013 much better to buy a media player and network it. Cheapest and most flexible option too. WD Live and WD Live Hub work well. +1. Love my WD Live! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duindam Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 For Nvidia graphics card not even think about a Nvidia 610 for playing full HD, start thinking Nvidia 630 or higher to get acceptable results. Your current VGA card should be able to play HD pretty okay, so make sure you have the latest Video drivers for your VGA card. http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/Pages/index.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now