RAM: can I increase w/out changing other hardware?

You guys helped me do a major rebuild going on 3 years ago around a chaintech 7nif2 motherboard. Been the most stable build so far (prior to that I relied on a friend to help me swap parts, etc., but I was always experiencing instability).

Things have slowed overall. I keep my machine meticulously clean, so am thinking it's time to upgrade some hardware. I'd like to add more RAM.

Aside from mobo above, I have:
AMD athlon XP 2500+ 1.84GHz processor
512 MB RAM
150 GB WestDigital Internal HD
200 GB WestDigital Ext HD (for backup only)

I don't need more HD space as I've only used a fraction of what I have. Can I get upgrade RAM without upgrading the processor? Or if I do need to upgrade the processor, will that work with the motherboard I have?

TIA
~Kat

Go to www.crucial.com and input your motherboard model. Crucial will tell you what ram is compatible with your system. As a side note, you should never have to upgrade your processor to upgrade/add more ram.

Thanks, photolady! That's a cool site and didn't know it was there. I let it go through the scanner, according to that I can put up to 3072MB of RAM in the 2 remaining available memory slots. They are recommending this 256MB model: 184-pin DIMM DDR PC2700.

So what do you think. I tend do go above and beyond current needs with hardware for longevity's sake. Get one or two? If I get two, I'm still at only 1/3 (1024 MB) of the total max (3072 MB) they recommend. But, I'm guessing this is an older version of RAM (I've not kept up to speed on hardware, sadly, and since things change at the speed of light I am definately out of the loop ;) ) As long as this motherboard is holding up, I won't be replacing it any time soon. But if the motherboard is nearing the end of it's lifespan (had it for 4 years) then I don't want to invest too much into RAM that won't work on a newer motherboard.

What are your thoughts on upgrading the processor? When my friend was helping me swap parts, he was upgrading the processor about every year on average (he had tons of parts available). So it's been 3 years since I did a processor upgrade.

I would go with at least another 512mb instead of 256mb. Or a 1gb stick to go with what you have now. Over 1gb is just not needed for average users who don't play high end games. It's not really that productive to max out what your motherboard can accept.

As for swapping your processor, those old Athlon XP's are hard to find these days. If you upgrade it, productive wise, you would need to upgrade your motherboard also.

Yea definatly go with atleast a 512 the 256 wont be worth your time. But if you end up going with a 256 you can find them really cheap, but youll be more satisfied with atleast another 512

There is a big reduction on bottom of the range A64 CPU's at the moment, in-line with pricecuts on X2's, because of the release of the Conroe. So you could pick up a decent combo (CPU/MOBO) for a good price, the 3700+ is now about £55 with VAT.

You can actually use 3200 (DDR 400) and as long as you're not using onboard graphics you can run 2 identical sticks in dual channel mode.


Liam

Thanks all for the input, appreciate it.

Just curious about something. How long a life should one expect to get from a motherboard, on average? (This has been such a good build, I hate to mess too much with it, and it still serves my needs. But realistically, it won't hold up forever) ;)

Do you mean before it becomes obsolete? It really depends on what you're doing with it. Theoretically, your system should last at the very least 3-4 years before an upgrade. But again, if all you're doing is programming or surfing, it could last a lot longer.

If gaming is your thing or something that is process and graphic intensive, you're probably going to be upgrading almost every other year (if you want to stay behind the curve).

Before it becomes obsolete and/or it becomes toast ;)

I'm not a heavy gamer, very rarely (got hooked on one, Medal of Honor Allied Assault). Did pretty well, but then I got to the Normandy stage and just couldn't safely reach the beach. That still bugs me ;) Never do onling gaming. More business, surfing and some graphics.

P.S. I see you're a relatively new member, nice to meet you. Are you really terrified of pickles? :D

Quote:

---

Things have slowed overall

---

It might be time to reformat the HD as over time they become cluttered with old unused files. The registry becomes some what corrupt from installing and uninstalling programs ect... As for the ram I would find out what kind of ram you have now and try to buy a ram stick to match it or just buy new matching sticks of ram especially if your board can run in dual channel.

Well considering you're using it primarily for productivity, your machine can ideally last a long time. Upgrading RAM is probably the best way to go about squeezing a little more out of your system.

I would tend to agree with Photolady in her post and say that you should get at least another 512. Anything more probably won't be used (I have 2 gigs of ram on my system and when I am not working on my animation or video encoding, typically I have about 1 gig free in available resources).

Note: If you're running Windows XP, ideally you'd want around a gig of RAM

According to what you wrote earlier, you're probably going to be hard pressed to find PC2700 modules. I'm not sure about the availability from where you reside, but up here in Toronto, if you can find PC2700 modules, you're pretty much going to end up paying a slight premium. So it's just a heads up just in case you notice a disparity in price.

I also wanted to ask if you're using 2 sticks of 256 or 1 stick of 512. Following that link you provided, the chaintech board states it's a dual channel board. If I'm not mistaken, dual channel boards usually have slight performance gains when it is using paired RAM modules. For example you have 512MB of RAM total, but are using 2 256MB RAM modules. This example would be ideal. If this is the case with your board, adding another 512MB stick should be suitable. Otherwise .. and this is where it might get tricky, I'd suggest you try to match your existing module as best you can.

Furthermore..... LOL, to add to what liam wrote .. there is some evidence that suggests that the price of RAM will start to rise soon. I'm assuming it probably won't increase by anything REALLY significant, but I mean if you save 10 bux, you earn 10 bux.

So I think I'll conclude this post here for the moment and pray that I haven't confused you any.

Offtopic:

Thanks! Pleased to meet you too. I hopped onto the forum a couple months back as a game I've been playing was giving me (and thousands of others) fits. I figured out later it had to do with some hacking protection software .. and some really, really poor programming.

Oh and no not really afraid of pickles. But wouldn't that really be fun? LOL I actually watched a video about a person with pickle-phobia on youtube. I just thought it was hilarious. :D

Actually PC2700 modules are still easily available, and they are the same price as PC3200 from Crucial:

http://www.crucial.com/store/listmod...bid=DDR+PC2700

Took awhile for me to get this taken care of, but I got my second stick of RAM and something is still not right. My original RAM was PNY 512 MB. I went to 3 retailers Sunday and all I could find was Kensington (512 MB PC 2700 DDR), so I grabbed one of those in 512 MB. So I now have a pair of 512s. (BTW, if Kensington is cheesy I'll return it. The guy who helps me with hardware at C City said 'Crucial's the cadillac of RAM, PNY is good, so if you have problems, just return this.' (Didn't quite know how to take that ;) ) Oh, and I put the RAM in slot A2. A0 is empty, A1 has the PNY and A2 has the Kensington stick, if that's significant.

But my CPU usage is still skyrocketing to 100%. I'm a bit confused by page file and how it works (always have been, someone kindly explained it to me here in great detail a long while back and I'm still confused :rolleyes: ). At any rate, I have XP set so page file is on auto pilot ;) Right before I got the new RAM I got a message that windows was going to have to increase my page file.

Attached are screen shots, a set of 3, showing CPU performance and a simultaneous screen shot of processes running. This morning things went haywire and shot to 100% (even with the new RAM) so that's when I took the newest screen shots.

If anyone has a take on what's happening here, I'd appreciate it.

~Kat

A high value for System Idle process is a good thing - you get that when the CPU isn't doing much. It is highly unlikely that adding the RAM will have had any effect on the CPU usage. In fact, looking at your screen shots, it is doing the sort of thing that I would expect from a single-core CPU of that vintage. The only thing that is definitely not right there is Internet Explorer using 91%, but it obviously isn't doing it all the time.

It took me a while to find a vendor I trust, but now I buy Athlon XPs and XP-Ms from here regularly. Be judicious on your bidding and you'll get a fair deal, and I've not had a DOA yet (out of 20+ I've bought so far).

I know what you mean about the stability of your system. Mine's similar, and although I'm itching to build one with an X2 4400+ I can't see ever parting with this computer. It's fast enough and very dependable.

Gosh, I guess a few years in hardware can make the difference between vintage and rip-you-off-your-chair speed :D You all kind of got me thinking about upgrading even more... but I'm going to try to restrain myself (weird things happen as soon as I open the case, and more often than not it turns into a multipage saga here).

SS, thanks for looking at the screen shots. I'm kind of surprised at the high value for Sys Idle being a good thing. All this time I thought my power settings were out of kilter or something. But you're smart, so I'll take your word for it :) I have no idea why IE started hogging resources all of a sudden.

All things considered, since it's been three years it probably is time for a format C:\. I so dislike that task.

lgbpop, thank you for the ebay referral. I'll bookmark it. (Although I will readily admit I'm chicken to purchase hardware from ebay ;) )

OK, I'm about ready to pull my hair out. IE is hogging resources now on a daily basis. I just had 3 IE windows open, OE, and then launched Word so I could get some Tsk Mgr screen shots. It took a full 10 minutes to launch Word and get those screen shots saved, IE has just slowed my machine to an anemic crawl. (low 80's to high 90's CPU usage)

I would think new/more RAM would have had an impact on this. But this is a relatively new development, even with 2nd stick of RAM.

Thoughts: New RAM isn't doing the trick? Repair IE (running IE6 SP2) or just ditch it and go for IE7? (Firefox got too glitchy on me, and so I quit using it.)

New screen shots attached showing CPU usage. Appreciate any input. It's taken me 20 minutes start to finish just to gather the attachment and get this typed/posted :confused:

You need to zap some of thos processes Kat, 52 is a lot, have a run through the list of processes and if you recognise any, see if you need it to be running, if you can get another screenshot of task manager maximised to show all of them, then we could find out if most of those 52 are needed or not.


Liam

Thanks, Liam, very much. I've been meaning to get to that too, just always something lately. (After I post this I have to run, won't be back till later today. Have a multi-ton tree uprooted from a storm, it's now sitting on top a rental property and tree service is on the way :eek: )

Attached is shot of all processes, I overlapped by a couple so none would be missed. I closed all IE windows, then reopened. Oddly enough, IE usage is down but CPU still high in high 90's.

I agree 52 processes are a bit too much. I have only 23 running on this one and could probably pare that down too.

As for ram helping with IE, that's really not the issue, because IE is dependant on your internet connection on how fast it loads and lets you send messages on here.

I bet you have too much in start up also that could be eating your memory.

There is some problem with IE, most likeluy something is corrupted. First of all, get your WinXP CD handy, then go to Start>Run and type "sfc /scannow" without the quotes. That'll replace any missing or corrupt system files.

Thanks to you both for responding. First, SS, I started with your suggestion. Only I had trouble. And before I elaborate further, if you want to bail out now, I'll understand. I suspect we are about to enter what DrMDJ used to teasingly refer to as "the KatMac zone". It is a place of weird tributaries and side routes that occur when enroute to a solution, and it can get ugly :rolleyes:

OK. So I closed programs and did sfc /scannow, and the black command prompt screen flashed and disappeared. Tried a couple more times, same thing. So I rebooted so I could do this in safe mode. (Here's where the wierd stuff comes in.) I didn't hit F8 in time and it stalled at the screen that lists Energy Star Complaint, my mobo, etc. On the upper right screen was a white half-box, inside was typed "Post Code 7F" (no quotes) . Then, over on the left middle of the screen, I see "CPU was changed. Please re-setting CPU information in CMOS set up" (no quotes, but that's typed verbatim). Immediately I thought of a virus because, well, it's just not proper English (and CPU was not changed). So I did a reset, got into Safe Mode, popped XP CD in, did sfc /scannow, and the same thing happened: Command Prompt screen flashed and disappeared.

I'd appreciate any thoughts. If you want to save yourself and run for the hills, I will understand :D

Actually what you should have gotten after the cmd prompt window disappeared was a small normal window titled Windows File Protection, within that there would be a bar moving across the screen. See the website below and scroll down about with 1/4 the page. It might take a few minutes for the small window to show up.

http://www.updatexp.com/scannow-sfc.html

Thanks, PL. I'll try it again. (This is the first time I had a successful boot up since last night. Tried multiple times, would get stuck at the screen prompting whether I wanted Safe Mode, Normal, Last Known Good Config., etc. and just kept going round & round. I was able to get into Safe Mode this morning, however, and only from there reboot and XP started normally. At the bios screen it kept displaying "Post Code 75", don't recall seeing that before. So I've now definately got some extra issues going on here.)

I think your CMOS settings have been corrupted. Try clearing the CMOS - that will reset all the BIOS defaults. There should be a jumper on the motherboard to do that, if there isn't or you can't find it then pulling the motherboard battery out for a few minutes will achieve the same result (unplug the power lead as well).

Thanks SS. I'll try that next. I did successfully go through sfc /scannow.

It's been a long time since I cleared CMOS. I need to jot down my current BIOS settings first, since clearing it will change them all, if I recall?

I'm beginning to feel silly and incompetent for not getting this issue under control, but I'm back again with that issue of IE hogging recources. So bad it took multipe attempts to get Task to even open.

Nearly fell off my chair. Not only is IE running in high 80's to high 90's, Page File is a whopping 1+ GB. :eek:

Screen shot attached. IE did clip along as it should (on Comcast) for a couple days after doing sfc /scannow, but it's reverted back again.

No chance to reset CMOS yet, have a work deadline looming I have to address. But this is giving me tons of grief, have never encountered this before, so if someone has thoughts, I'm grateful!

~Kat

I think it might be worth repairing or re-installing IE:

Repair or re-install IE & OE in WinXP

Repair IE & OE

I wouldn't worry about the value for the page file, that isn't unusual, and doesn't always mean what people think. As long as you have sufficient RAM installed, all the PF is doing is storing unused memory addresses that have been allocated but aren't actually needed - it isn't holding any real data at all.

Thanks, SS, for the reassurance on page file.

I haven't had a chance to do a repair yet (work deadline) but IE is behaving OK again (I suspect that's temporary, tho). You know what, I think I'm going to try IE 7. Have not heard gripes yet, those I know who've tried it seem quite pleased.

So would it be necessary to still do a repair of IE6 if I upgrade to IE7? (Don't know if IE7 is a 'separate' entity, or built on the foundation of IE6. If it's the latter, then I can see how repair of 6 would be justified before going to 7.)

Moving to IE7 would be a very good idea. You shouldn't need to repair IE6 first, as IE7 will replace it completely.

FWIW, I've been using IE7 since the early betas and it is a very nice browser indeed, all the bugs in the betas have been minor. If you can be patient though, I think the final release of IE7 is very close - within the next 2 or 3 weeks hopefully.

Great! Thanks for the info and input!

I'll go with IE7, keep an eye on CPU usage, and hopefully with new RAM and browser, this will all be resolved. (I was mostly using Mozilla and Firefox, but I guess I added too many extensions or something, was getting crashes left and right. Opera never did perform very well for me, and I tried several versions. So just went back to IE.) Perhaps a clean start with Firefox would be an added plus as well.

Again, thanks SS, you've been a huge help, really appreciate it ;)

You're very welcome :)