How good is my processor?

[Aerozord]

I've been having alot of slowdowns and starting to wonder if I screwed up with my processor. I currently have a Pentium(R) D 3.0 GHz, according to my system properties

some other system info, 1gb ram, windows XP, and my video card is 512mb

[Nikose Tyris]

I assume you're looking for honesty?

That entire computer is just terrible.

As near as I see it, 2 gigs is considered minimum nowadays, Your processor would be better if it were dualcore, and your motherboard is probably awful as well.

However if you're getting a lot of slowdowns it likely isn't hardware so much as you have crapware on your computer you need to clean up.

[MasterOfMagic]

What do you use your computer for? "Crap" may be all you need, depending. (I tend to be cheap about things.)

If it just suddenly decided to slow down, though, then Nikose is pretty much right. You probably need to clear it of spyware and such, and defragment your hard drive. Maybe reinstall windows if you're using XP and haven't for a long while.

[bluestarultor]

Just gotta say this, but your CPU could be worse. 3GHz isn't bad, especially given an XP system. I'd stick in another gig of RAM, myself, but depending on your needs, it might not be necessary.

Really, though, the CPU is a very sensitive component, and if you'd screwed it up somehow, it would just have died. Unless you messed around with the timing settings to overclock it, nothing should have affected its performance, and if you did tinker around with the timing, you can just change it back.

I have to agree with the others. Do some scans, defrag, etc. Also, look at what's changed since just before the problem started. Maybe you installed something that isn't releasing resources. If you're using Firefox, you may want to go in and end the process occasionally, too, since it's such a RAM hog. Basically, with tabbed browsing, any tabs you open don't release the RAM they took up when you close them, so it may also apply to Explorer.

[Aerozord]

I ask as this is my second motherboard/CPU, last one I bought was like 5 years ago. So I wasn't too sure what to get when I was buying it.

RAM, yea I wanted to get more, but this motherboard caps out at 2gb. I was thinking about pulling some cash from my car fund if I had to, but I didn't want to get a new one if what I had was still considered good.

[bluestarultor]

2GB is all you really need for an XP system. Actually, by that point, you'll likely only see additional benefit when multitasking. I really don't know when XP stops seeing returns on single-tasking, but by 2GB, it's hit it. I know this because Vista hits it before 2GB from my experience. My laptop has 2GB of RAM and a 2GHz Sempron CPU and I can honestly say my system bottlenecks on the processor. I've never used the maximum amount of RAM the entire time I've had it.

[synkr0nized]

I'd like to see a computer these days that "single tasks". Your average user runs a web browser, chat client, media client, mail client, combinations of these, and office applications and games as well at any given moment. Some of these may even gleefully make use of as much of the physical (and perhaps virtual, as well) memory as possible.

Saying 2GB is sufficient is one thing, but claiming a user will "stop seeing returns" is pretty unfounded.


And then there are dual monitor setups. Try running a movie and a fullscreen 3D app in addition to typical processes on 2 GB and then again with 4 GB (regardless of the fact that 32-bit systems will only "see" ~3.5 of that, depending) and tell me it has "hit it" and that the increased memory isn't doing anything. Sure this is perhaps atypical use but it illustrates the point rather well. It's not a different story for average use, either. Furthermore, the more RAM one has the less a system needs to make use of swap space/virtual RAM, which long story short is better on load times and access.

More is better in the realm of computer components, barring technical and physical limitations.


As to the original topic, the specs listed aren't "bad", at least not if we're talking four or five years ago. I suppose it's relative to what you are doing with the machine currently.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by synkr0nized

And then there are dual monitor setups. Try running a movie and a fullscreen 3D app in addition to typical processes on 2 GB and then again with 4 GB (regardless of the fact that 32-bit systems will only "see" ~3.5 of that, depending) and tell me it has "hit it" and that the increased memory isn't doing anything. Sure this is perhaps atypical use but it illustrates the point rather well. It's not a different story for average use, either. Furthermore, the more RAM one has the less a system needs to make use of swap space/virtual RAM, which long story short is better on load times and access.

actually I do have a dual monitor set up. My mind very much hates doing a single task, so I often do multiple ones. Have been lots of times I have music video playing, while surfing the web, and chatting.

Plus I am trying to get back into PC gaming. Its why I have a beefy graphics card and a nice 21 inch HD display. Though last time I bought RAM I went well beyond what was needed so I haven't gotten any more. I am also abit hesitant since once I bought some that didn't fit the motherboard

Some problems I have, involve starting things up. My computer takes several minutes to boot up, same with my games. For example starting up team fortress 2 takes about five minutes, once connected to a server it takes another five to ten minutes for me to actually be playing. I've times out multiple times.

I have defragged, done system clean up, and ran a virus scan. Still have trouble

[Donomni]

I've got a similar setup to what you have now(XP, 3.33 Ghz single-core, 1.5 GB of RAM, more-or-less shitty video card because I can't really afford or need a new one), and my comp runs alright, pretty fast...

If it's single tasking, or multi-tasking with a few non-game programs, that is. Most games start to cause a slowdown once they get started if Firefox stays on(Probably due to Firefox being a RAM hog).

You're likely just pushing you're PC too far than it can go.

It's just probably time to upgrade(Or adapt your using methods, if you don't have the money).

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by Donomni

If it's single tasking, or multi-tasking with a few non-game programs, that is. Most games start to cause a slowdown once they get started if Firefox stays on(Probably due to Firefox being a RAM hog).

Games actually take a lot of resources because they amount to a controlled infinite loop. Seriously, the game loop is the most basic part of graphical games, from modern ones all the way down to Pac Man. Even if you're not doing much in a game, the game loop still has to run to check for input from you and update all the objects currently in use, re-draw the screen, etc.

Basically, trying to run a game, or at least a stand-alone application, like, say, Oblivion or TF2, with other things like browsers and IM apps is going to cause you grief.