I Got a Hardware Rating of 1

Upgrading the graphics card to one that has onboard instead of shared memory
would be beneficial. You may also want to strongly consider increasing the
amount of RAM while you're in there rooting around. From what I have read,
you should have at least 1GB, and 1.5GB is what CNet thinks is adequate.


"Ernie" wrote:

> which normally coming 1st would be good but not here.
>
> It says:
> AMD Athlon 1.6
> Memory 752MB 1.7
> Hard Drive 3.0
> Graphics VIA/S3G 2.0
> Gaming Graphics 16MB 1.0
>
> I plan on getting a new PC later this year but what one thing would help now?
>
> I was hoping a new graphics card may help (I don't play games at all, just
> photo/video/web design), so I was thinking a low-cost 256MB card perhaps?
>
> Any suggestions on what I should get and would going to a separate graphics
> card rather than built in which it is now help performance etc?
>
>
>
>

If it stops the 9 minute start up time (4.59am to 5.08am) I'll try most
anything.

Might do a clean install too as this was an upgrade from XP, may help!

You are low on at least 3 counts:
Processor
Memory
Video

The Clean Install may improve your boot time, but I doubt you will ever be
more than a one on that computer without cost inefficient upgrades.
Instead of worrying about the rating, see how it performs in real life, that
is a far better way to measure performance.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Ernie" <Ernie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE4B0C5F-3708-4366-875A-0FEB2B80EAD4@microsoft.com...

> which normally coming 1st would be good but not here.
>
> It says:
> AMD Athlon 1.6
> Memory 752MB 1.7
> Hard Drive 3.0
> Graphics VIA/S3G 2.0
> Gaming Graphics 16MB 1.0
>
> I plan on getting a new PC later this year but what one thing would help
> now?
>
> I was hoping a new graphics card may help (I don't play games at all, just
> photo/video/web design), so I was thinking a low-cost 256MB card perhaps?
>
> Any suggestions on what I should get and would going to a separate
> graphics
> card rather than built in which it is now help performance etc?
>
>
>
>

Yeah, I'm still trying to figure out the math here myself. I have the
following:

Processor: 3.2 (AMD x64 +3700)
Memory: 5.4 (2 GB)
Hard disk: 3.8 (74 total, 54 free)
Graphics: 5.9 (Nvidia 7900 GTX)
Gaming graphics: 5.9 (512 MB)

Overall rating is a 3.

According to the help information I am between a 4 and a 5 (on Microsoft's
site I believe.)

It would appear that maybe this is partly driven by the fact my display and
sound card drivers have some performance issues. One complains of making my
computer slower to start up (creative drivers) and the other heavy resource
contention which is slowing my frame rate. The sound drivers are for beta 1
and is pretty much poop (X-Fi.) Hopefully the next version of the drivers
from creative will be good but they are notoriously slooooow on releasing
updates. I'm also hoping that Nvidia will have some new drivers as theirs
seem a little incomplete (several other issues I won't get into.)

Still, the numbers above a bit deceiving. Taking the average of the total
it's a 4.84. I guess that would mean that certain items carry more weight
than others and that's fine, I would suggest scaling the individual numbers
to fit a scale of 1-5 so that a true total can be quantified (I would
actually suggest 1-10 giving more range, finer tuning and room for growth
down the road.) But I'm obviously speaking out of a lack of knowledge. But
I would like to see the final number at least make a little bit of... sense.

Hopefully someone who has a more intimate knowledge can shed some light on
this.

=P



"Ernie" <Ernie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE4B0C5F-3708-4366-875A-0FEB2B80EAD4@microsoft.com...

> which normally coming 1st would be good but not here.
>
> It says:
> AMD Athlon 1.6
> Memory 752MB 1.7
> Hard Drive 3.0
> Graphics VIA/S3G 2.0
> Gaming Graphics 16MB 1.0
>
> I plan on getting a new PC later this year but what one thing would help
> now?
>
> I was hoping a new graphics card may help (I don't play games at all, just
> photo/video/web design), so I was thinking a low-cost 256MB card perhaps?
>
> Any suggestions on what I should get and would going to a separate
> graphics
> card rather than built in which it is now help performance etc?
>
>
>
>

Sucks to be you with that setup

A separate graphics card will always help, especially if you want
performance with Aero switched on.
Instead of just looking at the memory for a card, check what type of memory
it has. DDR3 is the latest and greatest, but those cards usually cost a
bit.
The one component that people mostly skimp on, but is the most important
component is memory. I don't mean just the amount, but the type, brand and
quality. I had a buddy who had 2GB of PC3200 DDR2 RAM. He bought a better
brand RAM, same basic specs as noted and replaced it (not added, switched
out) and the performance increase was amazing. He cleared up any lacking
issues he had with F.E.A.R.

Getting a new PC, you have to look at what you will be using it for. First
thing, get a decent processor and memory. If gaming is your thing, a video
card, if not, a decent midrange card will suit you fine. With your current
setup, a new processor and memory will give you much more performance boost
than a video card will.

"Ernie" <Ernie@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:CE4B0C5F-3708-4366-875A-0FEB2B80EAD4@microsoft.com...

> which normally coming 1st would be good but not here.
>
> It says:
> AMD Athlon 1.6
> Memory 752MB 1.7
> Hard Drive 3.0
> Graphics VIA/S3G 2.0
> Gaming Graphics 16MB 1.0
>
> I plan on getting a new PC later this year but what one thing would help
> now?
>
> I was hoping a new graphics card may help (I don't play games at all, just
> photo/video/web design), so I was thinking a low-cost 256MB card perhaps?
>
> Any suggestions on what I should get and would going to a separate
> graphics
> card rather than built in which it is now help performance etc?
>
>
>
>