|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 909
|
slow computer
I am using winxp with sp2 and i have 128 MB RAM, 1 GB HDD and 1 GHz Processor(P3).
Sometimes my computer runs slow, and when i click on any file or application, it takes lot of time for it to open. I wanted to know that is it necessary that the cause of this slowing down of computer is only because of viruses or spywares? Cannot our computer slow down because of fragmentation of the files and date in the HDD? Cannot our computer slow down because of the so many processes that run at the background which uses CPU and memory? Offcourse these applications and file that we use need some memory to execute and if the memory is being used up by other processes at the background then definitely these applications and files will have less memory to work causing slowing of computer. pls note that my HDD is not fragmented, its fine. I hope my question is clear. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member (14 bit)
Premium Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Great NorthWest
Posts: 12,594
|
Not trying to be nasty, but with "128 MB RAM, 1 GB HDD and 1 GHz Processor(P3)" , yes is going to run slow no matter what.
Yes, other things besides viruses can make it computer run slow. With your limited RAM and hard drive space, you're going to run into slowdowns because of swapfile issues and a lot of file shuffling due to the lack of room. Yes older computers can slow down because of a file fragmentation. It is less noticeable on newer systems but only because hard drives are typically much faster. Yes your computer can slow down due to so many processes running that use the CPU and memory. That is what dual core processors are all about; the ability to run more things at one time. Windows XP will run on less than 1 GB of RAM as in your system proves, but that is the smallest amount I personally recommend. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | ||||||
|
Shiro Usagi
Premium Member
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Kaneohe, Hawaii
Posts: 34,002
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Cricket
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,791
|
XP won't even install on a 1gb hard drive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 909
|
reply
GLC, why doesnot WinXP install on 1 GB HDD? Can u share its reason?
Thanks for your replies, so i have to add more RAM and make it atleast 256 MB. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | ||
|
Shiro Usagi
Premium Member
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Kaneohe, Hawaii
Posts: 34,002
|
Quote:
Quote:
Cricket
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Va
Posts: 823
|
i'm surprised that you have a 1gb harddrive that still works.....
__________________
R.I.P. #21 Sean Taylor 1983-2007 GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 537
|
If it's a version of XP without any service packs and updates then it might fit on a 1gig hdd, though you won't have much room for a pagefile. Only other way is if you used something like XP-Lite to remove all the clutter from XP or maybe one of those XP gamer editions that are illegally doing the rounds.
Anyhow, ITLover you are correct in thinking that it's not only just malware that can cause a slow PC. The other factors have been listed by fellow members, however they did miss one that sometimes I see on graphic designer's computers often - that is excessive number of fonts installed; a Font Manager is a good fix so no real biggy. I'd have to agree with the 512Mb RAM minimum for XP, though with RAM being quite cheap these days I'd go for 1gig. With a machine as old as yours I'd be guessing you have onboard graphics - so 'Windows' is stealing even more of your RAM just for that. Personally, I would ditch XP on that machine, unless you drastically increase the size of the hdd and RAM amount. If this machine is used for nothing more than emails, web browsing and basic office tasks then I would install a lovely FREE version of Linux. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: beerhouse
Posts: 61
|
i have a computer same as yours, here is how i speed it up.
disable xp themes (don't know if you did this already and sorry if posted somewhere else i forgot where i found this one) Go to user configuration>administrative template>start menu and taskbar > enable "force use classic start menu" Go to user configuration>adminstrative templates>control panel>enable "force classic control panel style" Go to user configuration>administrative templates>control panel>display>desktop themes>open "load a specific visual style file or force windows classic > click enabled > leave the entry blank click ok Go to computer configuration>administrative templates>system>logon>open "always use classic logon",click enabled,click ok also turn off any autoplay on your cd, storage device using tweikui wbr, |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 909
|
questions
Quote:
OK, i got it, I'll try to experiment on it and install WinXP on 1.7 GB HDD. As far as i understand the swap or paging file will be very low if the HDD has a small storage capacity like 1.7 GB HDD. The Greater the storage capacity of the HDD will be the greater will be the swap and paging file? As far as i know swap is an area in HDD, where the files not urgently needed for execution are stored temperorily. If for example the processes running in the background are using great amount of RAM and if i increase the memory by adding more RAM to my computer, then will the paging file reduce? The performance of the computer will definitely improve. I hope my question is clear. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member (14 bit)
Premium Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Great NorthWest
Posts: 12,594
|
You basically have it. The SF (swap file) ties into both (HD and RAM). If you had a larger drive, Window may make the SF larger, but only to a point. There is much debate on the perfect SF size, but it is often considered around 1 1/2 times the amount of RAM installed. So, adding more RAM will increase the SF size. Yes, the SF is just a file on the HD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Shiro Usagi
Premium Member
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Kaneohe, Hawaii
Posts: 34,002
|
Quote:
Cricket
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,791
|
Bottom line, with those specs, I would not install any version of Windows on it newer than 98SE. If you want to run XP on that computer, you have a strong enough processor but way too little ram and hard drive space. Anything less than 256mb ram and 8gb hard drive is going to be painful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 537
|
Quote:
The page-file is generally 1 1/2 times the amount of physical RAM you have installed; thus if you 512MB of RAM the page-file will be 768MB of hdd space. It has nothing to do with the size of the hard-drive, it is assigned by the amount of RAM; of course if the hdd space is too small then Windows will try to find a happy medium - but not a situation I'd be inclined to have. Note that the page-file is dynamically assigned in Windows, that means it will only use what it needs at that particular time. It is because of this dynamically assigned section of hdd that you are told to leave at least 10% hdd space free. When you start an application it is loaded into RAM, if the amount of RAM is insufficient than the page-file is activated - only using what it needs at that particular moment. If the amount of space required is too small on the page-file then Windows will write any data to the hdd to help clear out the page-file. Once it has cleared sufficient space it will re-use the page-file. RAM is faster than hdd, if you always keep needing the page-file then a machine will run slowly; as Windows will constantly be writing to the hard-drive. I've had XP running on a PIII 700MHz CPU with 512MB of Ram and a 20gig hdd. Whilst it ran I would hardly call the performance stella. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 52
|
Only 1GB and 128MB RAM? How did it install anyways? By standards 128MB of RAM will do but at least 1.5GB of free space will be required to install winxp. I think you should start with an upgrade of HDD.
__________________
If u want an audience, start a fight
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 37,791
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Pakistan
Posts: 909
|
I am sorry i made a mistake, I have 40 GB HDD, not 1 GB HDD. I just re-read my post and found out the mistake.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Slow Computer | charlie7 | Home Theater, Audio, and Video | 1 | 01-07-2007 12:43 PM |
| First steps to cure slow computer | mike12 | Windows Legacy Support (XP and earlier) | 17 | 11-22-2005 08:28 AM |
| Very slow computer | Bueyehl | Computer Hardware | 4 | 06-26-2005 10:26 AM |
| Computer running slow for no reason? | brandon84 | Computer Hardware | 10 | 02-03-2005 07:38 AM |
| When makin a cd, computer gets extremely SLOW!!! WHY?!?! | bboystatus | Computer Hardware | 4 | 01-24-2002 12:02 AM |