Why is this computer so SLOW?

[hans030390]

I've been messing around with my friend's old PC. Specs:

1.8ghz P4
128mb ram (yeah...ouch)
30gb HD
Integrated graphics

Basically, it takes around...30 minutes to an hour to fully load up Windows XP (to be able to actually click on stuff normally, though it's still slow).

I figured it was just windows...so I erased everything on the HD and installed Ubuntu.

Ubuntu still takes the same amount of time to load up.

Yeah, I know, it's crappy computer...but hold on. Ubuntu booted up and was able to run in under 5 minutes on a PC with a 500mhz celeron, 128mb ram, and a 4gb HD.

So, what's up with this computer? You'd figured it would load up at least as fast, having a bigger HD and a CPU 3 times faster...same ram, though.

Any particular thing that may be causing the system to be so slow?

 

[OdiN]

128MB RAM.

That's not enough RAM for XP AT ALL. You need at least 512MB.

 

[Gautama2]

^^ But he said he has the same problem on Ubuntu as well.

 

[DSF]

Originally posted by: OdiN
128MB RAM.

That's not enough RAM for XP AT ALL. You need at least 512MB.

Even with only 128MB of RAM, it doesn't take an hour to load XP.

 

[Glavinsolo]

Sounds like an old and tired hard drive

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: Glavinsolo
Sounds like an old and tired hard drive

Perhaps. I'll try a different HD. Even then, Live CDs ran like ass on it. Actually, they didn't load. Could this still be HD related?

Originally posted by: OdiN
128MB RAM.

That's not enough RAM for XP AT ALL. You need at least 512MB.

It's enough to boot it up in less than 30 minutes. I ran XP on that 500mhz/128mb computer I listed above for a while, and even it was able to boot up pretty quickly.

 

[HeXploiT]

Lol the ram. Get another 256mb chip and i promise you its performance will be like night and day.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Lol the ram. Get another 256mb chip and i promise you its performance will be like night and day.

Psh, I'm not spending money on it. Besides, that doesn't answer my question. My did my 500mhz system (same ram, smaller HD) run XP hundreds of times faster than this "newer" system does? Same with Ubuntu/Xubuntu.

 

[crispy2010]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Lol the ram. Get another 256mb chip and i promise you its performance will be like night and day.

Agreed probably a bad stick, at least try another stick.

Lets not forget the onboard graphics are using a piece of the memory also!

128 meg - video ram=???

 

[crispy2010]

Mobo prob using 64 meg dedicated!!!!:shocked:

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: DSF

Originally posted by: OdiN
128MB RAM.

That's not enough RAM for XP AT ALL. You need at least 512MB.

Even with only 128MB of RAM, it doesn't take an hour to load XP.

He didn't say to load...he said to load and use normally...I've seen systems with low ram that get to the desktop...but you can't do anything hardly at all....ever.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: crispy2010
Mobo prob using 64 meg dedicated!!!!:shocked:

definately lack of memory and slow harddrive

 

[Bateluer]

Lack of RAM, a slow HDD, or possibly the CPU being set for compatibility mode in the bios. Seen that on a friend's machine a month or so ago, actually took XP 20min just to display the login screen. It took almost 24 hours to format the 120GB hdd he'd purchased.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Lack of RAM, a slow HDD, or possibly the CPU being set for compatibility mode in the bios. Seen that on a friend's machine a month or so ago, actually took XP 20min just to display the login screen. It took almost 24 hours to format the 120GB hdd he'd purchased.

Lack of RAM wouldn't explain it. Are you reading my other posts? I had a system with the same amount of ram and a slower CPU, and it worked a lot faster than this computer. Slow HD, maybe. Compatibility mode...? I'm not quite sure what that is. Any way to check if it's on and disable it (bios, maybe)?

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: hans030390
I'm not quite sure what that is. Any way to check if it's on and disable it (bios, maybe)?

Speaking of BIOS, clear it using the jumper and try it again. Almost sounds as if the cache memory was disabled in BIOS.

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Lack of RAM, a slow HDD, or possibly the CPU being set for compatibility mode in the bios. Seen that on a friend's machine a month or so ago, actually took XP 20min just to display the login screen. It took almost 24 hours to format the 120GB hdd he'd purchased.

Lack of RAM wouldn't explain it. Are you reading my other posts? I had a system with the same amount of ram and a slower CPU, and it worked a lot faster than this computer. Slow HD, maybe. Compatibility mode...? I'm not quite sure what that is. Any way to check if it's on and disable it (bios, maybe)?

did the other computer have an integrated videocard?

 

[thorin]

hans030390
1) Have you tried booting in Safemode? Have you ever enabled and checked the bootlog?
2) As a diagnostic test why don't you boot from a LiveCD? That would take your HD out of the equation.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCD

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: hans030390
I'm not quite sure what that is. Any way to check if it's on and disable it (bios, maybe)?

Speaking of BIOS, clear it using the jumper and try it again. Almost sounds as if the cache memory was disabled in BIOS.

Using the jumper? What exactly is that?

Originally posted by: biostud
did the other computer have an integrated videocard?

Yeah, and probably one much slower/worse.

Originally posted by: thorin
hans030390
1) Have you tried booting in Safemode? Have you ever enabled and checked the bootlog?
2) As a diagnostic test why don't you boot from a LiveCD? That would take your HD out of the equation.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCD">https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCD</a>

1. No and No...how would I enable the boot log (if it's in an OS, forget about it...I can barely open them).
2. LiveCDs wouldn't run...they'd go way, way too slow. Well, I lied. Damn Small Linux ran without problems from the CD.

 

[nordloewelabs]

a) your integrated graphics is prolly using 64Mb of your total RAM.
check the BIOS and change that value to 8 or 16Mb.

b) bad RAM maybe? replace the memory stick and see what happens.

c) HD might have too many bad sectors. run CHKDSK.

d) check if you are running the HD on DMA mode.

e) it's also possible that the HD is on its way to meet its
creator. poor little ah heck.... +_+

 

[magreen]

Much more significant than the amount of memory the integrated graphics steals, is the memory bandwidth that the shared memory steals. They invented DDR to rescue the P4 chip which is quad-pumped and runs like a one-legged horse with single-pumped SDR ram. I know -- I used to have a P4 1.8A @2.0GHz with 512MB PC100 SDR and integrated graphics, and it stunk up the whole house with its performance in Win2k. Memory bandwidth was at 400MB/s. I put in an el cheapo AGP graphics card and memory bandwidth doubled to 800 MB/s -- it was like night and day in overall performance (I don't play 3d games). I'm assuming his P4 has SDR ram?

I know you said your Celeron 500 also had integrated graphics, but was it using shared memory or did it have dedicated video memory? If it had dedicated video memory then that's why it was faster. The old Diamond and Viper etc. graphics cards back in the days of the original P1 and P2 all had dedicated video memory even if no graphics processor.

Either way, I would guess the reason is that the P4 combined with SDR RAM and IGP makes a bad cocktail. You need double-pumped memory for the P4 to function.
The Celery wasn't quad-pumped so it probably played friendlier with SDR ram.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

I had a P4 1.6 back in the day. I used it with 128MB RAM (16MB shared for video) for a decent length of time when one of my DIMMs died. It did NOT take 30 minutes to an hour to be usable. And most motherboards from that era wouldn't even allow you to share 64MB for graphics - it was usually 8/16/32MB.

I think ZAP is right - L1/L2 cache is probably disabled in BIOS. Look around for that option.