Whats the best update for this PC?
- Thread starter bigcomp
- Start date
That will depend on what you are planning to use the system for. If you are simply checking the email and running an occasion game included with Windows you won't have need to go up too far on memory from the 256mb to 512mb single channel model if dual channel is available to a good pair of 512mb dimms to increase performance with the dual channel mode enabled. On a gaming system or one running large applications you would then consider boosting as well as looking at higher end hardwares(video, sound, peripherals).
diduknowthat
formerly liuliuboy
get the 512megs of ram, everything else would be a waste of money as your machine is considerably outdated for gaming and such.
If you have a good budget the option to go new would see a new build good for a few years. While trying to put money aside for a new 2007 case with higher end hardwares the current board starting failing. So the rush to grab a few things put that back a little while the new hardware would still run good for a few years by upgrading a few things like faster memory to replace the current pair of Kingston Value Ram pair of 1gb dimms, an FX60 to go with to replace the AMD64 3500+ cpu now being used, and an SLI dual video card setup(doubtful) for high end gaming to go a pair of newer cards then the current single model used. A good basic system with a pair of 512mb dimms will satisfy many for the most part depending on the type of case you need.
An increase to 512mb will certainly get you into some less demanding games. It also depends on how much you can throw on the present system as far as budget is concerned. Big bucks for big gaming on a new build. That will have to be planned out a little before you spend a great deal there. A PCI-Express video card type board will be the way over the now fading AGP type.
Last edited:
DanLatimer
New Member
he's talking about updating one thing or so, he doesn't have the buget to scrap his mobo, and get a new video card, and possibly cpu. for less demanding games he means like warcraft 3, or half life 1PC eye said:
DanLatimer said:
The remastered Half Life 1 requires the Steam/Source engine there. For an older system the older games like Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Doom I+II, and several of the older 98 games that will still run on XP wouldn't have the demands for system resources and should run without too many problems with 512mb of ram installed. The newer games out are XP orientated for systems running XP with a 1gb or higher. Anything that has high end graphics like a good number of action games will tend to be memory grabbers there.
speedyink
VIP Member
I have a comp with 512mb of ram and a 128mb FX5200 AGP, and an Athlon XP 2600, and it runs some of the newer(ish) games quite well. Need for speed Underground, Sims 2, GTA3, and Myst: Uru to name a few. I'm sure there are other games that would run on it, like HL2 if the settings were lowered a bit.
these games run even on my current PC.. Now take Mafia for example , its supposed to run at 40FPS on a celeron 400mhz with 128mb ram and TNT 2 card ( according to the director daniel vavra ) but while driving a car in the huge city i sometimes get 11-12 fps and other times 25-26 fps.. thou in closed rooms they increase a lot , offcourse .. and then during gun battles its above 40 fps or around 30 atleast..
I played san andreas on my cousin's PC which is 555mhz Pentium III , 128mb MX2000 and 128mb ram and it runs smoothly .. so if i install a total of 512 mb ( dual ) and 128mb FX/MX i'll probarly be able to get a smooth run .. OR a console would be better? are they fun??
and about the budget .. i'am a young kid whos gonna paid by his parents ( since i got my 64mb ram 333mhz celeron 4mb card ) so i don't need to arrange any budjet ( my parents can afford it
, but they are'nt crazy ) but computer prices in my country are REALLY high as compared to ones in US .. here 128mb ram is considered to be 'too much' and 512mb is considered to be super huge.. but i wanna link up with US standards as to play US games.. so, what should i do now?? PLEASE don't go too high..
I played san andreas on my cousin's PC which is 555mhz Pentium III , 128mb MX2000 and 128mb ram and it runs smoothly .. so if i install a total of 512 mb ( dual ) and 128mb FX/MX i'll probarly be able to get a smooth run .. OR a console would be better? are they fun??
and about the budget .. i'am a young kid whos gonna paid by his parents ( since i got my 64mb ram 333mhz celeron 4mb card ) so i don't need to arrange any budjet ( my parents can afford it
, but they are'nt crazy ) but computer prices in my country are REALLY high as compared to ones in US .. here 128mb ram is considered to be 'too much' and 512mb is considered to be super huge.. but i wanna link up with US standards as to play US games.. so, what should i do now?? PLEASE don't go too high..The one thing about constantly reducing settings on games to the lowest levels is something you do mainly when troubleshooting either the game's installation, video drivers, or temporarily until updating or building a system where the game's appearance the way it was meant to be seen can be run. The newer games with the crystal clarity in graphic details does require some memory as only one part of the process.
Game makers know that not all people can rush out for the latest hardware and want to run their products on older machines. Games just like XP can run on an old or low end machine. A boost in memory to 512mb will allow most to run. But you shouldn't expect a great deal of performance on the newer ones that need more ram then the older designed games for older versions of Windows.
Game makers know that not all people can rush out for the latest hardware and want to run their products on older machines. Games just like XP can run on an old or low end machine. A boost in memory to 512mb will allow most to run. But you shouldn't expect a great deal of performance on the newer ones that need more ram then the older designed games for older versions of Windows.