448mhz/256 ram or 333mhz/384ram for Win XP

[Glorfindael]

Ok well my ma insists on having windows xp..can't have 2000 or 98 and with the mobos/cpus I have the best situations i can make are using a mobo that maxes at 333mhz proc and 1gig ram and i have 3x128 sticks, thus a 333proc w/384 ram.. on the other hand I have a mobo that can support up to about 500 (i'll be overclocking the bus to 112mhz to go w/a 4 multiplier for a 400mhz slot p2) but only supports up to 256 ram. Which combo would be better to use for simple internet use, maybe solitare etc... nothing video intensive at all..both would be using a raddy 8500 as the vid card... Thanks, - Seth

 

[Shawn]

xp will probably run better with more ram rather than more cpu speed.

 

[jameswhite1979]

More RAM and tweak XP with its performance settings.

 

[Glorfindael]

thats the way i was leaning, but that mobo also limits the vid card to 16mb or something? and agp 2x i think...

 

[Glorfindael]

and ram speed is higher w/256 (112 compared to 100)

 

[JWade]

i found a program called xplite and used it to trim down winxp, reduced its size and used it to do soem tweaks to make it run faster. i was using winxp pro on a 466mhz celeron with 256mb ram and for internet and word processing it worked pretty good, alot better than i was expecting

 

[jhu]

try taking a look at tinyxp and see what they do. then use nlite to trim down your xp installation (because tinyxp is "illegal warez"). after doing all that, i'd go with the faster processor, otherwise use the one with more memory.

 

[cubby1223]

I'd bet you can get a socket 370 combo, maybe ~600-800mhz for super-cheap in the fs forums, probably around $15-$20 shipped.

 

[Nothinman]

You and her are both in for a world of pain...

 

[regnez]

Originally posted by: Glorfindael
thats the way i was leaning, but that mobo also limits the vid card to 16mb or something? and agp 2x i think...

Originally posted by: Glorfindael
and ram speed is higher w/256 (112 compared to 100)

Neither of those really matters. I am running XP on a Thinkpad with only 8mb of video (shared), and pc100 ram. It is not fast, but surfing the web is not too bad, and word processing is definitely still easy.

If I were you, I would go with the faster processor. 256mb of ram is more than enough to move XP along, but a 333mhz processor would really slow things down.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Both options are bad for XP.
I would go with neither.

If I was forced to use either computer, the 448mhz machine with 256mb of ram would probably be less likely to cause me to go on a rampage.

384mb of ram is a lot better than 256mb of ram for XP, but IMO 450 vs 333 mhz is a bigger difference assuming no multitasking is really taking place.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'd go for more RAM, personally, as long as they aren't into playing games or viewing media/DVDs. Otherwise CPU speed is better.

 

[Shawn]

Well I got WinXP working on a P2 266Mhz laptop with 256MB of ram. Basically I disabled all unnecessary services and got it running pretty smoothly for internet and word processing. Can't do much else though.

Maybe this will help: http://www.beemerworld.com/tips/servicesxp.htm