• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Celeron 1.1 and 128mb of memory, this is normal right?

Nocturnal

Lifer
This laptop is running Windows XP Home. I removed all spyware and viruses and basically the unit still runs slow. My uncle's computer which is similar to this laptop runs just as slow as this unit. I'm wondering, if it is normal for a Celeron 1.1 w/ 128mb of memory to run sluggish. Or should this unit be able to load Windows quickly and once it gets to the desktop, things should be pretty decent/fast?

Edit: Sorry it isn't my box, it's a box I'm working on. I removed some spyware/viruses. The client said it's still slow but I wasn't here to explain that that is just how it is with this much memory installed.
 
yup, if u feel like upgrading, some extra ram wouldnt hurt, though if you have the cash to spare, you might want to consider a new build
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
128MB of ram is horrible. :Q
Read the words of this great prophet. If you give a PII 300 512MB RAM it will happily run XP...but nothing will get it running fast w/ 128MB. Nothing.
 
That is normal for that sys.

I agree "need more ram". If not an option I would go to my computer/right click/properties/advanced click "performance settings" and check "best performance settings.
Option #2 would be to install windows 98
 
That is normal for such a system.

The RAM isn't as much of an issue as these blokes will have you believe. The processor (a Celeron 1.1!!!!) is your primary bottleneck.
 
Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
That is normal for such a system.

The RAM isn't as much of an issue as these blokes will have you believe. The processor (a Celeron 1.1!!!!) is your primary bottleneck.

more ram never hurts. i think both are important.
 
Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
That is normal for such a system.

The RAM isn't as much of an issue as these blokes will have you believe. The processor (a Celeron 1.1!!!!) is your primary bottleneck.
I must disagree. At 1.1GHz, it would be a PIII-based Celeron w/ a 100MHz FSB. Not bad at all.
 
Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
That is normal for such a system.

The RAM isn't as much of an issue as these blokes will have you believe. The processor (a Celeron 1.1!!!!) is your primary bottleneck.

A Tualatin based Celeron runs WinXP just fine. I have a 1.2/512 and it runs smoothly.
 
I've got a Celeron 1.2GHz laptop that came with 256MB RAM, since upgraded to 768MB. Definitely made a very noticeable improvement, and I can still use my computer for my daily tasks (e-mail, web-browsing, etc.). I would definitely say that RAM is the primary culprit in the OP's laptop.
 
I worked on a friend's laptop that was a Gateway with a Celeron processor (don't remember the speed, but it was at least 1 GHz) and with 128MB. It was sluggish, hard drive gets cranking. I doubt you'll probably want to replace the processor. A memory upgrade will definitely not hurt as a few already suggested.

I also have a desktop with a Celeron 1.3GHz and 512MB, it seems to be adequate for Windows XP.
 
lol 128mb. its like trying to run a suv with a lawnmower engine. theres no hope. xp requires atleast 384+ and the less ram u have the faster the harddrive should be..heck the harddrive should be fast period. and on old ass laptops it was hideously slow. the processors just fine. a setup like that is either sold as a super sale item for people who know no better, or as a win98 machine.
 
128mb is definitely your problem. Your standard windows build takes about 200+ MB just to load. You realise...you are already out of RAM before you start doing anything in Windows. You are mile high into file swapping, so your hard drive is essentially running as your RAM.

And your Hard Drive is slow...even a WD Raptor is slow as molasses for file swapping. (Even Quake will stutter on your comp if you had a WD Raptor for file swapping).
 
Originally posted by: Cerb
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
128MB of ram is horrible. :Q
Read the words of this great prophet. If you give a PII 300 512MB RAM it will happily run XP...but nothing will get it running fast w/ 128MB. Nothing.

Quite possibly he could setup a SCSI 15K RPM Raid 0 array which could be used for the page file and would make up for the slow ram (heard that with a 10K RPM scsi drive, you can get fairly good system performance if it's low on ram). Though that would obviously be stupid and would cost significantly more than more ram and I don't think it's even possible on a laptop.
 
but how do u get scsi raid interface into an old laptop. no point anyways, new far nicer laptops go for a few hundred these days. investing anything in an old laptop is a waste.
 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
but how do u get scsi raid interface into an old laptop. no point anyways, new far nicer laptops go for a few hundred these days. investing anything in an old laptop is a waste.

Nah, getting another 256 stick for 50 bucks isn't a waste at all.
 
Its ram not the cpu holding you back. Bud of mine runs XP with office apps on a AMD Duron 700 with 384 mb and its pretty snappy really.
 
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
but how do u get scsi raid interface into an old laptop. no point anyways, new far nicer laptops go for a few hundred these days. investing anything in an old laptop is a waste.

Nah, getting another 256 stick for 50 bucks isn't a waste at all.

sodimms that old cost double that. probably pc100 or pc133....
assuming eh's got any free memory slots..or it can take a 256..some were picky picky
 
Back
Top