You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

The Computer I bought (look inside)

Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 2:40am

Post 1 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Now I know I was railing against Windows for awhile. Looks like I have to eat my words now.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the beauty that now occupies my life:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8674794&type=product&id=1197075131085&ref=06&loc=01&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=8674794

http://www.bestbuy.ca/multimedia/products/large/10090159.jpg

Intel Quad 2.4ghz, 4 gigs ram, 750GB hd, HD-Rom, DVD Lightscribe, Wireless mouse/kb, Nvida 8500 GT. Around $1500 w/o monitor. Best Buy 2 year extended service plan $200.

First off - let me just say. The 32-bit Vista SCREAMS with 4 gigs. I don't know if it's because HP fine-tuned it to perfection, Vista, or the 4 gigs - but it is truly unbelievable.

And having tons of help advisers, updaters, help videos, utility applications, backup tools, migration tools, and everything else .. right out the door when you first bootup - helps too. HP put together a sweet system.

I've already rendered in AE, captured HD in Premiere, encoded video, played some games, did some 3DS modelling, Encore CS3 burns, Photoshop editing - and the system ran beautifully. I've been putting it through all the paces past couple days. Never a single problem.

In fact, i launch an application - before I can even sip my Mountain Dew - it's already up and rearing to go. Wow. Just Wow.

The wireless keyboard and mouse is good - but I replaced it with my previous wireless logitech kb/mouse combo. Mainly because my existing mouse had fwd/back little buttons. And I use that aggressively when browsing. I hate moving my mouse up to the back button, or pressing backspace.

And price wasn't bad - tho I bought my 24" HP HDMI LCD for $500 elsewhere. Even w/o the Blu-Ray drive (i'll buy that later this summer when writers and BR 2.0 mature) it came out to around $1500 (w/o monitor) or so with 4gigs installed. The manuals and sheets were very easy to understand and intuitive. And the packaging of the box, cables, even batteries was very top notch.

HP has done a great job here.

This truly is an incredibly fast and stable system. Just what I wanted. And the Vista UI improvements - are just sweet now.

I'm letting my gf's calls go straight to voice mail.

me = happy. smile

d
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 7:48am

Post 2 of 32

dungmeister

Force: 0 | Joined: 13th May 2007 | Posts: 13

Member

haha,
mines like exactly the same as yours, cept 1tb hard drive (that i installed myself somehow) and a nvidi 8800GTS 512mb graphics
in aus, they sell them cheap as chips custom made of ebay (http://search.ebay.com.au/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=q6600&category0=), all you have to do is type Q6600 and you got a buttload.
Nice pc though. how bigs the monitor?

Should make you feel good now editing video
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 8:18am

Post 3 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

yeah i wanna get the nvidia 8800. apparently it's a huge upgrade from the 8500.

But i'm still researching whether the extra 265mb and circuitry will really make a diff in my rendering, etc.

I got a HP 24" w2408h HDMI monitor. It is SWEET. Pivots, Rotates, everything. Connected vid HDMI cable.

My 2nd is a 20" DVI monitor for now. Until I buy a nice 40" HDTV and affix it at an angle on the wall. Then I can use it for my source monitor.

For extra storage, if ever needed - I can buy either those usb external lan hard drives, or the personal media bays. Hopefully by then I'll have a BR writer I can pump out 24gig backups to make more room for footage.

I'm so glad I didn't go 64-bit for the extra RAM. My friend had 64-bit and had nothing but unsigned vs signed driver and crash problems. He gave up and went 32-bit again. Way more stable too.

d
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 8:35am

Post 4 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

EvilDonut wrote:

I don't know if it's because HP fine-tuned it to perfection, Vista, or the 4 gigs - but it is truly unbelievable.
Well... not trying to be an ass here, but... it DEFINITELY has more to do with the fact that you have a quad-core and 4 GB of RAM. HP most definitely didn't "fine-tune it to perfection," because they most likely did the exact opposite.

Sadly, such is the state of the PC OEM industry -- in order to lower the prices of the computers they sell, the big-name OEM's (like Dell, HP, Sony, Gateway, Acer, etc) accept little monetary kickbacks from software companies if the OEM agrees to pre-install trial-versions of their software onto the pre-made machines. The idea is, people who purchase a new computer will start using all of this free software "included" with their purchase, become endeared and familiar with the software, and then purchase it when the trial-period ends.

Unfortunately, while this looks good on paper, reality tells a much different story. All of this pre-installed trialware is typically useless, often mimicking or replicating a function found in free or built-in applications. This results in software that is, at best... a nuisance, and at worst... a security risk. Either way, it typically reduces performance (because these trial softwares often start up with your computer whether they asked you or not) and generally reduces system stability.

I know HP's come with the Yahoo Toolbar installed for Internet Explorer 7. Get rid of it -- that's some of the most useless, cluttering software that's available. Really, just about ANY software that comes from Yahoo's labs can be considered borderline malware -- it's useless, reduces performance, is often incompatible with certain settings in Windows, and doesn't give you any perceivable benefit in usability. You know that little Yahoo search bar on your taskbar in Windows? Uninstall that, too. There's no need to be able to search a crappy search engine right from the desktop, and if you absolutely want and/or need that functionality, grab a Google search gadget for your Vista Sidebar from the Windows Vista Gadget Gallery. Or snatch an OpenSearch plugin, compatible with the search field in the top-right of both Internet Explorer 7 AND Firefox 2.

Removing these, and any other bloat/trialware software from your system will improve it's stability, speed, and responsiveness. Trust me, by removing this crap... you won't hate your computer in about two months, when all your trial software starts "reminding you" (in the most obnoxious way possible) that you need to pay to continue using it.

Also, get some good security software. McAfee and Norton are NOT good security packages -- they suck, they're pretty overweight programs (ie, they eat CPU and RAM like it's going out of style) and they cost money. Get Free AVG (a fantastic, lightweight, self-updating anti-virus program) and Free ZoneAlarm (a free firewall that can be fairly annoying when you FIRST start using it, but otherwise REALLY improves security after you teach it the basic rules). Also, there's a program out there called CCleaner, it cleans out temporary program files and your registry, which should also speed up your system and make it more stable. CCleaner should be on EVERY Windows computer out there, so long as third-party software companies with little regard to quality continue to exist.

Vista comes with Windows Defender, which is a really good anti-spyware application. It scores very high marks in spyware/adware detection and removal, it's pretty surprising for a built-in Windows security application.

EvilDonut wrote:

In fact, i launch an application - before I can even sip my Mountain Dew - it's already up and rearing to go. Wow. Just Wow.
That's, undoubtedly, Vista's SuperFetch feature at work.

You mentioned that you have a 24" monitor... which probably means you're running it at a display resolution of 1920x1200. That's EXTRAORDINARILY wide, and gives you ample room for like... anything. I'd recommend running your Windows Sidebar on top of other windows -- it's really pretty handy to have all of your gadgets right there, ready to use without having to... oh... you know... strike a keyboard shortcut or something like that. There are some nice gadgets out there, such as an Uptime gadget (tells you how long it's been since your last reboot), a Recycle Bin gadget (allows you to empty your Recycle Bin even with maximized windows), Sphere Timer (a clock, alarm clock, countdown, and stopwatch all-in-one) and the Multi-Meter (monitors CPU core and RAM usage -- and yes, they have one for quad-cores).

Also, if you like Mac OS X's window management system like Expose, you should consider getting and playing around with Switcher, which basically lets you do the same thing with Windows Vista's Aero interface... only with a FAR greater degree of control. smile

Oh yeah. And Firefox 2. Give it a try... because it rocks Internet Explorer 7 back into the... immediately Post-Industrial Age. It rocked IE 6 back to the Stone Age, but IE 7 doesn't suck too badly. I still think Firefox 2 is vastly superior, though. Also, Apple released their Safari browser for Windows -- it's... actually not sucky. Early betas were, but... Safari is REALLY fast and features some very nice, Mac-like font rendering. I rather like that, but Safari lacks Firefox extensions and customizeable searches.

Hope I've been helpful. smile

EvilDonut wrote:

yeah i wanna get the nvidia 8800. apparently it's a huge upgrade from the 8500.

But i'm still researching whether the extra 265mb and circuitry will really make a diff in my rendering, etc.
It won't help in rendering times -- rendering is all done by the CPU. Having a good amount of RAM helps reduce render times, too.

Where high-end graphics cards really matter is in real-time 3D... for example, in your viewports in 3dsmax, or in a full-3D game like Call of Duty 4. CPU's are terrible at rendering complicated, high-polygon, high-texture scenes at frame rates in excess of 30 frames per second (that's about how fast you want your games running in order to look smooth to your eye). This is where graphics cards help.

And, if you want, they can also assist in doing real-time post-processing of video and whatnot. ATI cards these days come with AVIVO HD when you purchase the card, and it helps with video playback on your screen. ATI cards are ideal choices for Media Center or Home Theatre PC's for this very purpose -- Nvidia cards can do the same, but require a $50 after-card purchase of their video-enhancement software called "PureVideo HD."
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 10:36am

Post 5 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

OMG, thanks for the multi-meter and switcher links. Those two programs are so incredible. I gotta install switcher on my work laptop.

You clearly know what you're talking about. Thanks.

I have my Vista taskbar docked on my left (more real estate horizontally then vertically, and you can list more programs) - so with 2 monitors, I have so much room to play with. It's just amazing.

Yeah I think someone else here clearly defined the ATI card as the better choice. But it'll suffice for now.

I never watch DVDs on my desktop. Only may laptop at airports - and I'm more concerned on getting a good Blu-Ray writer when they come out (and mature).

I hear you on bloatware. First thing I did was remove Norton. Huge resource hog and very annoying. Also Vista and proper router, account settings, firewall, defender, firefox, etc. settings makes my system pretty secure from the get-go.

But HP did set things up real smoothly and intuitively. This system clearly is 'idiot-proof' out of the box - and while that isn't as important to me as Aunt Marthae - it allowed me to start having fun and installing stuff within minutes.

It even included a swell program called 'WET' allowing me to seamlessly migrate my files from my old to new computer through usb or dvd. Wow.

thx.

d
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 11:34am

Post 6 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

EvilDonut wrote:

OMG, thanks for the multi-meter and switcher links. Those two programs are so incredible. I gotta install switcher on my work laptop.
I use Switcher religiously. Great program, props to Apple, and props to Bao Nguyen for bringing it to Windows. biggrin

EvilDonut wrote:

You clearly know what you're talking about. Thanks.
Well, at least someone here thinks so. Woot. biggrin

EvilDonut wrote:

But HP did set things up real smoothly and intuitively. This system clearly is 'idiot-proof' out of the box - and while that isn't as important to me as Aunt Marthae - it allowed me to start having fun and installing stuff within minutes.
No doubt. HP does a good job at that, and by-and-large, HP does a good job with their systems in general.

Enjoy your system. I'm gonna keep cleaning my room. And checking FXhome. biggrin
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 2:07pm

Post 7 of 32

Nuke Shower

Force: 0 | Joined: 28th Mar 2008 | Posts: 3

Member

My cousin has that same computer. It is rely fast and amazing.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 4:05pm

Post 8 of 32

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

May you be very happy together for years to come smile

My 3-year-old (albeit top-end at the time, and still beats half the stuff in PC World) lappy is looking on in envy :-$
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 4:16pm

Post 9 of 32

FreshMentos

Force: 1667 | Joined: 10th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1141

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Congratulations EvilDonut! I love the feeling of a new PC that makes your life easier.

pdrg wrote:

May you be very happy together for years to come

My 3-year-old (albeit top-end at the time, and still beats half the stuff in PC World) lappy is looking on in envy :-$
LOL! For a second I thought you were talking about your child! razz

Sorry to go a little off-topic.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 4:27pm

Post 10 of 32

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

From feedback that I have got 64bit vista is a lot more stable driverwise than 64bit XP. Some hardware does have problems but its worth trying out because if it works there are a lot of benefits.

At the moment you are wasting a large chunk of that 4GB (approximately the size of your graphics card memory) but a bigger issue is that any single process under 32bit windows is limited to 2GB which can become especially limiting in the field of video/graphics.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 4:29pm

Post 11 of 32

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

if you have the Intel Q6600 as I suspect you can easily OC it to 3ghz/core - I've done this. Though I followed a guide specifically for my mobo. Makes things go that little bit faster.

Sadly - pre-made computers are never quite as hardcore as ones you could make yourself, cheaper. I noticed you didn't mention a graphics card - so unless you accidentally bought a good one there's gaming out the window :s

Also - Vista 32bit with 4 gigs of ram hm? Have you checked that Vista sees all 4Gb and not 3Gb... Which is what 32bit operating systems are actually limited to? Believe me - I have 4x1gb sticks in this machine and vista will only see 3gb after a little tweaking.

Also, with the CS3 apps make sure you've enabled to extra core options in the preferences. There's a checkbox for render multiple frames simultaneously - as without this enabled you're not going to reap much benefit. (note that you'll spot AE using up a ton more ram due to it creating several processes - one per core to render frames).

In any case, cool. Perhaps you'll be able to throw some cool GPU/Soundcard in and have more of an all rounder. wink

on a final note - check out a program called 'UltraMon'. It's not free but there's a trial version. It can stretch your taskbar over 2 monitors and has some other dual monitor options. Pretty handy.

-Hybrid.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 6:08pm

Post 12 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Here's more info on Vista and 4GB

http://komku.blogspot.com/2007/02/ibmer-says-vistas-ram-sweet-spot-is-4gb.html

a bunch is grabbed by the HD, Video Card, Vista, etc. so you're left with about 3.25 GB.

But the difference is shocking. I was up this morning, hit my keyboard - and it was up and out of sleep mode within 4 seconds. Rearin' to go.

NVidia 8500. But i'm not a gamer. I got my xbox 360 for that. But I could change my mind if I don't like this card. But for now it's okay.

Overclocking? I used to do that too. But i'm afraid of ruining service warranties, and creating new problems. Everything is fine now. Since this is my work machine, and lotsa money depends on it - not sure if I want to take that chance. I might read up on it tho.

AE: I still need to make those changes. Thanks for reminding me.

d
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 6:09pm

Post 13 of 32

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

How are those photo/image editing apps going? Fast as ever I'd guess. wink
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 7:15pm

Post 14 of 32

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Suspend to ram should restart near instantaneously regardless of system performance because all the information is still held in ram! Very little loading or processing is actually done so it is no indication of speed whatsoever.

Also the reccomendation of having 4GB implies you are using the 64bit version. Under 32bit the difference between that 3.25GB and the full 4GB is just sitting there doing nothing at all.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 8:58pm

Post 15 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Kid wrote:

full 4GB is just sitting there doing nothing at all.
i suggest you read that link. lots of good info there.

my system screams at 4gb. I'm sure if I went back to 3gigs (out of the box) it would be so 'screaming'.

In fact, I was at best buy yesterday (where their computers have 3 gigs) and did some opening/closing, as much as I could do what what little installed on their demo computer. Clearly their system was nowhere near as fast as mine is right now.

Fast = more time devoted to my filmmaking. Which makes me a happy Panda. smile

d
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 9:48pm

Post 16 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

My Macbook Pro has 2GB of RAM, and boots from hibernate in about 2 seconds (in OS X, though). There isn't really any difference with 3GB unless you have loads of memory intensive programs open.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 10:32pm

Post 17 of 32

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

EvilDonut wrote:

Kid wrote:

full 4GB is just sitting there doing nothing at all.
i suggest you read that link. lots of good info there.

my system screams at 4gb. I'm sure if I went back to 3gigs (out of the box) it would be so 'screaming'.
I would suggest YOU read that link, they are talking about 64bit vista.

Also read this link. Your system will go exactly the same speed with 3 rather than 4 because windows 32bit cannot address (CAN NOT USE WHATSOEVER) roughly the last GB of it.
Posted: Sat, 29th Mar 2008, 11:54pm

Post 18 of 32

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Strictly speaking, a 32-bit OS can probably use part of that last gig - the other memory addresses will certainly eat heavily into it though, and for the difference in price between 3.25Gigs/RAM and 4, I'd let the 4 ride...
Posted: Sun, 30th Mar 2008, 2:23am

Post 19 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

Kid wrote:

EvilDonut wrote:

Kid wrote:

full 4GB is just sitting there doing nothing at all.
i suggest you read that link. lots of good info there.

my system screams at 4gb. I'm sure if I went back to 3gigs (out of the box) it would be so 'screaming'.
I would suggest YOU read that link, they are talking about 64bit vista.

Also read this link. Your system will go exactly the same speed with 3 rather than 4 because windows 32bit cannot address (CAN NOT USE WHATSOEVER) roughly the last GB of it.
From your own link sir:

"Significant chunks of address space below 4GB (the highest address accessible via 32-bit) get reserved for use by system hardware:

• BIOS – including ACPI and legacy video support

• PCI bus including bridges etc.

• PCI Express support will reserve at least 256MB, up to 768MB depending on graphics card installed memory"

And that, is what makes all the difference.

Just to finally put this to rest. I opened up the case today and threw back in the 512MB chips. 3GB now.

I did my work for 3 hours. System ran considerably slower.

Back to 4 gigs. Back to screaming Vista.

You CAN'T argue with results. The system is physically right in front of me and I saw it with my own two eyes.

So my choice becomes clear as day to me.

d
Posted: Sun, 30th Mar 2008, 8:36am

Post 20 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Not trying to be an ass, but they're right. 32-bit versions of Windows, or... any operating system, for that matter, only have 32-bits with which to define memory addresses. Much (or exactly) in the same manner that IPv4 is limited to about 4 billion unique IP addresses, Windows is limited to just over 4 billion addressable memory locations -- in total.

That's not just system RAM. That's ALL memory, meaning system memory AND video memory. To compensate for this, Microsoft added a cap to system memory at 3.12 GB, leaving the rest of the space for video memory to use.

If you felt a massive difference in general system use between 2 GB and 4 GB... you're... wrong. You didn't. It's not that profoundly different.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605
Posted: Sun, 30th Mar 2008, 8:58am

Post 21 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

A Pickle wrote:

Not trying to be an ass, but they're right. 32-bit versions of Windows, or... any operating system, for that matter, only have 32-bits with which to define memory addresses. Much (or exactly) in the same manner that IPv4 is limited to about 4 billion unique IP addresses, Windows is limited to just over 4 billion addressable memory locations -- in total.

That's not just system RAM. That's ALL memory, meaning system memory AND video memory. To compensate for this, Microsoft added a cap to system memory at 3.12 GB, leaving the rest of the space for video memory to use.

If you felt a massive difference in general system use between 2 GB and 4 GB... you're... wrong. You didn't. It's not that profoundly different.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605
I believe what my eyes showed me. You're telling me i'm delusional. So don't know what else to say sir.

d
Posted: Sun, 30th Mar 2008, 9:19am

Post 22 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Apparently then, so is Microsoft...

...and they made the operating system on which you "witnessed" your speed-ups. Again, I'm not trying to be an ass... but... 2 GB is more than enough in Vista. Therefore, so is 3 GB.
Posted: Sun, 30th Mar 2008, 11:21pm

Post 23 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

A Pickle wrote:

Apparently then, so is Microsoft...

...and they made the operating system on which you "witnessed" your speed-ups. Again, I'm not trying to be an ass... but... 2 GB is more than enough in Vista. Therefore, so is 3 GB.
Fine, okay, you win, want a cookie now?

I believe what my eyes tell me. You say i'm brainwashed. I really don't know what else to say here.

d
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 12:41am

Post 24 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

EvilDonut wrote:

A Pickle wrote:

Apparently then, so is Microsoft...

...and they made the operating system on which you "witnessed" your speed-ups. Again, I'm not trying to be an ass... but... 2 GB is more than enough in Vista. Therefore, so is 3 GB.
Fine, okay, you win, want a cookie now?
My T.I. used to ask me that all the time. wink

EvilDonut wrote:

I believe what my eyes tell me. You say i'm brainwashed. I really don't know what else to say here.

d
Dude, you get way too defensive way too fast. It could simply be that, since you had 4 GB of RAM in your machine, you took notice and appreciated when things were speedy more often. With 3 GB, the conscious knowledge of 1 fewer GB of RAM may have appeared to be slower. Psychology man, we're all human and susceptible to it.

Or, it could be that that extra 120 MB of RAM that Windows uses with a full-on 4 GB of RAM actually makes a huge lot of difference, but... I... really doubt it.
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 12:48am

Post 25 of 32

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Praising an HP bought at Best Buy.

'Nuff said.
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 2:29am

Post 26 of 32

EvilDonut

Force: 200 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2008 | Posts: 595

Member

A Pickle wrote:

It could simply be that, since you had 4 GB of RAM in your machine, you took notice and appreciated when things were speedy more often. With 3 GB, the conscious knowledge of 1 fewer GB of RAM may have appeared to be slower. Psychology man, we're all human and susceptible to it.
lol.

I think i've heard everything on the internet now. smile

me == still happy.

d
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 9:09am

Post 27 of 32

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

A Pickle wrote:


Or, it could be that that extra 120 MB of RAM that Windows uses with a full-on 4 GB of RAM actually makes a huge lot of difference, but... I... really doubt it.
Don't write off that 120MB! That's 120 times the TOTAL memory in my first lappy, and that's using himem.sys to get access to that valuable 384k wink

OK, so the addressing constraint without the cunning 36-bit addressing workaround (the equivalent of himem.sys) the system doesn't get to enjoy every last drop of the RAM, but in the same way most people use their huge gas-guzzler Hummers to go to the shop to get milk, the capacity's there if ED chooses to go 64-bit any time. And frankly he's thrilled with what he's got (I would be too!), let's be happy for him smile
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 9:46am

Post 28 of 32

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

lol.

I think i've heard everything on the internet now.
You mean you've heard elementary psychology for the first time? You've not used the internet much, have you? All APickle is saying, rather too verbosely, is "If you try to find faults, you'll find them". Every computer owner suffers from that.
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 9:52am

Post 29 of 32

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Moved to the general chat forum, as this doesn't have much to do with filmmaking.

evildonut wrote:

In fact, I was at best buy yesterday (where their computers have 3 gigs) and did some opening/closing, as much as I could do what what little installed on their demo computer. Clearly their system was nowhere near as fast as mine is right now.
I'm not sure that's entirely conclusive evidence, as it doesn't seem to be a particularly scientific method of analysing performance. smile
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 9:53am

Post 30 of 32

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Get this - I once ran 3 programs at once, and it was faster than a 286. QED.
Posted: Mon, 31st Mar 2008, 7:20pm

Post 31 of 32

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

EvilDonut - The extra GB can not possibly be making a difference in speed that you are talking about. To actually use more than 2GB you need to do a lot more than open and close a couple of windows. The only difference you will see is at what point it starts swapping to disk with multiple applications running simultaneously. So either you are seeing a difference simply because you want to or the 512MB modules the wrong speed or setup incorrectly causing a serious problem.

With any reasonable amount of memory the speed of your system is almost entirely down to the speed of your CPU. Having a lot of memory is good (for certain tasks) but it is not a one stop answer for a fast system.

My main point is not that its worth dropping down to 3GB rather than have the extra GB sitting there wasted. It is that it is worth using 64bit windows to actually make use of the full 4GB and unless you have a problem with it I wouldn't write it off so quickly.
Posted: Tue, 1st Apr 2008, 1:48pm

Post 32 of 32

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

pdrg wrote:

Don't write off that 120MB! That's 120 times the TOTAL memory in my first lappy, and that's using himem.sys to get access to that valuable 384k
I just knew someone was gonna say something relating my 120 MB figure to old computers. biggrin