I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
using.
Its specs are the following:
CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the exact
model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share from the
system.
Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
OS: Win XP
The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
like forever when I try loading a simple program.
Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
upgrade:
1) 512 mb of memory
2) 7200 rpm hard drive
I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference in
computer speed?
> I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
> using.
> Its specs are the following:
> CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
> Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
> was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
> Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the exact
> model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share from the
> system.
> Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
> OS: Win XP
> The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
> can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
> like forever when I try loading a simple program.
> Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
> upgrade:
> 1) 512 mb of memory
> 2) 7200 rpm hard drive
> I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
> superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference in
> computer speed?
Depends. It sounds as if the laptop is swapping, though. Then
more memory would be the better option. MS software is known to
be memory hungry (read: carelessly designed).
If you still go with 2), you have to make sure cooling is adequete.
Hot disks die eraly and above 60C or so also can fail catastrophically.
The only sure way to do that is to determine the power consumption
of the old drive and to make sure the new drive does not take more,
unless it stays cool under heavy load. However that involves a
difficult judgement call.
The important figures are tha maximum and average power consumption
numbers. If a disk manufacturer does not give either number, expect
it to be bad. I looked into this some time ago, and found that no
7200rpm drive had low enough power consumption to safely replace
my 5400rpm 40GB IBM Travelstar. The same may still be true or not.
dacconverter wrote:
>
> I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
> using.
>
> Its specs are the following:
> CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
> Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
> was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
> Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the exact
> model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share from the
> system.
> Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
> OS: Win XP
>
> The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
> can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
> like forever when I try loading a simple program.
>
> Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
> upgrade:
>
> 1) 512 mb of memory
> 2) 7200 rpm hard drive
>
> I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
> superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference in
> computer speed?
>
More RAM. 256MB is marginal for XP, and your integrated graphics steals
some of that. If you add a 2nd 256MB stick of RAM to your laptop, make
sure it is compatible with the one you have and with the laptop; if you
don't know how to tell, it is safer to just replace the 256MB stick with
a single 512MB stick. The websites of major RAM vendors give very good
online assistance in RAM selection for standard PC/laptops; log on to www.crucial.com from your laptop, and they will tell you what will work
on your PC.
--
Cheers, Bob
On Sep 16, 3:05 am, Arno Wagner <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> Hot disks die eraly and above 60C or so also can fail catastrophically.
> The only sure way to do that is to determine the power consumption
> of the old drive and to make sure the new drive does not take more,
> unless it stays cool under heavy load. However that involves a
> difficult judgement call.
But even with the included 4200 rpm drive, there's usually a
"burning / electronics" odor from using the laptop for less than 20
min. And it gets pretty hot ( not warm ) on the part of chassis above
the hard drive.
Isn't this the worst it can get in terms of disk heat?
On Sep 16, 8:00 am, Bob Willard <BobwB...@TrashThis.comcast.net>
wrote:
> dacconverter wrote:
>
> > I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
> > using.
>
> > Its specs are the following:
> > CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
> > Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
> > was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
> > Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the exact
> > model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share from the
> > system.
> > Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
> > OS: Win XP
>
> > The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
> > can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
> > like forever when I try loading a simple program.
>
> > Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
> > upgrade:
>
> > 1) 512 mb of memory
> > 2) 7200 rpm hard drive
>
> > I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
> > superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference in
> > computer speed?
>
> More RAM. 256MB is marginal for XP, and your integrated graphics steals
> some of that. If you add a 2nd 256MB stick of RAM to your laptop, make
> sure it is compatible with the one you have and with the laptop; if you
> don't know how to tell, it is safer to just replace the 256MB stick with
> a single 512MB stick.
The laptop has two memory slots, each of which has a 128 mb stick. If
I do plan for more memory, I would insert 512 mb on one slot and keep
a 128 on the other. Will compatibility issues possibly arise from
this?
And RAM aside, you aren't concerned that its hard disk has 4200 rpm in
speed? 4200 is below par than the 5400 rpm deemed to be ancient by
today's standards.
dacconverter <seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote
> Arno Wagner <m...@privacy.net> wrote
>> Hot disks die eraly and above 60C or so also can fail catastrophically.
>> The only sure way to do that is to determine the power consumption
>> of the old drive and to make sure the new drive does not take more,
>> unless it stays cool under heavy load. However that involves a
>> difficult judgement call.
> But even with the included 4200 rpm drive, there's usually a
> "burning / electronics" odor from using the laptop for less than 20 min.
That vintage of Dell laptops run the hard drives much too
hot and the drives dont last that long for that reason.
> And it gets pretty hot ( not warm ) on the part of chassis above the hard drive.
> Isn't this the worst it can get in terms of disk heat?
No, it will get even worse if you replace the hard drive with a 7200 rpm drive.
dacconverter <seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 8:00 am, Bob Willard <BobwB...@TrashThis.comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> dacconverter wrote:
>>
>>> I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
>>> using.
>>
>>> Its specs are the following:
>>> CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
>>> Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
>>> was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
>>> Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the
>>> exact model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share
>>> from the system.
>>> Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
>>> OS: Win XP
>>
>>> The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
>>> can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
>>> like forever when I try loading a simple program.
>>
>>> Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
>>> upgrade:
>>
>>> 1) 512 mb of memory
>>> 2) 7200 rpm hard drive
>>
>>> I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
>>> superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference
>>> in computer speed?
>>
>> More RAM. 256MB is marginal for XP, and your integrated graphics
>> steals some of that. If you add a 2nd 256MB stick of RAM to your
>> laptop, make sure it is compatible with the one you have and with
>> the laptop; if you don't know how to tell, it is safer to just
>> replace the 256MB stick with a single 512MB stick.
>
> The laptop has two memory slots, each of which has a 128 mb stick. If
> I do plan for more memory, I would insert 512 mb on one slot and keep
> a 128 on the other. Will compatibility issues possibly arise from
> this?
>
> And RAM aside, you aren't concerned that its hard disk has 4200 rpm in
> speed? 4200 is below par than the 5400 rpm deemed to be ancient by
> today's standards.
Previously dacconverter <seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 3:05 am, Arno Wagner <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Hot disks die eraly and above 60C or so also can fail catastrophically.
>> The only sure way to do that is to determine the power consumption
>> of the old drive and to make sure the new drive does not take more,
>> unless it stays cool under heavy load. However that involves a
>> difficult judgement call.
> But even with the included 4200 rpm drive, there's usually a
> "burning / electronics" odor from using the laptop for less than 20
> min. And it gets pretty hot ( not warm ) on the part of chassis above
> the hard drive.
Not good at all.
> Isn't this the worst it can get in terms of disk heat?
The worst is that the disk stops working because it is too hot.
From my experience that happens in the range 60C-70C. The second
worst is that it dies very young, after some weeks or months.
The thing is that (as a relatively good approximation), temperature
over ambient is linearly dependent on power consumption.
Example:
If you get 55C (at 25C amb) with a disk consuming 1.5W, that is
20C/W. With a disk consuming 1.9W, you then get 63C disk temperature
and likely an early grave for the disk.
Previously dacconverter <seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 8:00 am, Bob Willard <BobwB...@TrashThis.comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> dacconverter wrote:
>>
>> > I have an old laptop, a Dell Inspiron 500m, that I want to continue
>> > using.
>>
>> > Its specs are the following:
>> > CPU: Pentium M 1.4 GHz
>> > Memory: 256 mb ( I don't remember the type of memory but the laptop
>> > was released around early 2003, which should give you a rough idea )
>> > Graphics: Integrated Intel graphics. Again, I don't remember the exact
>> > model, but it doesn't have its own memory and has to share from the
>> > system.
>> > Hard drive: 4200 rpm !!!
>> > OS: Win XP
>>
>> > The 500m is clearly slow, as it keeps on reading its drive before I
>> > can even open the contents of a folder in windows explorer. It feels
>> > like forever when I try loading a simple program.
>>
>> > Having very little money, I have two options for a performance
>> > upgrade:
>>
>> > 1) 512 mb of memory
>> > 2) 7200 rpm hard drive
>>
>> > I have money for only one of two options. Which option is most
>> > superior? And will the upgrade feel like a night and day difference in
>> > computer speed?
>>
>> More RAM. 256MB is marginal for XP, and your integrated graphics steals
>> some of that. If you add a 2nd 256MB stick of RAM to your laptop, make
>> sure it is compatible with the one you have and with the laptop; if you
>> don't know how to tell, it is safer to just replace the 256MB stick with
>> a single 512MB stick.
> The laptop has two memory slots, each of which has a 128 mb stick. If
> I do plan for more memory, I would insert 512 mb on one slot and keep
> a 128 on the other. Will compatibility issues possibly arise from
> this?
> And RAM aside, you aren't concerned that its hard disk has 4200 rpm in
> speed? 4200 is below par than the 5400 rpm deemed to be ancient by
> today's standards.
Yes. But it does not impact seek time, and latency for 4200rpm
is 14ms, while for 5400rmp it is 11ms. That is just 20% faster
and barely noticeable.
dacconverter wrote:
> On Sep 16, 8:00 am, Bob Willard <BobwB...@TrashThis.comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> The laptop has two memory slots, each of which has a 128 mb stick. If
> I do plan for more memory, I would insert 512 mb on one slot and keep
> a 128 on the other. Will compatibility issues possibly arise from
> this?
>
Could be -- not because of different sizes, since the BIOS and the OS can
cope with mixed sizes, but because of different speeds. To be safe, I'd
discard both 128MB RAMs and insert a pair of 512MB RAMs purchased from
the same vendor at the same time with the same part number on each.
If your laptop uses dual-channel memory mode (I don't think it does, but
I didn't look up the specs), then the sizes must match or your performance
will drop dramatically.
> And RAM aside, you aren't concerned that its hard disk has 4200 rpm in
> speed? 4200 is below par than the 5400 rpm deemed to be ancient by
> today's standards.
>
Due to heat issues, as noted by others, I would not change the HD unless
it is dead. Cooling in laptops is pretty marginal, so I would not do
anything to make it worse. If you *know* that your old HD is affecting
performance a lot, then I suggest a new laptop instead of piecemeal
upgrades.
Overall, adding enough RAM to avoid swapping will decrease the affect
of a slow HD. Running XP on a 256MB PC, particularly with integrated
graphics, is a recipe for lousy performance; been there, done that,
got the RAM to fix it.
--
Cheers, Bob
faster hard drive vs. more memory 
Linear Mode
