Got The AN35n ultra - What's next?

[photon]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

My trustly ol AK35GT went into cardiac arrest after I upgraded the
BIOS (or at least tried to--!!) . So, I just puchased the AN35N Ultra
to replace it. The system will have little game use, but will be used
mostly for burning DVDs and some transferring of video to DVD. I am
thinking of still using the other original components (2 X 256 mb
PC2100 Kingston, a Geforce 3 Ti200 video card, AMD 1700+ XP Proc) .
Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it will
be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but what
would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
advice.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

"Photon" <gamma@ray.com> wrote in message
news:c7p1q0p5ejrp1fm6i7m7d6ehddrg0mn6so@4ax.com...
>
> My trustly ol AK35GT went into cardiac arrest after I upgraded the
> BIOS (or at least tried to--!!) . So, I just puchased the AN35N
> Ultra
> to replace it. The system will have little game use, but will be
> used
> mostly for burning DVDs and some transferring of video to DVD. I am
> thinking of still using the other original components (2 X 256 mb
> PC2100 Kingston, a Geforce 3 Ti200 video card, AMD 1700+ XP Proc) .
> Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
> the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it
> will
> be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but
> what
> would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
> advice.

Given the application i.e. video transfer I would say that more RAM or
at least faster RAM would be most beneficial but then the CPU could be
upgraded probably for less than the RAM ...hmmmmm tricky one this
......... I say CPU

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

I like Toys and Cake wrote:
> "Photon" <gamma@ray.com> wrote in message
> news:c7p1q0p5ejrp1fm6i7m7d6ehddrg0mn6so@4ax.com...
>
>>My trustly ol AK35GT went into cardiac arrest after I upgraded the
>>BIOS (or at least tried to--!!) . So, I just puchased the AN35N
>>Ultra
>>to replace it. The system will have little game use, but will be
>>used
>>mostly for burning DVDs and some transferring of video to DVD. I am
>>thinking of still using the other original components (2 X 256 mb
>>PC2100 Kingston, a Geforce 3 Ti200 video card, AMD 1700+ XP Proc) .
>>Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
>>the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it
>>will
>>be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but
>>what
>>would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
>>advice.
>
>
> Given the application i.e. video transfer I would say that more RAM or
> at least faster RAM would be most beneficial but then the CPU could be
> upgraded probably for less than the RAM ...hmmmmm tricky one this
> ........ I say CPU
>
>
If the CPU is a T'bred B core get some PC3200 and overclock the system.
If the CPU is a Palomino or T'bred A core upgrade the CPU and overclock.
My $0.02.

--
FRH

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

Photon wrote:
> Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
> the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it will
> be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but what
> would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
> advice.

I did a little informal testing while making dinner last night, changing the
bios settings on my board to simulate the different variables-- although
I do have the Barton core. I encoded to MPEG-2 a 2.5 GB DV file,
uh, quite a few times.

I don't know if you are able or willing to overclock your 1700+, but even
so, you might only get 2 GHz? If that is the case, you are better to get a
new processor. I would get the mobile, as you can adjust the multiplier.
They run cooler and overclock better, as well. Newegg has some for $77.

Even with the memory running at 133 MHz and the multiplier set to 17 for
2.26 GHz, it was only about 23% slower than the baseline 2.2 GHz with
PC3200. Running PC-3200 asynchronously resulted in almost no gain over
your current system. I have a single 512 MB stick of Mushkin Value RAM
PC-3200 that cost $75 at Newegg. It's running 2.5-3-3-11 and, for the
money is not that far from my expensive dual-channel Corsair at 2-2-2-11.

So basically, where you're at is 50% slower than what I'm running. For a
25% gain, get the processor. For the full 50%, get both for $150. Or you
just overclock what you have and be happy. I actually underclocked my
system for a while (to see how low I could get the vcore) to nearly XP1700+
speeds, and I left it there for over a week, so it wasn't that bad. With video
encoding, it takes a long time no matter what you have. It's done when it's
done.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

The board comes with 3 memory slots, so adding a third memory dimm is easy.

"Photon" <gamma@ray.com> wrote in message
news:c7p1q0p5ejrp1fm6i7m7d6ehddrg0mn6so@4ax.com...
>
> My trustly ol AK35GT went into cardiac arrest after I upgraded the
> BIOS (or at least tried to--!!) . So, I just puchased the AN35N Ultra
> to replace it. The system will have little game use, but will be used
> mostly for burning DVDs and some transferring of video to DVD. I am
> thinking of still using the other original components (2 X 256 mb
> PC2100 Kingston, a Geforce 3 Ti200 video card, AMD 1700+ XP Proc) .
> Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
> the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it will
> be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but what
> would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
> advice.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.shuttle (More info?)

I agree with most of the posters. Your CPU and RAM are both holding you
back. $150 will make both bottlenecks disappear, and you'll have a very
decent machine. If you get faster ram, you're still held back by the slow
processor. If you get a fast processor, you're still held back by the slow
FSB of the ram. As for processors, a great deal is the Athlon XP-Mobile
2500+ (2400+ for a couple bucks less is great, too) It's amazingly
overclockable. Meant to run at 1.88Ghz. I've got mine running at a little
over 2.3Ghz, with a $10 Speeze cooler and 512mb of 3200 ram.




"Photon" <gamma@ray.com> wrote in message
news:c7p1q0p5ejrp1fm6i7m7d6ehddrg0mn6so@4ax.com...
>
> My trustly ol AK35GT went into cardiac arrest after I upgraded the
> BIOS (or at least tried to--!!) . So, I just puchased the AN35N Ultra
> to replace it. The system will have little game use, but will be used
> mostly for burning DVDs and some transferring of video to DVD. I am
> thinking of still using the other original components (2 X 256 mb
> PC2100 Kingston, a Geforce 3 Ti200 video card, AMD 1700+ XP Proc) .
> Being on a limited budget, which of those three areas would give me
> the best return on being upgraded (given the application that it will
> be used for). It's obvious that they should all be upgraded, but what
> would be effective and what would be over-kill? Thanks for any
> advice.