Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Should I blame it on the CPU?

Last response: in Windows 8
Share
April 16, 2014 9:54:44 AM

I just finished formatting an old - but not that old - eMachines ET133 my friend gave me: she says the computer was painfully slow, to the point where it was nearly impossibile to use it. She was right!

The thing has 4 gigs of RAM, an integrated Nvidia GPU (GeForce 6150SE), a fairly decent 320GB 7300RMP WD hard drive and a CPU which I believe is the reason of the insane slowness: an AMD Athlon 2650e, single core processor clocked at 1.60 Ghz.
It is crap, like, real crap: Windows 8 - the OS I choose to replace Windows 7 - struggles even while launching the Control Panel, despite the fact that I spent hours tuning the system by disabling unused services and features. Still, it takes 5 seconds for Internet Explorer to start.
It seems like the CPU usage is always at 100%, no matter what I'm doing.

Do you guys think that this is driver related issue? Windows 8 is not officially supported on this computer according to the eMachines website, but the OS managed to find every driver for the hardware with no problem whatsoever...

Is it because I used a 32 bit version of Windows 8? I know that it has 4 gigs of RAM, but the CPU was so weak that I thought that being able to use 3.75GB out of 4 was a reasonable loss considering that a 64 bit installation would be even heavier on the processor...

Is there anything else I can try? Windows XP is not supported anymore, Linux is way too difficult for my friend and Windows 7 should not be faster then 8, at least in theory...

More about : blame cpu

a b à CPUs
a b * Windows 8
April 16, 2014 9:59:42 AM

Well it could be the CPU but it could also be that once you get everything running you are out of memory. Take a look at the task manager and see how much your RAM is being used also.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:01:01 AM

melampo_ said:
I just finished formatting an old - but not that old - eMachines ET133 my friend gave me: she says the computer was painfully slow, to the point where it was nearly impossibile to use it. God damn she was right!

The thing has 4 gigs of RAM, an integrated Nvidia GPU (GeForce 6150SE), a fairly decent 320GB 7300RMP WD hard drive and a CPU which I believe is the reason of the insane slowness: an AMD Athlon 2650e, single core processor clocked at 1.60 Ghz.
It is crap, like, real crap: Windows 8 - the OS I choose to replace Windows 7 - struggles even while launching the Control Panel, despite the fact that I spent hours tuning the system by disabling unused services and features. Still, it takes 5 seconds for Internet Explorer to start.
It seems like the CPU usage is always at 100%, no matter what I'm doing.

Do you guys think that this is driver related issue? Windows 8 is not officially supported on this computer according to the eMachines website, but the OS managed to find every driver for the hardware with no problem whatsoever...

Is it because I used a 32 bit version of Windows 8? I know that it has 4 gigs of RAM, but the CPU was so weak that I thought that being able to use 3.75GB out of 4 was a reasonable loss considering that a 64 bit installation would be even heavier on the processor...

Is there anything else I can try? Windows XP is not supported anymore, Linux is way too difficoult for my friend and Windows 7 should not be faster then 8, at least in theory...


No, it is the CPU. That is below the win 8 specs on speed. That CPU probably does not even support x64 bit processes.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:02:29 AM

well, 32-bit windows 8 can use 3.75-4.0 gb of ram, but thats not an issue. according to the cpu's benchmark, it is super slow. i would find a better cpu for your mobo, or get a new mobo and cpu, but that may cause an issue with your windows 8 license. is the windows 8 retail or OEM?
m
0
l
April 16, 2014 10:17:30 AM

@neieus
I believe the RAM usage is not the problem: according to the task manage, I'm now using 500MB out of 3.7gigs and I never saw it using more than 700MB even while browsing and listening to music at the same time.

@Hello man
Windows says that it is a x64 based processor on which a 32 bit system is installed. Not sure why it performes worse than the Intel Atom I have on my netbook...

@Danbuscus25
This Windows 8 installation is not activated yet, I'm just trying to figure out if it is worth the money, but for now is seems like the best I can do is go back to Windows 7, maybe use some special lite version of Windows like Windows Thin PC...


m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:21:43 AM

melampo_ said:
@neieus
I believe the RAM usage is not the problem: according to the task manage, I'm now using 500MB out of 3.7gigs and I never saw it using more than 700MB even while browsing and listening to music at the same time.

@Hello man
Windows says that it is a x64 based processor on which a 32 bit system is installed. Not sure why it performes worse than the Intel Atom I have on my netbook...

@Danbuscus25
This Windows 8 installation is not activated yet, I'm just trying to figure out if it is worth the money, but for now is seems like the best I can do is go back to Windows 7, maybe use some special lite version of Windows like Windows Thin PC...




Hmmmm. What is the speed of the RAM? Can you tell?
m
0
l
April 16, 2014 10:28:15 AM

Hello man said:
melampo_ said:
@neieus
I believe the RAM usage is not the problem: according to the task manage, I'm now using 500MB out of 3.7gigs and I never saw it using more than 700MB even while browsing and listening to music at the same time.

@Hello man
Windows says that it is a x64 based processor on which a 32 bit system is installed. Not sure why it performes worse than the Intel Atom I have on my netbook...

@Danbuscus25
This Windows 8 installation is not activated yet, I'm just trying to figure out if it is worth the money, but for now is seems like the best I can do is go back to Windows 7, maybe use some special lite version of Windows like Windows Thin PC...




Hmmmm. What is the speed of the RAM? Can you tell?


4GB Single-channel DDR2 RAM @321MHz (5-5-5-15), according to Speccy.

m
0
l

Best solution

a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:30:23 AM

the speed of the ram doesnt matter, the problem is you are using decent parts, but are being bottlenecked by the cpu. there is no way around it other than to upgrade the cpu/mobo, and the ram. if you dont want to game, then pick up a cheap A-6 Apu and a cheap mobo, should only be about $80 for both of them. the mobo wont need integrated graphics or a seperate graphics card cuz an A-6 has a gpu built it.
Share
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:32:20 AM

Danbuscus25 said:
the speed of the ram doesnt matter, the problem is you are using decent parts, but are being bottlenecked by the cpu. there is no way around it other than to upgrade the cpu/mobo, and the ram. if you dont want to game, then pick up a cheap A-6 Apu and a cheap mobo, should only be about $80 for both of them. the mobo wont need integrated graphics or a seperate graphics card cuz an A-6 has a gpu built it.


Agreed.
m
0
l
April 16, 2014 10:42:19 AM

I'd love to, but the computer is not mine and the owner does not want to spend a single dime on this machine. Too bad, I guess I can't do anything besides defragging the hard drive and give it back to my friend...
m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:42:22 AM

http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Danbuscus250/saved/4o6p
CPU AMD Athlon II X2 260 3.2GHz Dual-Core $59.99
Motherboard Biostar A960D+ Micro ATX AM3+ $35.99
Memory Patriot Viper 3 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 $29.99
Total: $125.97

here is a cheap mobo/cpu/ram, i have the same mobo, a very similar cpu (athlon II x2 270) and 4gb ram, windows 7 64-bit, and it run flawlessly.
m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 10:43:18 AM

oh well, and btw who built this comp, or if its pre-built what company?
m
0
l
April 16, 2014 10:47:26 AM

Danbuscus25 said:
oh well, and btw who built this comp, or if its pre-built what company?


eMachines, which is a brand of low end PCs owned by Acer. So yes, it is a - very badly - pre built desktop computer...

m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 11:02:34 AM

did they install windows 7 on it?? o.o
m
0
l
April 16, 2014 11:18:21 AM

Yep, it came with Windows 7 Home Premium. Nearly unbelievable, considering how bad the experience must have been on such a low end computer...
m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 11:45:53 AM

lol, that build would have done way better with windows xp.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2014 1:15:52 PM

Danbuscus25 said:
lol, that build would have done way better with windows xp.


Using XP now is like staying in the crack hotel in a sketch neighborhood. I would run forest run from that OS.
m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
April 16, 2014 1:23:28 PM

lol now that xp doesnt have support, i agree it would be risky. it would be ok with linux, maybe vista, but vista has its on library on problems lol.
m
0
l
!