Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What you do when building a sys. with an intel proc.

Last response: in Systems
Share
December 24, 2008 3:12:59 AM

can you tell me exactly what you do when youre building a system that has an intel processor. like, exactly what you do when youre ready to install the os. like, install os 1st, 2nd mobo drivers, 3rd gfx drivers, etc.

because my family has three computers, all with intel processors, and they are running real slow. so i think its something were not doing (like maybe a jumper on the motherboard limiting performance?)
a b B Homebuilt system
December 24, 2008 3:35:56 AM

If the CPU HSF isn't installed correctly, your CPU will run pretty hot and will throttle back the CPU speed. This is a possibility, but I'd check that you don't have any viruses and any spam on your systems. You may need to do a fresh install, which I recommend at least every 6-12 months. This will clean out all of the crap and also force you/them to back up their important files/pictures too.
What are the system specifications?? What OS are they currently using on each of these systems too? It's hard to help you too much further without more information.
December 24, 2008 3:53:51 AM

you can help me by answering my question
Related resources
December 24, 2008 4:19:14 AM

proto_prime said:
can you tell me exactly what you do when youre building a system that has an intel processor. like, exactly what you do when youre ready to install the os. like, install os 1st, 2nd mobo drivers, 3rd gfx drivers, etc.

because my family has three computers, all with intel processors, and they are running real slow. so i think its something were not doing (like maybe a jumper on the motherboard limiting performance?)


You've pretty well got the sequence right. Good luck.
a b B Homebuilt system
December 24, 2008 4:32:02 AM

proto_prime said:
you can help me by answering my question

There are numerous "how to's" with a quick google search. You already have the basic process already, which is: install the OS, than the mobo drivers (includes things like: LAN, Chipset, HD specific drivers, etc.), and finally any GPU drivers if you have a dedicated GPU. Than after all of that is done than make sure you go online and update your OS.
Here is one of the proceedures on how to do a fresh install of windows xp.
December 24, 2008 4:35:17 AM

proto_prime said:
you can help me by answering my question
Usually mobo drivers, graphics drivers and updates in that order. Your problem is not likely caused by your order of driver installation, which was what he was saying.

Generally when someone is looking for advice they include the specs of their machine. I understand that you have three that are running slow, so pick one and give the specs of one and maybe we will be able to give specific advice on how you dorked it. Then you can take what you have learned and apply it to the others.

You say running slow, have you run any benches to determine how slow or where the problem might be occurring? Do you think we have a crystal ball and can divine the answer for you?

Try giving us at least the minimum to work with and we can help you determine which programs to run to help find the problem, or you can just piss and moan about getting a question answered with no information to even have a shot at giving any relevant advice.

[/end rant]

Provide your specs and any diagnostic programs you have run and their results, or just your specs and we will tell you what to run.
December 24, 2008 4:37:21 AM

proto_prime said:
you can help me by answering my question


Geesh, way to go.

'System slowdown' can be attributed to a TON of things including: Ram errors, Hard disk failure, CPU throttling, PSU malfuntion, Motherboard defects or damage (Most usually blown capacitors), Security issues, high backround task count, ect...

It's not usually drivers. There are no jumpers that are likely to make your system slower (Defeats the purpose of innovation). It would help if you told us what processors they are, what OS they have, how long it's been since os install or reinstall, what manufacturer if any, and hardware temps which you can easily read with programs like HWMonitor or Speedfan.

(There are some instances that HP printer drivers installed via windows update can bring a system to its knees.)

And I may have caught your mood totally wrong, and correct me if I did. But snapping at someone who could be your only ticket to free help isnt the way to get things done in life. You need to work on your people skills a little.
December 24, 2008 5:17:57 AM

like i said, all systems are running slow.. such as slow bootup time and long time opening up documents and programs. the internet connection to each computer is in no way slow, so thats not the problem.

ill list all three comp. specs
note: no system has any overclocked settings

system 1
CPU: e6850
MOBO: p5k
RAM: 2gb a-data 800mhz
GFX: 8600gt
HDD: 7200.10 8mb 160gb
OS: Windows XP home sp3
PSU: fsp 500w

system 2
CPU: e8400 C0
MOBO: 780i SLI
RAM: a-data 2gb 800mhz
GFX: 8800gtx
OS: Windows XP home sp3
HDD: 7200.11 500gb 32mb
PSU: 700w FSP

system 3
CPU: e8400 E0
MOBO: Asus P5Q Pro
RAM: G.Skill 2gb 1066mhz
GFX: 8600gt
OS: Windows XP home sp3
HDD: 7200.10 8mb 160gb
PSU: 750w PC power & cooling


all BIOS are up to date
all motherboard and graphics drivers are up to date
there are ZERO viruses or worms present on any system
temps and voltages are within acceptable range

if you have any ideas, speak with regard to system #2, that is the system i have in my room. systems 1 and 3 are my parents systems but i built them myself as well
December 24, 2008 5:28:51 AM

What is the boot time from kernel launch to desktop in seconds?

What are your idle and Prime95 small FFT temps measured with Core Temp?

Run HDTune and post average read speed and CPU usage.
December 24, 2008 6:27:43 AM

from the second i first see text on the monitor to the first time i see the desktop takes 27 seconds--10 seconds on the windows load bar screen.

while using prime95, both cores were at 53 degrees.

average read speed is 91.5mb/s
cpu usage is at 0% (+/- 2%)
random access time is 15ms

this is from system 2 as mentioned
December 24, 2008 6:30:57 AM

That does not appear to be slow to me. What are you comparing this against? I'm assuming that you have some programs loading at start up.

Run SiSoftware Sandra Lite and bench the CPU and RAM and compare them against the comparison processors/configurations that closely match each system.
December 24, 2008 7:14:34 AM

im comparing the performance to a very old computer thats next to mine--an AMD build with a 3500+ processor that runs at 2.2ghz and has only 512kb of cache. at times this old computer is just as fast doing simple things such as opening up word documents

sandra lite results =
CPU test-
power management efficiency (ALU power performance - MIPS) ranked worst (with a score of 8650) with an e6700 ranking 30% better

Cache and memory test-
cache/memory bandwidth: my system ranked 5gb/s below a system with an e6700 and an intel 975X.
my system got 19gb/s while that other OLD system got 24gb/s cache/memory bandwidth!!!!
unacceptable!

all the other tests produced acceptable results, though
December 24, 2008 7:54:34 AM

Clearly some huge miscommunication or a hoax lol come on
December 24, 2008 9:20:22 AM

If you are worried about performance, why are you even quoting power management efficiency numbers.

That cache/memory test is a combined test of the processor cache and the memory speed. So it's harder to determine what the cause of the lower numbers is. I can safely say it isn't the CPU cache. Did you stop all unnecessary programs from booting in start up and disable any antivirus services running in services.msc? Just for grins do that (or not) and post a screen shot of the detailed results tab, I'd like to see it.

As far as your AMD at times doing simple tasks like opening a document faster I suspect that is related to the HD needing to spin up, needing a defrag or the need to use the page file. Try opening a document, then closing it and reopening it. I suspect it will open very quickly.

I can say without fear of reproach that it isn't the order you loaded your drivers. I personally don't like the 7XXi motherboards, that may be part of your bandwidth "problem". Many others will disagree, I'm sure.

Another thing you could do is get a good HS, if you don't have one already, and OC that chip along with the FSB. That will make it a little more snappy, although I seriously doubt it will make a document open faster, because that isn't even taxing the CPU now.

Run a little test. Open the task manager and set always on top in the options, if it isn't already. Click on the performance tab and open a document. See how much the CPU load is.
December 24, 2008 5:09:22 PM

Lol, what a waste. I cant stand people sometimes.
a b B Homebuilt system
December 24, 2008 5:58:25 PM

curnel_D said:
Lol, what a waste. I cant stand people sometimes.

sorta reminds me of posts about a Vista machine on 1 gb's of DDR2 and the comparison with an XP machine with 2 gb's of DDR2! Especially when Vista first came out too! I know if you have Office 2007 it takes quite a bit more to load it under Vista than a comparatively match XP machine.
December 24, 2008 7:45:33 PM

Zorg said:
If you are worried about performance, why are you even quoting power management efficiency numbers.

it was under the cpu tests column, so i figured id do it. you told me to do it.

Zorg said:
That cache/memory test is a combined test of the processor cache and the memory speed. So it's harder to determine what the cause of the lower numbers is. I can safely say it isn't the CPU cache. Did you stop all unnecessary programs from booting in start up and disable any antivirus services running in services.msc? Just for grins do that (or not) and post a screen shot of the detailed results tab, I'd like to see it.


I disabled all sartup programs in MSCONFIG and i stopped my antivirus software in services.msc but i could not find a 'Results' tab there.

Zorg said:
As far as your AMD at times doing simple tasks like opening a document faster I suspect that is related to the HD needing to spin up, needing a defrag or the need to use the page file. Try opening a document, then closing it and reopening it. I suspect it will open very quickly.

I can say without fear of reproach that it isn't the order you loaded your drivers. I personally don't like the 7XXi motherboards, that may be part of your bandwidth "problem". Many others will disagree, I'm sure.


Dont worry, ive accounted for that. When i do that sort of test for speed, I open different documents everytime.

Zorg said:
Another thing you could do is get a good HS, if you don't have one already, and OC that chip along with the FSB. That will make it a little more snappy, although I seriously doubt it will make a document open faster, because that isn't even taxing the CPU now.


not to be a know-it-all, but system #3 has an e8400 E0. I have an e8400 C0 (the system you and I are working on now) and the E0 has the stock cooler on it and reports 25C idle temp. my C0 has an Arctic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 on it (after market cooler) and it reports 43C idle. My cooler got very high reviews. C0 steppings have been known to have faulty temperature sensors.

Zorg said:
Run a little test. Open the task manager and set always on top in the options, if it isn't already. Click on the performance tab and open a document. See how much the CPU load is.

CPU usage raises to 29% when opening a 650kb MS word 2007 file (for the first time). WINWORD.exe takes 14% CPU load under the Processes tab.

Also, I booted into Safe mode network and it was still slow.
December 25, 2008 12:46:04 AM

proto_prime said:
it was under the cpu tests column, so i figured id do it. you told me to do it.
Ok miscommunication, no big deal. Did you run the memory benchmarks, if not run them as well.
proto_prime said:
I disabled all sartup programs in MSCONFIG and i stopped my antivirus software in services.msc but i could not find a 'Results' tab there.
Screen shot of the Detailed Results tab in Sandra for the cache and memory bench. If you look at the graph it will let you see how your setup compares at the different test block sizes. It's not critical I was just curious. Did you run the bench after disabling the programs? What did you get, the same or better numbers?
proto_prime said:
Dont worry, ive accounted for that. When i do that sort of test for speed, I open different documents everytime.
What I was saying is that if the same file opens very fast the second time then your increase in time is related to getting it off the HD, or clearing space in RAM.
proto_prime said:
not to be a know-it-all, but system #3 has an e8400 E0. I have an e8400 C0 (the system you and I are working on now) and the E0 has the stock cooler on it and reports 25C idle temp. my C0 has an Arctic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 on it (after market cooler) and it reports 43C idle. My cooler got very high reviews. C0 steppings have been known to have faulty temperature sensors.
Yeah, the DTSs on those chips are problematic, especially the closer you get to idle.
proto_prime said:
CPU usage raises to 29% when opening a 650kb MS word 2007 file (for the first time). WINWORD.exe takes 14% CPU load under the Processes tab.
Well your not maxing out the CPU opening documents, I have nothing to compare it to because I have a Q6600 @ 3.2/400. The performance tab isn't showing much more than that for total CPU usage, is it? There is a possibility that something is stealing cycles, but that should have shown up in the Sandra CPU bench. Download and run SuperPrimeā„¢ 0.9.9. Run the 25M and 100M benches. Start a new thread and see if you can get some people to run the bench with an E8400 at stock for comparison.
proto_prime said:
Also, I booted into Safe mode network and it was still slow.
Ignore safe mode.
!