Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Athlon Performance Drop?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 5, 2001 3:02:09 PM

My Athlon has suffered a performance drop since i purchased it little over a month ago, the problem is located mainly around the memory/cpu system:

in SiSoft Sandra CPU: 2503MIPS from 3653MIPS
1208MFlops - 1778MFlops
Multi Media: 5019it/s from 7250it/s
6062it/s from 8874it/s
Memory: 244MB/s from 377MB/s
288MB/s from 415MB/s

What could be causing this problem?!

System Specs:
Athlon 1300
Gygabyte GA-7ZXR
256MB TwinMos RAM (PC133)
Matrox Marvel G450 etv
WD 8.4GB HDD ...

HDD is defraged,
No apps open,
CPU Cooling is effective, but runs hot on hot days to about 59degrees C when stressed, (Cooler Master EP5 6i11)
isn't underclocked in any way, fsb is 2x 104MHz, mem @ 138MHz,

*sigh* what could it be? Help would be Welcome,

PM
September 5, 2001 3:07:51 PM

What was your most recently installed software?

Kelledin

"/join #hackerz. See the Web. DoS interesting people."
September 5, 2001 3:53:38 PM

last was DX8.1 (beta) has expired, am downloading latest
Related resources
September 6, 2001 9:19:41 AM

Sounds like a case of the windows....time to reinstall, and get a bigger harddrive too!.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
September 6, 2001 4:31:14 PM

If you are running any version of Windows 9x (95, 98, ME) then you probably just need to back up all your documents and email and do a complete reload. The longer a Windows 9x system goes without a purge, the worse it gets. My dad has had the same installation of Windows 95 for almost three years!!!! His performance is abismal. His hard drive is constantly doing something (god only knows what) and his game/internet performance is total crap. Just try doing a reload and see what happens.

Windows 2000 can also have this problem, but it is more rare and takes much longer to develop. I wish I knew what causes Windows to do this (other than a under-developed kernel), cause then I might be able to come up with better remedies than a full reload. But for now, that is the best I can do.

Also, I would stay away from anything Microsoft classifies as Beta since even their "Final Release" of most software is still technically Beta. Why do you think they have so many service packs.....
September 6, 2001 6:49:47 PM

look at the sig... applies here... windows starts off fast with an install slowing down within a week and coming to a crawl quite quickly... a few months... unlike linux which tends to go the other way, improving the longer you use it... little joke in russian about it but nearly impossible to translate and keep the joke good... oh well...

if in doubt blame microsoft...
September 6, 2001 8:13:47 PM

moo



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
September 6, 2001 8:41:02 PM

I found that to be true of windows. I recently had Win ME on my system up and running for about 6 months. Then it started Fu*king Up for no reason that I could see. So I backed up all my items I need to keep and formatted and reinstalled the OS. Now she running awesome!

So the lesson I've learned here is Win9x/ME should be reinstalled every 3 months or so!

I'm gonna install Win2k or Try Win XP and see if the same thing happends.

If So I will go back to just running linux as my primary OS and having some verison of windows on a second partition!

I've told alot of people about that and no ones believed me but I know from personal experience that all 9x versions of windows only stay stable for a couple months!

I hope MS solved this problem with Win2k!
September 6, 2001 8:48:14 PM

They seem to have improved on it in Win2k. I have been running the same Win2k installation for about 5 months now and I have only noticed slight slowdowns in my performance. When I get some new components in the next couple months I am going to do a re-install though just to give it that little boost. I think Win2k would let me go for about a year before I absolutely had to do a reinstall, but why let it get to that point.
September 6, 2001 10:30:52 PM

They improved basically everything in W2k :) 



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
September 6, 2001 10:46:08 PM

This is true. I can't think of one thing that Windows 9x/Me can do that Windows 2000 can't do equally well or better. And there are tons of things that Windows 2000 can do that no other Microsoft OS ever thought about doing.
September 7, 2001 2:29:33 PM

They can crash better. Also they seem to play old games better. Well 98 does anyways. But thats just my personal experience. I currently use w2k and will probably upgrade to xp whether I like it or not. I mean as a technician I have to keep up with the current software. I can't shun it just because i don't like it. That wouldn't be a very smart move.

What is the difference between <font color=red>pink</font color=red> and <font color=purple>purple</font color=purple>? The <b>GRIP</b>!
September 7, 2001 4:15:46 PM

damn right

if in doubt blame microsoft...
!