Re-casing a Pavilion 512n?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Hi,

My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?

Thanks,
Jim

 

[br549]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> Hi,
>
> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
>
> Thanks,
> Jim

Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
there will
be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power supply.
I've done this
conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
switches wiring.

Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move the
motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly. You
also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard later.

Good Luck.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an ATX case
with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply needs to
have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to the
obvious ATX power connector.

ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle only a
micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX boards and
offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a sturdy old
steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers

On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:

>
>"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
>news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
>> Hi,
>>
>> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
>> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
>> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
>> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
>> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
>> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
>> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
>> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jim
>
>Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
>there will
>be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power supply.
>I've done this
>conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
>switches wiring.
>
>Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
>connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move the
>motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly. You
>also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard later.
>
>Good Luck.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Ben Myers wrote:
>
> Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an ATX case
> with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
> depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply needs to
> have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to the
> obvious ATX power connector.
>
> ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle only a
> micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX boards and
> offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a sturdy old
> steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
> retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
>
> On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
> >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
> >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
> >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
> >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
> >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
> >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jim
> >
> >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
> >there will
> >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power supply.
> >I've done this
> >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
> >switches wiring.
> >
> >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
> >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move the
> >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly. You
> >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard later.
> >
> >Good Luck.


BR and Ben,

Thanks for the info!

BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to be
running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
old PIII-450 that seems much faster .

Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2 of
what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?

Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

ohaya wrote:
>
> Ben Myers wrote:
> >
> > Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an ATX case
> > with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
> > depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply needs to
> > have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to the
> > obvious ATX power connector.
> >
> > ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle only a
> > micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX boards and
> > offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a sturdy old
> > steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
> > retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
> >
> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
> > >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
> > >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
> > >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
> > >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> > >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
> > >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
> > >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
> > >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Jim
> > >
> > >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
> > >there will
> > >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power supply.
> > >I've done this
> > >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
> > >switches wiring.
> > >
> > >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
> > >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move the
> > >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly. You
> > >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard later.
> > >
> > >Good Luck.
>
> BR and Ben,
>
> Thanks for the info!
>
> BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to be
> running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
> old PIII-450 that seems much faster .
>
> Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2 of
> what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?
>
> Jim


Hi,

Sorry, I forgot to mention that the case I'm looking at is something
like:

http://www.dealsonic.com/appcblmeatxm.html

Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Several factors influence the perceived performance of a computer. I would
assume you have done the usual cleanup of temp files and other garbage followed
by a complete defrag.

1. The operating system. Generally, the newer the Microsoft release, the more
bloated and slow it is. So in terms of speed rankings: Windows 98 > Windows ME
> Windows 2000 > Windows XP. Linux, any release, is an absolute speed demon,
running lightning fast on an older Celeron 400 machine I've set up here.

2. The number and type of programs loaded at system startup. These are launched
from the startup menu AND via directives deep in the bowels of the registry.

3. The total amount of system memory. If the memory in the HP Pavilion is less
than 256MB, this is the answer. The Intel 810E graphics drivers use up to 11MB
of system memory for video buffers.

4. The rotational speed and average seek times of the hard drive, and the
fastest interface speed they permit: ATA100/66/33, or some advanced PIO.

5. Type of Ethernet chip and supporting drivers. For my money, Intel and 3COM
NICs continue to be the best, even tho 3COM does very little with NICs anymore,
having moved on to mostly "higher level" more expensive networking gear.

6. Drivers for the hard drive controller. See below.

7. Some newer 32-bit applications are much slower than their older 16-bit
counterparts, due to added bloatware features and larger, slower execution code.
Fill in the name of your favorite application here, starting with Microsoft
Office and Internet Explorer.

The HP Pavilion Socket 370 motherboards use the Intel 810E chipset for disk I/O
and graphics. Not scaldingly fast graphics, but acceptable. Decent disk I/O
tho. And Intel's latest chipset drivers and application accelerator software at
www.intel.com may make a difference... Ben Myers

On Wed, 05 May 2004 09:24:24 -0400, ohaya <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote:

>
>
>Ben Myers wrote:
>>
>> Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an ATX case
>> with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
>> depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply needs to
>> have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to the
>> obvious ATX power connector.
>>
>> ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle only a
>> micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX boards and
>> offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a sturdy old
>> steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
>> retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
>>
>> On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
>> >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
>> >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
>> >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
>> >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
>> >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
>> >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
>> >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
>> >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Jim
>> >
>> >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
>> >there will
>> >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power supply.
>> >I've done this
>> >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
>> >switches wiring.
>> >
>> >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
>> >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move the
>> >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly. You
>> >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard later.
>> >
>> >Good Luck.
>
>
>BR and Ben,
>
>Thanks for the info!
>
>BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to be
>running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
>old PIII-450 that seems much faster .
>
>Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2 of
>what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?
>
>Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
news:4098EB08.4049A33@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
>
>
> Ben Myers wrote:
> >
> > Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an
ATX case
> > with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
> > depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply
needs to
> > have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to
the
> > obvious ATX power connector.
> >
> > ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle
only a
> > micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX
boards and
> > offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a
sturdy old
> > steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
> > retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
> >
> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
> > >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some
upgrading,
> > >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able
to
> > >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
> > >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> > >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace
the
> > >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was
wondering
> > >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would
fit
> > >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Jim
> > >
> > >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
> > >there will
> > >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power
supply.
> > >I've done this
> > >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
> > >switches wiring.
> > >
> > >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
> > >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move
the
> > >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly.
You
> > >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard
later.
> > >
> > >Good Luck.
>
>
> BR and Ben,
>
> Thanks for the info!
>
> BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to be
> running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
> old PIII-450 that seems much faster .

A Celeron P4 is slow, due to the lack of sufficient cache to support the
deep pipelines of the P4 architecture. Depending on the application (and how
often the pipeline needs to reload due to errors in the pre-fetch routine),
it will run from 0% to possibly >50% slower than the equivelant speed P4.
You would see an increase in performance if you replaced the Celeron with a
real P4. It is, however, faster than a PIII-450 in an equivelant system.
P4-based Celerons are to be avoided.
>
> Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2 of
> what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?

No idea on this, sorry.
>
> Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

What the original message is talking about is a Socket 370 Celeron running at
1.4GHz. Socket 478 Celery chips were never made to run that slow, AFAIK. The
1.4GHz Celeron runs with 100MHz FSB, and has 128K Level 2 cache, not a lot, but
sufficient for many uses.

As far as the Celeron P4 is concerned, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
For a great many people, the Celeron P4 is fast enough and offers good value for
the price. For others, especially gamers and heavy-duty number crunching types,
it stinks. If one is doing the usual mix of office work, a Celeron is just
fine, 'cause the delays and bottlenecks lie elsewhere in the overall system,
bottlenecks in the network, the server, the internet, etc.

Note that HP thought enough of the Socket 370 Celeron to use it in the Pavilion
512n.

Don't be so quick to tar and feather the Celeron. Just say it's not good enough
for you... Ben Myers

On Wed, 05 May 2004 23:14:04 GMT, "Mark Bilger" <mark.bilger@hp.com> wrote:

>
>"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
>news:4098EB08.4049A33@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
>>
>>
>> Ben Myers wrote:
>> >
>> > Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get an
>ATX case
>> > with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD Athlon,
>> > depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply
>needs to
>> > have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition to
>the
>> > obvious ATX power connector.
>> >
>> > ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle
>only a
>> > micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX
>boards and
>> > offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a
>sturdy old
>> > steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive bays,
>> > retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
>> >
>> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
>> > >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
>> > >> Hi,
>> > >>
>> > >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some
>upgrading,
>> > >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able
>to
>> > >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
>> > >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
>> > >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace
>the
>> > >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was
>wondering
>> > >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would
>fit
>> > >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> Jim
>> > >
>> > >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX case
>> > >there will
>> > >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power
>supply.
>> > >I've done this
>> > >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front panel
>> > >switches wiring.
>> > >
>> > >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
>> > >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you move
>the
>> > >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections accordingly.
>You
>> > >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard
>later.
>> > >
>> > >Good Luck.
>>
>>
>> BR and Ben,
>>
>> Thanks for the info!
>>
>> BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to be
>> running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
>> old PIII-450 that seems much faster .
>
>A Celeron P4 is slow, due to the lack of sufficient cache to support the
>deep pipelines of the P4 architecture. Depending on the application (and how
>often the pipeline needs to reload due to errors in the pre-fetch routine),
>it will run from 0% to possibly >50% slower than the equivelant speed P4.
>You would see an increase in performance if you replaced the Celeron with a
>real P4. It is, however, faster than a PIII-450 in an equivelant system.
>P4-based Celerons are to be avoided.
>>
>> Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2 of
>> what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?
>
>No idea on this, sorry.
>>
>> Jim
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:409982eb.23849134@news.charter.net...
> What the original message is talking about is a Socket 370 Celeron running
at
> 1.4GHz. Socket 478 Celery chips were never made to run that slow, AFAIK.
The
> 1.4GHz Celeron runs with 100MHz FSB, and has 128K Level 2 cache, not a
lot, but
> sufficient for many uses.
>
> As far as the Celeron P4 is concerned, beauty is in the eye of the
beholder.
> For a great many people, the Celeron P4 is fast enough and offers good
value for
> the price. For others, especially gamers and heavy-duty number crunching
types,
> it stinks. If one is doing the usual mix of office work, a Celeron is
just
> fine, 'cause the delays and bottlenecks lie elsewhere in the overall
system,
> bottlenecks in the network, the server, the internet, etc.
>
> Note that HP thought enough of the Socket 370 Celeron to use it in the
Pavilion
> 512n.
>
> Don't be so quick to tar and feather the Celeron. Just say it's not good
enough
> for you... Ben Myers
>

Ben,


Socket 370 Celeron is a decent performer, I didn't realize the switch to
Socket 478 came about that late. Different story, the 370 Celeron should be
performing at about 95% of the equivalent P3 in general use, no real reason
to replace it.
I do stand by what I said about the P4 Celeron, though, a Duron 900 was
outperforming the 1.8GHz P4 Celeron in almost every test I saw. ;-)
Sorry for my confusion, I should have done some research first and seen
this was a Socket 370 system.

E-vil

> On Wed, 05 May 2004 23:14:04 GMT, "Mark Bilger" <mark.bilger@hp.com>
wrote:
>
> >
> >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:4098EB08.4049A33@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> >>
> >>
> >> Ben Myers wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Keeping in mind the possibility of an upgrade later on, best to get
an
> >ATX case
> >> > with a power supply capable of handling a Pentium 4 or fast AMD
Athlon,
> >> > depending on your personal preference. Either way, the power supply
> >needs to
> >> > have an extra 12v lead which attaches to the motherboard, in addition
to
> >the
> >> > obvious ATX power connector.
> >> >
> >> > ATX cases come in various sizes, starting with the ones which handle
> >only a
> >> > micro ATX motherboard to those which accept full-sized or micro ATX
> >boards and
> >> > offer various numbers of drive bays with varying heights. I have a
> >sturdy old
> >> > steel ATX monster here standing 24" high with all kinds of drive
bays,
> >> > retrofitted with a P4-capable power supply... Ben Myers
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, 05 May 2004 12:51:25 GMT, <BR549@callme.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
> >> > >news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> >> > >> Hi,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some
> >upgrading,
> >> > >> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been
able
> >to
> >> > >> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it
seems
> >> > >> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> >> > >> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just
replace
> >the
> >> > >> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was
> >wondering
> >> > >> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would
> >fit
> >> > >> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Thanks,
> >> > >> Jim
> >> > >
> >> > >Sure, this is an ATX system, albeit it an MATX. In a standard ATX
case
> >> > >there will
> >> > >be plenty of room left over and it will use a standard ATX power
> >supply.
> >> > >I've done this
> >> > >conversion several times. The only place of concern is the front
panel
> >> > >switches wiring.
> >> > >
> >> > >Try to identify the pins on your current motherboard header for the
> >> > >connections and write them down so you won't get confused when you
move
> >the
> >> > >motherboard over to the new case and make the connections
accordingly.
> >You
> >> > >also can use your new case as a platform to upgrade the motherboard
> >later.
> >> > >
> >> > >Good Luck.
> >>
> >>
> >> BR and Ben,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the info!
> >>
> >> BTW, after much cleanup, I'm still puzzled that this machine seems to
be
> >> running rather sluggishly. Is the Celeron 1.4G THAT slow? I have an
> >> old PIII-450 that seems much faster .
> >
> >A Celeron P4 is slow, due to the lack of sufficient cache to support the
> >deep pipelines of the P4 architecture. Depending on the application (and
how
> >often the pipeline needs to reload due to errors in the pre-fetch
routine),
> >it will run from 0% to possibly >50% slower than the equivelant speed P4.
> >You would see an increase in performance if you replaced the Celeron with
a
> >real P4. It is, however, faster than a PIII-450 in an equivelant system.
> >P4-based Celerons are to be avoided.
> >>
> >> Also, the network speeds I get when doing bandwidth test is about 1/2
of
> >> what I get on the PIII-450 (same LAN). Is the NIC on the 512n so slow?
> >
> >No idea on this, sorry.
> >>
> >> Jim
> >
> >
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Mark Bilger wrote:
>
> <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
> news:409982eb.23849134@news.charter.net...
> > What the original message is talking about is a Socket 370 Celeron running
> at
> > 1.4GHz. Socket 478 Celery chips were never made to run that slow, AFAIK.
> The
> > 1.4GHz Celeron runs with 100MHz FSB, and has 128K Level 2 cache, not a
> lot, but
> > sufficient for many uses.
> >
> > As far as the Celeron P4 is concerned, beauty is in the eye of the
> beholder.
> > For a great many people, the Celeron P4 is fast enough and offers good
> value for
> > the price. For others, especially gamers and heavy-duty number crunching
> types,
> > it stinks. If one is doing the usual mix of office work, a Celeron is
> just
> > fine, 'cause the delays and bottlenecks lie elsewhere in the overall
> system,
> > bottlenecks in the network, the server, the internet, etc.
> >
> > Note that HP thought enough of the Socket 370 Celeron to use it in the
> Pavilion
> > 512n.
> >
> > Don't be so quick to tar and feather the Celeron. Just say it's not good
> enough
> > for you... Ben Myers
> >
>
> Ben,
>
> Socket 370 Celeron is a decent performer, I didn't realize the switch to
> Socket 478 came about that late. Different story, the 370 Celeron should be
> performing at about 95% of the equivalent P3 in general use, no real reason
> to replace it.
> I do stand by what I said about the P4 Celeron, though, a Duron 900 was
> outperforming the 1.8GHz P4 Celeron in almost every test I saw. ;-)
> Sorry for my confusion, I should have done some research first and seen
> this was a Socket 370 system.
>
> E-vil


Hi,

So, if this is a Socket 370 Celeron, and it's a decent performer, any
other ideas beyond what has been posted for trying to improve
performance?

I've updated the graphics controller with the latest from the
support.intel.com, and installed the Application Accelerator, and I
think it is a bit faster than it was before (my subjective testing
involves opening an IE window), but it still seems a bit slower than my
PIII-450.

I'm still thinking 7200 RPM hard drive (tho the 450 also has a 5400RPM
drive) and maybe a better video card.

FYI, I've resolved the network speed problem. After testing with other
machines on my network, it looks like there's some kind of slowdown with
our cablemodem service. Service guy is coming out tomorrow to try to
resolve that.

I'd love to 'downgrade' him to Win2K, but the machine is used by my son
and his wife, and she's somewhat attached to the WinXP 'eye candy', so I
don't know if they'd go for that...

Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

But how much memory is installed in the Pavilion 512n? The original 128MB
delivered with the system is a pathetic excuse for the memory required to run XP
Home. Double the memory to 256MB and you will see a difference. Kick it up
(well, the great Emeril does it all the time) to 512MB, and you'll see some more
improvement.

Windows XP Home is a tarted up Windows 2000. It is loaded with bloated 32-bit
Microsoft-written code. A name-brand company has absolutely no excuse for
selling an XP or 2000 computer with a puny 128MB! Except they can compete
better on price by selling an underconfigured system. Running XPee bloatware in
an extremely constrained 128MB almost guarantees a lot of page file activity.
The hard disk light flashes a lot?

Whatever version of Windows you are running on the other computer, 95, 98, or
ME, rest assured that it is leaner and meaner than XPee. This probably accounts
for most of the perceived slow performance of the 512n.

Other lesser factors are a badly fragmented and even more bloated registry, and
a highly fragmented page file. The sad excuse for a disk defragger shipped with
Windows XP does a poorer job of defragging than the Windows 2000 version.
Somebody must have crippled it before shipment. Microsoft and Executive
Software, original publsiher of Diskeeper, must have made the deal to include
the Lite version in XPee.

Neither the XP nor the 2000 defragger can defragment system files, i.e. the page
file and all the registry hives. For that, you need SysInternals' PageFrag.
If you can get over being pissed off at Executive Software for its sad XPee
version of Diskeeper, they sell a real defragger for real money. But all of
this presupposes some badly fragmented files, system or otherwise. But file
fragmentation can kill system performance... Ben Myers

On Thu, 06 May 2004 21:00:45 -0400, ohaya <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote:

>
>
>Mark Bilger wrote:
>>
>> <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
>> news:409982eb.23849134@news.charter.net...
>> > What the original message is talking about is a Socket 370 Celeron running
>> at
>> > 1.4GHz. Socket 478 Celery chips were never made to run that slow, AFAIK.
>> The
>> > 1.4GHz Celeron runs with 100MHz FSB, and has 128K Level 2 cache, not a
>> lot, but
>> > sufficient for many uses.
>> >
>> > As far as the Celeron P4 is concerned, beauty is in the eye of the
>> beholder.
>> > For a great many people, the Celeron P4 is fast enough and offers good
>> value for
>> > the price. For others, especially gamers and heavy-duty number crunching
>> types,
>> > it stinks. If one is doing the usual mix of office work, a Celeron is
>> just
>> > fine, 'cause the delays and bottlenecks lie elsewhere in the overall
>> system,
>> > bottlenecks in the network, the server, the internet, etc.
>> >
>> > Note that HP thought enough of the Socket 370 Celeron to use it in the
>> Pavilion
>> > 512n.
>> >
>> > Don't be so quick to tar and feather the Celeron. Just say it's not good
>> enough
>> > for you... Ben Myers
>> >
>>
>> Ben,
>>
>> Socket 370 Celeron is a decent performer, I didn't realize the switch to
>> Socket 478 came about that late. Different story, the 370 Celeron should be
>> performing at about 95% of the equivalent P3 in general use, no real reason
>> to replace it.
>> I do stand by what I said about the P4 Celeron, though, a Duron 900 was
>> outperforming the 1.8GHz P4 Celeron in almost every test I saw. ;-)
>> Sorry for my confusion, I should have done some research first and seen
>> this was a Socket 370 system.
>>
>> E-vil
>
>
>Hi,
>
>So, if this is a Socket 370 Celeron, and it's a decent performer, any
>other ideas beyond what has been posted for trying to improve
>performance?
>
>I've updated the graphics controller with the latest from the
>support.intel.com, and installed the Application Accelerator, and I
>think it is a bit faster than it was before (my subjective testing
>involves opening an IE window), but it still seems a bit slower than my
>PIII-450.
>
>I'm still thinking 7200 RPM hard drive (tho the 450 also has a 5400RPM
>drive) and maybe a better video card.
>
>FYI, I've resolved the network speed problem. After testing with other
>machines on my network, it looks like there's some kind of slowdown with
>our cablemodem service. Service guy is coming out tomorrow to try to
>resolve that.
>
>I'd love to 'downgrade' him to Win2K, but the machine is used by my son
>and his wife, and she's somewhat attached to the WinXP 'eye candy', so I
>don't know if they'd go for that...
>
>Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:409af416.48003850@news.charter.net...
> But how much memory is installed in the Pavilion 512n? The original 128MB
> delivered with the system is a pathetic excuse for the memory required to
run XP
> Home. Double the memory to 256MB and you will see a difference. Kick it
up
> (well, the great Emeril does it all the time) to 512MB, and you'll see
some more
> improvement.
>
> Windows XP Home is a tarted up Windows 2000. It is loaded with bloated
32-bit
> Microsoft-written code. A name-brand company has absolutely no excuse for
> selling an XP or 2000 computer with a puny 128MB! Except they can compete
> better on price by selling an underconfigured system. Running XPee
bloatware in
> an extremely constrained 128MB almost guarantees a lot of page file
activity.
> The hard disk light flashes a lot?
>
> Whatever version of Windows you are running on the other computer, 95, 98,
or
> ME, rest assured that it is leaner and meaner than XPee. This probably
accounts
> for most of the perceived slow performance of the 512n.
>
> Other lesser factors are a badly fragmented and even more bloated
registry, and
> a highly fragmented page file. The sad excuse for a disk defragger
shipped with
> Windows XP does a poorer job of defragging than the Windows 2000 version.
> Somebody must have crippled it before shipment. Microsoft and Executive
> Software, original publsiher of Diskeeper, must have made the deal to
include
> the Lite version in XPee.
>
> Neither the XP nor the 2000 defragger can defragment system files, i.e.
the page
> file and all the registry hives. For that, you need SysInternals'
PageFrag.
> If you can get over being pissed off at Executive Software for its sad
XPee
> version of Diskeeper, they sell a real defragger for real money. But all
of
> this presupposes some badly fragmented files, system or otherwise. But
file
> fragmentation can kill system performance... Ben Myers
>
> On Thu, 06 May 2004 21:00:45 -0400, ohaya <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net>
wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Mark Bilger wrote:
> >>
> >> <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
> >> news:409982eb.23849134@news.charter.net...
> >> > What the original message is talking about is a Socket 370 Celeron
running
> >> at
> >> > 1.4GHz. Socket 478 Celery chips were never made to run that slow,
AFAIK.
> >> The
> >> > 1.4GHz Celeron runs with 100MHz FSB, and has 128K Level 2 cache, not
a
> >> lot, but
> >> > sufficient for many uses.
> >> >
> >> > As far as the Celeron P4 is concerned, beauty is in the eye of the
> >> beholder.
> >> > For a great many people, the Celeron P4 is fast enough and offers
good
> >> value for
> >> > the price. For others, especially gamers and heavy-duty number
crunching
> >> types,
> >> > it stinks. If one is doing the usual mix of office work, a Celeron
is
> >> just
> >> > fine, 'cause the delays and bottlenecks lie elsewhere in the overall
> >> system,
> >> > bottlenecks in the network, the server, the internet, etc.
> >> >
> >> > Note that HP thought enough of the Socket 370 Celeron to use it in
the
> >> Pavilion
> >> > 512n.
> >> >
> >> > Don't be so quick to tar and feather the Celeron. Just say it's not
good
> >> enough
> >> > for you... Ben Myers
> >> >
> >>
> >> Ben,
> >>
> >> Socket 370 Celeron is a decent performer, I didn't realize the
switch to
> >> Socket 478 came about that late. Different story, the 370 Celeron
should be
> >> performing at about 95% of the equivalent P3 in general use, no real
reason
> >> to replace it.
> >> I do stand by what I said about the P4 Celeron, though, a Duron 900
was
> >> outperforming the 1.8GHz P4 Celeron in almost every test I saw. ;-)
> >> Sorry for my confusion, I should have done some research first and
seen
> >> this was a Socket 370 system.
> >>
> >> E-vil
> >
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >So, if this is a Socket 370 Celeron, and it's a decent performer, any
> >other ideas beyond what has been posted for trying to improve
> >performance?
> >
> >I've updated the graphics controller with the latest from the
> >support.intel.com, and installed the Application Accelerator, and I
> >think it is a bit faster than it was before (my subjective testing
> >involves opening an IE window), but it still seems a bit slower than my
> >PIII-450.
> >
> >I'm still thinking 7200 RPM hard drive (tho the 450 also has a 5400RPM
> >drive) and maybe a better video card.
> >
> >FYI, I've resolved the network speed problem. After testing with other
> >machines on my network, it looks like there's some kind of slowdown with
> >our cablemodem service. Service guy is coming out tomorrow to try to
> >resolve that.
> >
> >I'd love to 'downgrade' him to Win2K, but the machine is used by my son
> >and his wife, and she's somewhat attached to the WinXP 'eye candy', so I
> >don't know if they'd go for that...
> >
> >Jim
>
I agree with Ben, if you're running XP, get 512Mb of RAM for any decent
(non-page swapping) performance. I haven't tried running XP on 128Mb of RAM,
personally, but I'm positive it will be a major performance hit to do so.
7200RPM drive vs. 4500/5400 isn't going to do a lot to improve performance,
in my opinion, unless you have sufficient RAM first (and even then it's not
going to be a huge increase). A better video card will only help with 3D
applications, all desktop/2D cards are basically equal in performance, in my
experience.

Good luck, I think the RAM upgrade is you're wisest choice for improving
system performance.

E-vil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

ohaya wrote:

> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some
> upgrading, e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't
> been able to find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware,
> but it seems like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply.
> In my searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just
> replace the HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I
> was wondering if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard,
> etc. would fit all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX
> power supply?

Honestly, I don't see the need for a case swap just because You want to add
an hard drive. I had an Pavilion with 170W PSU that I put two 80GB 7200rpm
disks, an additional DVD burner and a Geforce4 Ti4200 in and that worked as
stable as before (and still does it for its new owner). Don't forget that
"Watts" does say nothing how much load the PSU can take. I've seen 400W PSUs
failing at loads a good 180W PSU could handle easily. Cheap PSUs have a very
bad efficiency faktor, making You just wasting energy. The only really
important factor is the current (Ampere values) the single lines (+12V, +5V,
+3,3V, etc) can handle.

I wouldn`t re-case the Pavilion. The PSU that came with the unit is
certainly good enough for powering two fast disk drives and even a very fast
gfx card. And even if not, You still can replace the PSU only for something
better. But buying a full size case for a micrATX board is IMHO somehwat
useless.

Benjamin

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message news:409853F6.8CF89FE@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> Hi,
>
> My son has a Pavilion 512n, and we're thinking of doing some upgrading,
> e.g., adding an additional 7200 RPM hard drive. I haven't been able to
> find much in the way of specs for the standard hardware, but it seems
> like it comes with a relatively small 150W power supply. In my
> searching, it seems like the usual recommendation is to just replace the
> HP case with a 'regular' ATX case and power supply, but I was wondering
> if anyone can confirm that this particular motherboard, etc. would fit
> all right in a standard ATX case with standard ATX power supply?
>
> Thanks,
> Jim

One thing to watch out for if you swap the case, the configuration of I/O connectors
on the motherboard isn't standardized. Newer ATX cases have a rectangular
plate with the proper holes in it. If you buy just a motherboard, it will come
with the plate you can just pop in. Check your current case to see if it has one.
If it doesn't, you may be stuck with an open case at the back.

Premium cases like Antec run a whole lot quieter than the basic $50 case/
power supplies you see on the market, and are worth it.

One other performance tip is that virus scan software can really slow down a
system, particularly if you have several old versions loaded. Although you
really need the protection, be aware of what it costs you. There are other
software packages out there that can really bog down a system, just by having
them installed. Be very judicious about what's loaded on the system.

Looks like it came with integrated video. That's OK for normal use, but any
video or gaming use would cause poor performance. This was a real low-end
system, and I think you're seeing that sometimes cheap doesn't necessarily mean
best value. Rather than upgrading, you might want to consider building a new
one from scratch. You have a 100 Mhz memory bus in this thing, so it will
never be a screamer. By the time you replace the disk, video, case, power
supply, OS, and add memory, you could have just about built a really nice new
computer. Motherboards and CPU's aren't very expensive compared to the
labor required to whip this old dog into shape.

Your system probably came preloaded with gigabytes of junkware in addition
to the OS. Check your recovery disks/partition to see just how much. I lean
strongly towards doing a clean install of something like W2K, which will run
a lot faster than a bloated XP installation. The only reason I see for using XP
is if you're doing a lot of digital photography, and like the little goodies they
throw in to help out.

Dave Kinsell

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

On the more recent pavilions, once you have removed the motherboard,
etc, the I/O plate can be very gently pressed into the HP case from
its edges on the outside, and removed intact... On new generic atx
cases (at least on the ones I use) the standard I/O plate on the back
can be easily removed (held by "break-away" tabs ) and the HP I/O
plate can simply be snapped in place in the new generic case, and then
everything on the motherboard lines up a treat..

(This I/O plate swap information is also true of the more recent
e-machines computers) .

The original I/O plates on all these machines are a standard size, and
are a seperate part, which can be reused in a generic atx case. ( I
have done this frequently)

As for your statement that "low end" atx cases are noisy, I do not
necessarily agree.. I use generic, under 50.00 mid tower atx cases
(with 350w p4 power supplies) for my re-case machines, and I find
them to be quiet enough, and very durable.. Yes, high end cases are
nice, but they are not always required or desired..

I use these exact same generic cases and power supplies for my own
computers, and have yet to find a complaint with them..

hth,

JM


On Wed, 12 May 2004 13:19:50 GMT, "David Kinsell"
<kinsell@poboxyz.com> wrote:


>One thing to watch out for if you swap the case, the configuration of I/O connectors
>on the motherboard isn't standardized. Newer ATX cases have a rectangular
>plate with the proper holes in it. If you buy just a motherboard, it will come
>with the plate you can just pop in. Check your current case to see if it has one.
>If it doesn't, you may be stuck with an open case at the back.
>
>Premium cases like Antec run a whole lot quieter than the basic $50 case/
>power supplies you see on the market, and are worth it.
>
>One other performance tip is that virus scan software can really slow down a
>system, particularly if you have several old versions loaded. Although you
>really need the protection, be aware of what it costs you. There are other
>software packages out there that can really bog down a system, just by having
>them installed. Be very judicious about what's loaded on the system.
>
>Looks like it came with integrated video. That's OK for normal use, but any
>video or gaming use would cause poor performance. This was a real low-end
>system, and I think you're seeing that sometimes cheap doesn't necessarily mean
>best value. Rather than upgrading, you might want to consider building a new
>one from scratch. You have a 100 Mhz memory bus in this thing, so it will
>never be a screamer. By the time you replace the disk, video, case, power
>supply, OS, and add memory, you could have just about built a really nice new
>computer. Motherboards and CPU's aren't very expensive compared to the
>labor required to whip this old dog into shape.
>
>Your system probably came preloaded with gigabytes of junkware in addition
>to the OS. Check your recovery disks/partition to see just how much. I lean
>strongly towards doing a clean install of something like W2K, which will run
>a lot faster than a bloated XP installation. The only reason I see for using XP
>is if you're doing a lot of digital photography, and like the little goodies they
>throw in to help out.
>
>Dave Kinsell
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

Hi All,

Thanks for all the responses. I wanted to post back to close this
thread.

FYI, it looks like getting more RAM (another 256 stick) made a
noticeable difference, and now that we've resolved a speed problem (took
over a week) with our cable service, the machine is "good enough". I
bought this machine for my son when he was stationed in Germany with the
Army, and he's not a real computer-literate person, and uses it mainly
for web and email, so I think it's fine now.

My thinking re. a faster hard drive was that it would help, and could
also be moved to another system if he ever upgraded, but what happened
was that I ran HDTach on his system (with his 5400 rpm drive) and he was
getting performance numbers that were reasonable compared to other
systems that I have with 7200 rpm drives and 8MB caches, so I deferred
on that one.

Again, thanks!!

Jim

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.hp.hardware (More info?)

"ohaya" <ohaya_NO_SPAM@NO_SPAM_cox.net> wrote in message
news:40A28EB9.8302C7EF@NO_SPAM_cox.net...
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for all the responses. I wanted to post back to close this
> thread.
>
> FYI, it looks like getting more RAM (another 256 stick) made a
> noticeable difference, and now that we've resolved a speed problem (took
> over a week) with our cable service, the machine is "good enough". I
> bought this machine for my son when he was stationed in Germany with the
> Army, and he's not a real computer-literate person, and uses it mainly
> for web and email, so I think it's fine now.
>
> My thinking re. a faster hard drive was that it would help, and could
> also be moved to another system if he ever upgraded, but what happened
> was that I ran HDTach on his system (with his 5400 rpm drive) and he was
> getting performance numbers that were reasonable compared to other
> systems that I have with 7200 rpm drives and 8MB caches, so I deferred
> on that one.
>
> Again, thanks!!
>
> Jim

Alright then, glad to see you reached a satisfactory conclusion. 5400 vs.
7200 RPM drives, in my experience, don't show much of a performance increase
in real-world use, unless you have an application that is streaming data
in/out out the drive at near-maximum rates (video editing, DVD ripping,
etc.). You were low on RAM though.

E-vil