|
|
|
PLEASE HELP!! Problems burning with Nero+Decrypter
|
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. December 2004 @ 18:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi everyone, I got a Memorex Dual Format DVD Burner 2 weeks ago and am having problems burning. I am using Shrink 3.2, Decrypter 3.5.1.0 and Nero 6.0.
I started with Memorex DVD+R discs (made by Ritek) and I got a few good burns out of the 25 pack. I got another pack and it was made by CMC (crappy discs - all coasters) and after reading on here (from ScubaPete) that memorex are crappy, I got 100 Verbatim DVD+R discs made by Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation (Checked in DVDIdentifier) from Best Buy.
I burned the Memorex with an older firmware, and then I upgraded my drive's firmware to BWSE from Memorex's website and reinstalled the ASPI layer. The discs I'm burning from are clean and most of them were new. Is it possible that the new firmware is not compatible with the Verbatim DVD+Rs?
Shrink makes a good image of the DVD, but when I burn the image with Nero or decrypter it skips about 20-30 times (mostly in the middle of the movie). I have tried to burn 40 different movies and the only one I got a perfect copy of was Lion King 1. I tried ripping the DVD to files on the hard drive using shrink and also tried ripping the DVD using decrypter and it still skips. BUT if I play the image file made by Shrink, it does not skip, So I'm thinking that something is wrong in the burn process. I burned the discs in 4X (lowest allowed by Disc - as specified in Decrypter). If I burn it any lower it still burns it at 4X. If I put a burned movied in Shrink, during analyzing it says - Data Error - Cyclic Redundancy Error.
These are my system specs:
Intel Celeron 1.3, 40 GB Compressed Hard drive (25GB available space), 128MB SDRAM, 4096MB Virtual Memory (don't know if that helps), Memorex Dual Format, Double Layer Internal E-IDE Drive with 2 MB buffer, all drives have DMA enabled, Windows SP2 installed, McAfee Antivirus and McAfee Firewall (both disabled during ripping and burn), also Windows Firewall is disabled.
PLEASE!! I've read all the manual's I could find on Shrink and Decrypter, but haven't figured out what the problem is.
Thanks for the space!
DGajre777
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. December 2004 @ 03:38
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
Moderator
|
3. December 2004 @ 11:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yours is an interesting problem because it appears you have all the correct settings and have already tried or done my usual littany of suggestions. Very nice work indeed!
While it's odd that the MCC coded media isn't working well it's not impossible. Some drives simply don't like certain brands/types of media. It's also strange that the disc skips in the middle and not the usual end of the disc.
My immediate suspicions are hardware related and my first theory would be that towards the middle of the burn for some reason the buffer underrun feature is kicking in. The reason I say this is twofold - one being that the buffer underrrun feauture simply does not work as advertised when it comes to video and the second is that you're running the bare minimum amount of RAM. Burning a DVD is quite system intensive so as the theory goes we're losing data flow to the burner, usually towards the middle of the disc.
My suggestion would be to get at the very least another 128MB of RAM but considering that RAM for an older system such as yours is usually fairly inexpensive, 512MB or even a GB would really improve the encoding/burning process in addition to pepping up your PC's performance across the board :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33 |
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. December 2004 @ 13:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
Nephilim - Thanks for the reply! I agree with you about the memory. I thought about the buffer being a problem today. I burned another disc and watched the buffer bars carefully in decrypter. The device buffer was at 98-100%, but the system buffer (on the left) slowly goes down to 0% in the middle of the movie, then climbs back up to near 100%. This is normally where i get all the skips when I play them.
It is strange because if I burn the same movie 3 times, they will all skip at 3 diffent areas in the movie. I tried burning it at 1x in decrypter, but the disc I have has a speed of 4X, 6X and 8X. Even if I select 1X it still burns at 4X. And it doesn't matter if I burn in Nero 6, Nero 5.5 or Decrypter, they all skip at different times/areas in the movie with the SAME ISO image file.
I tried to increase the buffer in decrypter from 20MB to 50MB (because I read somewhere that you are not supposed to use more than 40% of your system's memory on the buffer), but that didn't help either.
I think the only option I have is to get a 256MB RAM upgrade and go from there. My computer can support a maximum of 512MB (2 x 256MB). I checked Tigerdirect.com - Ultra 256MB PC133 SDRAM is $50 (Cheaper than I expected!).
Question: Is there any way (in decrypter) to burn it at 1x? or to use virtual memory as a buffer? And what is the maximum percent of the system's memory can I use as a buffer - is 40% max correct?? Thanks!
Time for me to order memory!! :)
DGajre777
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 3. December 2004 @ 13:58
|
Moderator
|
3. December 2004 @ 14:26 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The device buffer was at 98-100%, but the system buffer (on the left) slowly goes down to 0% in the middle of the movie, then climbs back up to near 100%. This is normally where i get all the skips when I play the
Bingo :) Going up to 512MB should certainly keep that from happening. As for the percentage of RAM being used I would tend to think that provided everything else is shut down the burn process could use as much as it needs.
It's quite possible that if the media you're using is rated for 8X your drive won't allow burning speeds below 4X since the drive always has the last say in burn speeds. Have you tried to use some 4X media? That may help.
To be honest I'm not up to speed on the ins and outs of virtual memory. I've never had a problem with buffers draining so I've never paid much attention to the issue. There are others here that may be able to give you the skinny on it but I wouldn't worry about it unless you experience buffer underruns after installing the new memory.
Be sure to check back and let us know how you get on :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
3. December 2004 @ 14:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thank you very much for all the info!!
DGajre777
|
Moderator
|
3. December 2004 @ 15:18 |
Link to this message
|
My pleasure :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
222333444
Junior Member
|
3. December 2004 @ 16:45 |
Link to this message
|
I recently bought a Memorex dual format, dual layer external DVD burner. I use the softwear that came with it which is now the updated Nero 6.6.0.1 and (DVD Decrypter).
I have no problems using memorex DVD's. Everyone says they are bad but they work for me everytime.
I first use DVD Decrypter and make sure it is in File mode. It takes about 15 minutes.
Now I close the DVD Decrypter, open up Nero Start Smart and put it in DVD Mode. Then I go to COPY and BACKUP at the top and click on
Copy Entire DVD Video. This puts me in Nero Recode 2. Now I import my Decrypted movie, decide what I want to get rid of, decide the quality and then burn the video. Never fails. the highest quality takes about 30- 60 more minutes. A quick burn is 15 more minutes.
I do have a Gig of RAM and a 2.6 GHz Pentium though. I also remove most spy wear with Ad Aware and Sybot which can really bog your computer. I also use Norton Internet Security that works well with a fast computer.
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
4. December 2004 @ 15:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thanks! I'll try that! But I'm running on 1/10 of your RAM and a slower processor, so it takes a LOT longer on my computer. I'm just curious, download DVD Identifier and find out who makes your Memorex. If it has a code of CMC and you are burning perfect copies, I'll be very suprised!
2 more questions for anyone who can help!:
1) I read in a guide that in Decrypter you are supposed to make an MDS file and burn that file (not the ISO file). WHY?? And what's the difference between an MDS file made from the ISO file and the ISO file itself.
2) In my I/O tab in Decrypter settings, I noticed mine was on STMIP - Microsoft (or something like that) so I had to change it to ASPI - wnaspi32.dll (I think that's what it was). It is supposed to be on STMIP????
DGajre777
|
|
222333444
Junior Member
|
5. December 2004 @ 10:22 |
Link to this message
|
I'm just curious, download DVD Identifier and find out who makes your Memorex. If it has a code of CMC and you are burning perfect copies, I'll be very suprised!
Corey:
Manufacture I.D. FUJIFILM03
I use the 8 Times ones. I guess the faster they will burn the Higher the quality?
1) I read in a guide that in Decrypter you are supposed to make an MDS file and burn that file (not the ISO file). WHY?? And what's the difference between an MDS file made from the ISO file and the ISO file itself.
Corey:
All I no is the ISO is necessary if you want to use The Decrypter to burn your DVD. I use File F Mode and then use Nero Recode 2. You just go to mode at the top and change it to File F.
2) In my I/O tab in Decrypter settings, I noticed mine was on STMIP - Microsoft (or something like that) so I had to change it to ASPI - wnaspi32.dll (I think that's what it was). It is supposed to be on STMIP????
Corey:
Mine is set for SPTI - Microsoft
|
Moderator
|
5. December 2004 @ 13:22 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
1) I read in a guide that in Decrypter you are supposed to make an MDS file and burn that file (not the ISO file). WHY?? And what's the difference between an MDS file made from the ISO file and the ISO file itself.
The mds is a small information file about the ISO. It's the mds that gets recognized first but it's the ISO that actually gets burned.
Quote:
2) In my I/O tab in Decrypter settings, I noticed mine was on STMIP - Microsoft (or something like that) so I had to change it to ASPI - wnaspi32.dll (I think that's what it was). It is supposed to be on STMIP????
In practice it doesn't matter which one you use as long as Decrypter works. Those options are just different small interface layers that allow communication between your drive and the rest of your system. SPTI is the one that windows comes with - some folks get away with using just that but many find the need to install some version or another of ASPI :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
5. December 2004 @ 20:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
I tried burning the MDS file, still got skips. I had an older version of Force ASPI, I upgraded it to a new Adaptec ASPI layer. Then my computer was acting funny, I ran a full system anti-virus check and it had a Trojen virus (how it go by McAfee's virus protection I have no idea). I'll be ordering my memory in a couple of weeks, so I'll keep you guys informed. Thanks again for all the info!
DGajre777
|
Moderator
|
5. December 2004 @ 21:22 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
(how it go by McAfee's virus protection I have no idea)
Because McAfee isn't exactly the best there is. Norton is good as well as AVG Free Edition :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
15. December 2004 @ 15:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
Here's an update! I burned 20+ movies, and they don't skip or freeze. I installed Adaptec ASPI, selected SPTI-Microsoft in Decyrpter for the ISO burn. I still use Shrink to create ISO files, but I have to create and burn the MDS file to have a skip free movie. I also set buffer for 90MB (out of my 128MB). It takes 30 seconds to fill the buffer and about 30-45 minutes to burn a movie, but it works!!
A few movies skip in Playstation 2, but they don't skip on my laptop. I've noticed that a few rented movies from blockbuster skip on the playstation 2 too.. like 'I Robot', which was a new disc, skipped twice yesterday. Wierd!
Anyways, thanks everyone for all the advise and help. Going to order 256MB of memory in a week :)
DGajre777
|
Moderator
|
15. December 2004 @ 17:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Wonderful news! Happy burning :)
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|
Buik
Member
|
15. December 2004 @ 18:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
DGajre777
In your first post, you said you have a compressed 40gb hard drive drive. Are you running a compression program? If so, it could be that you were trying to overpower something that was not necessary.
I have no problem with memory upgrades & such. And the headaches.
222333444:
That you get a good burn with memorex is not what veterans are concerned with. Poor media may play well for a few months, or a year. It is how long it will last. Do you want that DVD to play 2-3 years from now? That is a consideration when purchasing media. I bought COMPUSA labled disks for about $1 US over a year ago. some were a waste of money shortly there after. Not to mention the time I spent creating the file I burned onto the disk
TC
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
17. December 2004 @ 14:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm using Windows XP compression. If you go to My Computer, right click on your C: Drive, on the General tab, click compress drive, it will compress your whole hard drive. It took about 30 minutes and all new files are automatically compressed. It made my computer a lot faster. I did the same thing to my work computer and I could compress a 2.2 Gig MS Access file to 700MB using Winzip 7.1 and Windows XP's hard drive compression. My work computer and my laptop both have 512MB of RAM, I'm now thinking I should have got an external DVD+RW instead of trying to put an internal drive on a slow computer with 128MB of RAM. But hopefully, the memory upgrade will help out a lot.
As for the Memorex, the first batch were coasters, the second batch of DVD+R discs, I had a gap in the media after burn, like a chunk of data missing from the DVD disc. I've read that that was due to poor quality manufacturing. Something about poor quality dye!?!
DGajre777
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 17. December 2004 @ 15:00
|
|
BlueLaser
Junior Member
|
27. December 2004 @ 03:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hopefully you've gotten your problem resolved by now, but I wanted to add some suggestions. You said, "It took about 30 minutes and all new files are automatically compressed. It made my computer a lot faster." - The fact that it made your computer faster points a red flag in the direction of your hardware. I've done a lot of systems with/without compression and many different configurations. Compression actually makes ALL systems slower because it must decompress the files before using them, and this takes up cpu time. Ok, before I shoot my foot, I agree you are seeing a faster system, but there is some trickyness here. It is possible to speed up some over all situations with compression if everything is right, but not for the reasons you may be thinking. If for example a person has a very slow hard drive, a weak slow data buss, and slow memory - then data has trouble traveling on that system quickly. That will make the system slow. If you compress data that *can* be compressed (like a huge text file), those files sometimes become less than 1/2 their original size. If the drive and buss are slow, then a file 1/2 the size or smaller will give you a quicker response from your system with those types of files only... BUT at the expense of your cpu. Unless you are copying compressed files that simply get moved, then it's faster to copy smaller files. But everything else in windows gets hurt by doing this. This would be only one of the problems, the additional 10% (guessing) of lost cpu here is another.
But more important is that video information rarely, if ever, compresses well. That means you won't see a speed benifit from it's attempt to compress video. It may smartly skip uncompressable files, (i don't think it does actually), but there is still time lost for that in other areas. As drive speed improves, compression helps less and less because newer drives can naturally move large files well.
I see is that you are on a 40GB drive and that is not as fast as new newer ones they have. I've always found newer/larger drives to be faster. It depends a lot of which year your drive was made. While 40GB may be large enough for you, everytime I pulled a 40GB drive out and put in say a 120GB Western Digital, I have seen a big jump in performance in windows for all things.. It doesn't have to be WD but they are very good and affordable. I really think that if you could get a new 80GB, or 120GB with the 8MB cache, and forget about using compression, that you would see a world of difference.
I'm also pretty sure you would not see much improvement by compressing files on a faster drive. That's because a 40 is so slow at retreiving data, that compressed files help it out. A good drive doesn't need that help. Once a fast HD is there, the compression would actually hurt your performance because the HD no longer needs the help, and it steals cpu cycles. It's all a balance. Speed up one thing, and another is relatively slow etc. Again, I have dumped drives when I didn't need more space, just to get a newer, faster one.
Also your 4096MB swap file on a compressed drive hurts too. Well, the size being that big won't help. So your "speed up" may be perceived in some applications and lost on big things like burning DVD's. The earlier suggestion that you get more ram is definately important too. 128MB isn't even recommended for XP and is one of your major problems. Besides when you have low ram, your drive will get fragmented faster. 384MB should be a minimum, but 512MB is what is needed for smooth operation. The 1024MB, while a waste for many applications, will make large projects go really smooth.. But it's not needed. The faster the computer, the more it will get bogged down by the HD. Your 1.3 isn't the fastest, but it would be helped quite a bit by again, a better drive and not using the compression. One other thing. In copying 4.3GB of data, you will deplete any amount of ram. So having a good HD is important. Of course a new HD, more ram and new fast motherboard would be killer, but I know upgrades get expensive... If you don't want to dump too much money into your current system, you may not need both a new HD and new ram. Maybe just ram, or just a HD will get rid of your problem. Simply put.. compressed slow drive + 128MB ram is the kiss of death for burning, LOL.. good luck.
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. December 2004 @ 04:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
It is strange that you said this cause I was telling my wife 2 days ago that I should build a computer myself. I already have a DVD+RW drive, I was looking into the 120GB hard drive and a Pentium 4, 3.2Ghz processor. If I get a computer with the DVD burner at Best buy/circuit city etc, it would cost me about $1400. If I build my own computer using my burner, it would cost about $350 for the processor and Motherboard, $200 for 1 gig of ram and $120 for a 120GB hard drive. That's about $700. I was thinking of compressing the 120 gig drive, BUT after what you said, I'll be leaving it uncompressed. Thanks for all your advise.
DGajre777
|
|
BlueLaser
Junior Member
|
28. December 2004 @ 01:37 |
Link to this message
|
That is strange, and coincidental, lol. Your choice sounds great and is exactly what I already have. What you want is the 3.2ghz, but NO prescott versions, or any faster than 3.2ghz. It's the best deal, no heat issues, or fast whining fans. You should also steer clear of anything Celeron since they are only crippled/slower versions of the better chip. You don't need exactly what I will mention, but I did shop around, and this is just an example of what I have. I have an Asus P4C800-E Deluxe motherboard with 1GB of Kingston pc3200 value ram (512 per stick). bus is 800mhz and memory runs at 400mhz. It uses dual channel memory and it's faster to have two chips, so the cpu uses it as dual channel... It can pull memory (in this case case video) from both sticks at the same time. If you want 1024MB total, I'd consider two 512 sticks instead of one 1024MB for example. A pair will give best speed for dual channel, otherwise dual channel is not working. Best buy doesn't tell you that, and they don't care, lol. My board allows for auto cpu fan control which I turned on right away. Instead of running too fast all the time, it adjusts down and is very quiet.. I can push the cpu very hard before the fan speeds up, so it sits there night and day quiet. Burning a DVD isn't enough to get the fan to speed up either. Games are also not a problem. I shopped for the fastest computer I could get without loud, obnoxious fans! Can you tell I don't like that, ;-). Of course the fan maker is a factor, but control and cpu type is important when you get a high end system. I'm being a little picky about the fan, so probably anything you pick will be fine. Even a prescott would probably be fine, I just avoided it because of heat and they are not really faster until 3.6. Some setups are even slower...
Your $350 package is probably your best bet. Just make sure your ram is matched correctly for your board. The new fast motherboards can be picky sometimes. I've seen people get super high end expensive ram and it caused lock ups because it wasn't matched correctly. My Kingston wasn't most expensive, yet it is very fast and my system never locks up. So I stayed with that. I also know my system is only one example and there are plenty of other good choices out there. With current systems this fast, you can easily burn up to 16x. And not all because of cpu speed, but the full picture with good bus/hd etc.
Your prices are pretty much about what I spent, and it is a savings. I got my gig for $180 through mail order. So $200 is good. I paid about $140 for my mother board because I wanted the best. They have somewhat cheaper ones that are good.. Of course there are other brands that are like $80 etc. In case you have any further problems with your drive (I don't know what you have), check this list out.. http://www4.tomshardware.com/storage/20041102/index.html - I saw the NEC 3500 and almost got it because it could do 4x dual layer, but bought the Sony dru-710a (which is now Lite on) because it was very very good, faster reading, and easy to get. They patched firmware and it now does 4X DL so I'm happy.. Not that I will ever buy a DL blank at those prices. But my point is that I burned a Verbatim +R data disc in 6 minutes at 16X with my computer with no problems!... So if you get a new system, that is what you can hopefully look forward to. Yes, I'd not compress it. The idea seems nice at first, but you'll regret it later in speed. You could always make a compressed folder or make a new compressed partition, but with new big drives there isn't much point. I used to compress too, and finally gave it up. Besides 120 should be pretty big on it's own. The amount of ram you are looking to get, plus new HD and motherboard should be more than enough to overcome dvd burning problems no matter what brand you choose by far. So everything doesn't have to be perfectly top notch, (equals $$$ and is just preference). Even if you got memory in one stick it wouldn't hurt it enough to prevent fast burning. You pretty much can't go wrong with what you mentioned. Just starting with a good solid base as you are now doing solves it. Glad I could help and happy burning.
|
|
DGajre777
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
28. December 2004 @ 14:37 |
Link to this message
|
Thanks for all the info. The Pentium 4 processor I was talking about is 530 3.0Ghz (not 3.2). Tiger Direct has a good deal with Intel Motherboard and Pentium 540 3.0 for $319.
The reason I said I'll be going with 1 GB is because I'll probably put it another 1GB RAM in a few months. The motherboard can hold a max of 4GB RAM. It's the Intel D915PGAVL Socket 775 Motherboard with Dual-Channel DDR333/400 Mhz memory slots. I was thinking of getting single channel RAM, but it sounds like there are benefits for a dual channel, so once again that's for the info! :)
I also noticed that the motherboard has a Serial ATA interface, so I'll be shopping for a SATA hard drive since it has a 150Mb/s transfer rate. One thing I can't find is that when I went to Intel's website they mentioned that this motherboard has Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 but I can't find how much video memory it actually has. It has PCI Express 16X but I have no idea what it's for (except for a video card). Only other thing is it does not have a firewire port, so I'll have to get a PCI card for it. Also what did you mean by 'no prescott versions of the 3.2 processors'?
Here's the link if you want to check it out!
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1121347&CatId=1632
Thanks for all the advise. It's been really helpful!!
DGajre777
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. December 2004 @ 14:39
|
|
CAVALLARO
Newbie
|
29. December 2004 @ 19:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
Get all the ram you want now. it may be because i am running a raid configuration. I had 2 sticks of ddr ram and tried to add 2 more. oops, problem.as my system was congigured the first time with only 2 sticks of ram, that is what it wanted to see. so i had to blow everything away and start over. and a must do is make sure that the ram is amtched to your motherboard. Check out corsair ram. very high quality and on there web site they have a program to match ram to motherboard. hope this helps you
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
BlueLaser
Junior Member
|
30. December 2004 @ 01:49 |
Link to this message
|
You're welcome.. I see the chip you're looking at is the newer 520 with 775 socket. It's a prescott, but sounds improved over the ones I read about 4 months ago. The initial prescotts ran slower than non-prescotts... They have longer pipe-lines for instructions. It ran 105 watts, 30 more than mine and was very hot. I'm not completely sure about the wattage on this new one, but have not heard any bad news either. IN fact I am hearing very good news. So forget what I said about "no prescotts". You might want to do some double checks on the net before you get it, but it looks good. I'm looking at your 520 at:
http://www.cluboverclocker.com/reviews/cpu/intel/p4/3.0/ - I'm not interested in the overclocking, but just the specs.
The 520 is very close in speed and cheaper than mine from 8 months ago. It pulls in nearly 9000 MIPS.. not bad. The mother board you are looking at has a good bus. I've never tried or seen one, but at 3ghz, you should be fine with temps. I read it overclocks well and can go up to 3.7ghz. But only with a high end board like Asus or ABit.. You'd need the Asus equivilent or ABIT AA8 DuraMAX board to do that.. And I think it would be very hot while over clocked. So it may not be worth doing that.. I just put the link because it sounded interesting and praised the cpu. You'd have to read more on it.. But you were not to looking to do this anyway. You wanted very fast and affordable and I think what you chose is a good deal and will blow your old system away.
You won't need the 2GB of ram or the SATA to ensure a good DVD burn.. The machine will be way overkill for DVD burning already.. But if you just want SATA to improve windows and file transfer speed, that's great. I'm not sure why you'd want 2GB of ram other than having your friends say how cool it is. LOL. Swap memory is only used when the program+data uses more than your ram.. Almost NO programs go to swap with 1G.B., so with 2GB you will have 1G.B and more sitting there doing nothing most of the time. There are some very special programs that use more, but they are few. Available ram on a 128mb system drops off to zero quickly and uses swap. 512MB drops very slowly. If you get 1GB it seems to stop sinking while doing DVD burning. XP holds onto enough ram and seems content.. When I burned a DVD, my free ram fell from 768MB to 500MB and never lower. So XP ran smooth when the disc was done. If you've ever seen all your icons redraw slowly while the drive grinds and HD light flickers, you were out of memory. It won't happen with 1GB and probably not even 512MB. But 128, yes indeed.
The only negative to not getting 2GB is filling your slots with 1GB. And I'm sure you now that. But again 2GB is so huge it would be totally rare and special softare that would need it. Most sotware recommends 512MB at this point anyway. The big negative to having one 1GB stick is that the dual channel won't work as fast as it should and they cost more in 1GB sticks. So you'll end up with slower memory if you don't fill the other slot. I think in your case, it's more important to have a faster system with 2 sticks either way. You'd get roughly 25% to 30% speed boost on the memory bus using dual channel correctly. But only you know how much ram you need. Of course you could always buy one and add one as you said, but at a premium.
As for the graphics ram, motherboards usually don't give you a lot. I'm not sure what this one has either. You'll probably need a dedicated video card if you really like fast games. The PCI 16 express is a new bus that is faster than AGP 8X... Just make sure you choose a board you like that works with PCI 16. I haven't shopped for one, but with some quick searches found out they are out there and PCI Express is catching on quick. Here is something at Toms hardware about PCI Express..
http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. December 2004 @ 01:54
|
|
