AstroSkipper
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by AstroSkipper
-
<<< System Information >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ System Model MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD MS-6391 Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz Physical Memory 1.5 GB Graphic NVIDIA GeForce 6200 Video Memory 256 MB Operating System Microsoft Windows XP (5.1.2600) 32-bit Application PCMark05 <<< Result >>> The value 1.5 GB was edited by me. Due to my nature, I hate wrong values. I am like a rock in the surf (German saying). BTW, from a statistical point of view, the sample size is too small for any meaningful conclusions.
-
Not very trustworthy as the integrated version is very old. I believe it is version 3.21. This SystemInfo Explorer version was not able to indicate the correct memory size in my system. It says 2 GB instead of the correct value of 1.5 GB. BTW, the last Windows XP compatible version is 4.48.
-
At this point, I would like to quote a saying that someone here usually gives off:: To Each Their Own!
-
Just for clarification. There was nothing "bumped". My thread "General and specific solutions for problems regarding AU/WU/MU in Windows XP " gets updates and new information when necessary. I am kind enough to share my experience with people. And using MU/WU does not mean that all offered updates have to be applied. It's up to the user to decide which updates are wanted and which not. No need to install all updates. So, I don't understand your objection at all. However, my Windows XP always gets all necessary updates. And that's a good thing.
-
I basically only do stability tests and hardware tests to make sure that hardware components are OK and running well in the system. The last time, I did a burn-in test was when I modified the BIOS on my old Athlon XP machine as regular BIOS updates were abandoned many years ago. I replaced the SATA module integrated in the motherboard BIOS with a newer version and then flashed my modded BIOS back. After that, some tests were necessary to check the stability and functionality.
-
Yep, that's right. The main reason for it was that your computer is nearly 10 years younger than mine. My computer (and by that I mean its motherboard) is from 2000. And your DDR2-RAM is actually much faster than my very slow SD-RAM. However, the test results are a bit strange as a computer many years younger actually should be faster.
-
Oops! That was me? Ok. I can live with that. The good is I've found several problems which are now all fixed. BTW, this was my very first benchmark test. In general, I am not particularly interested in such tests.
-
A PCMark Score of 2089 vs 1412. The values are not particularly far apart which means my PC is only a bit faster than yours. Right?
-
Yep! I did the same but then I read the software requirements. As I am not interested in downgrading my Windows Media Player, I have uninstalled PCMark04 after one unsuccessful run.
-
Keep in mind that PCMark04 requires Windows Media Player 9 (and not higher) whereas PCMark05 requires Windows Media Player 10 or higher.
-
PCMark05 is a very sensitive software and also seems to have problems on certain computers if all tests are to be performed. Here are my test results so far: After various tests, changes and corrections in my system, I was able to run all the tests from System Test Suite successfully. Here is my missing PCMark Score: Although all tests from all categories can be run now successfully on my system, the software does not manage to run them all at once. This indicates a bug in the programme, which is probably only noticeable on certain systems.
-
A quite legitimate question, which I have also asked myself time and again, is why you should still use MU/WU under Windows XP at all. There are no longer any new updates anyway. The answer is very simple. If you make any changes or retrofit components from Microsoft, it can happen that updates are available for these, which logically could not be installed before. I installed the Windows Media Encoder 9 a few days ago. After a search via MU, an update was actually found. In addition, MU also found a further missing update that was previously installed but is no longer available for whatever reason. It is therefore worth running a search via MU/WU from time to time.
-
It was the security update KB2447961 for Windows Media Encoder 9 from December 2010. My Windows Media Player 11 is of the version 11.0.5721.5293. So, a bit more recent than yours. Check for updates via MU/WU!
-
No. Install it and check via MU/WU if there are updates available! On my Windows XP system, an update for the Windows Media Encoder 9 was offered.
-
I'm glad you think rebasing the xul.dll file makes sense. Mozilla doesn't care about less RAM usage. Like many other manufacturers, they assume that the users of their newer versions have enough RAM available in their computers. Otherwise they would not produce such rubbish.
-
Does anyone know why only this test failed? PCMark05 otherwise ran smoothly and had nothing to complain about.
-
The GeForce 6200 AGP is indeed a good one. It is absolutely silent as my version is passively cooled. Unfortunately, my motherboard supports only AGP 4x although the GeForce 6200 is an AGP 8x one. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-6200-agp.c2419
-
Thanks again! What is a little strange is the unfortunate circumstance that the Multithreaded Test 1 failed completely on my Windows XP computer even though I had installed the Windows Media Encoder 9.
-
The animal rights activists won't like that.
-
Just for clarification. Only the scores are completely arbitrarily defined values. You have to read more carefully what I write. And please don't mix everything up!
-
@NotHereToPlayGames BTW, here is the corrected link in the way uCyborg posted it: https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Pentium-4-280GHz-vs-Intel-Atom-N450/m3163vsm3190
-
Thanks for the link! However, I never used 3DMark before as I am not a gamer. The graphics on my Windows XP computer is very weak anyways.
-
You are grabbing values from the System Test Suite. These values are not CPU-specific. That's what the CPU Test Suite is for.
-
A small note. You probably meant rather "Auf Wiedersehen!". I’ll say then:
-
No. What am I to win here? I already lost. As I already stated, your CPU is definitely weaker than mine. But how much weaker can only investigated if there are meaningful values. It can only be solved statistically and thus mathematically.