Hardware Requirements for Internet PC

[Searcher7]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
background operations going on that I cannot find.

I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
anyway.

The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
culprit. (Not that I install much software).

I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
(Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
doesn't work at all on my system).

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.

 

[BillW50]

In

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
background operations going on that I cannot find.

I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
anyway.

The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
culprit. (Not that I install much software).

I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
(Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
doesn't work at all on my system).

Any advice would be appreciated.

Hi Darren! Well I could configure such a machine as yours to do a fine
job for those tasks. Although performance really jumps up with 1GB of
memory. And depending on what kind of memory and the max that machine
can use, it might not be too costly at all.

The second thing I would check is CPU use. The Task Manager comes with
all XP machines, so watch what percentage of use it runs at. Sure it
will be jumping around depending on what you are doing. But I mean say
on average. If it is spending most of the time at 100% or something very
high, that is a problem. And if it is, we can tackle that one if it is.

Another thing that can slow a computer like that one down a lot is high
disk activity. Yes 512MB of RAM will cause lots more disk swapping than
1GB will. But other things like AVG might be scanning the drives at boot
or something. You can stop AVG from doing this if this is the case. And
I used to use AVG in the past, but later versions slowed down my
computers and I found Avast (the free one) to be very quick, so I
switched.

You also mentioned sluggish video with youtube. That uses Flash and the
newer versions of Flash requires a much more powerful machines. I would
use an older version of Flash. I usually use v9, but v8 might be ok for
most modern day websites. Older versions can be found at:

Old Version of Adobe Flash Player
http://www.oldapps.com/flash_player.php

 

[BillW50]

In

You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
Player.

VLC plays in your browser? How? Sure VLC could play them if you download
them.

Do NOT use old versions of Flash. Doing so will have a high
probability of the computer being compromised. Either use the latest
version or none at all.

Yes I have heard that before. Older versions of Flash have many security
holes in them. Either I am very lucky or I don't visit pirate or porn
websites or something. Also real time AV scanners are supposed to be
scanning every port on your computer anyway. And if something does try
to sneak in through a security hole, it is supposed to block it anyway.

And I have been running Windows since '93 and I haven't been infected
yet. Although I have worked on a lot of computers that were and I
cleaned them all up. ;-)

 

[Bob Willard]

In

VLC plays in your browser? How? Sure VLC could play them if you download
them.


Yes I have heard that before. Older versions of Flash have many security
holes in them. Either I am very lucky or I don't visit pirate or porn
websites or something. Also real time AV scanners are supposed to be
scanning every port on your computer anyway. And if something does try
to sneak in through a security hole, it is supposed to block it anyway.

And I have been running Windows since '93 and I haven't been infected
yet. Although I have worked on a lot of computers that were and I
cleaned them all up. ;-)

512MB with XP SP3 is pretty skimpy. XP's demands for RAM did grow from
the original to SP3. If you don't want to spend on a new PC, then I
suggest more RAM -- lots more RAM -- to compensate for your rather slow
CPU. Since RAM is cheap, I'd pour in as much as your MoBo can handle:
4GB if possible, but at least 2GB.

Also, make sure you have a bunch of unused HD space, to avoid slowdowns
due to fragmentation. If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC. (I don't usually
push PC replacement -- I still use a 500 MHz Win98 PC for some stuff --
but a slow PC with a small RAM may be due to go.)

One more trade-off to consider: turn off the realtime feature of your
AV app, to improve file access time. On my primary PC, I have AVG and
AdAware and SpyBot set to run every night (and I run MalWareBytes and
SuperAntiSpyware a couple of times a week); enough protection so that I
don't feel the need to run any realtime AV.

 

[BillW50]

In

512MB with XP SP3 is pretty skimpy. XP's demands for RAM did grow
from the original to SP3. If you don't want to spend on a new PC,
then I suggest more RAM -- lots more RAM -- to compensate for your
rather slow CPU. Since RAM is cheap, I'd pour in as much as your
MoBo can handle: 4GB if possible, but at least 2GB.

Also, make sure you have a bunch of unused HD space, to avoid
slowdowns due to fragmentation. If your HD is more than 50% full, it
may be advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC. (I don't
usually push PC replacement -- I still use a 500 MHz Win98 PC for
some stuff -- but a slow PC with a small RAM may be due to go.)

One more trade-off to consider: turn off the realtime feature of your
AV app, to improve file access time. On my primary PC, I have AVG and
AdAware and SpyBot set to run every night (and I run MalWareBytes and
SuperAntiSpyware a couple of times a week); enough protection so that
I don't feel the need to run any realtime AV.

Since I have found security updates to cause stability problems and
incompatibilities, I *really* rely mostly on real time AV scanning. So I
would be a bit concern about turning it off. But I admit that about once
or twice a year that Avast flags and blocks a malicious website trying
to pass something through a security hole. So maybe I am more worried
than I should be.

Avast is also really light on using up your computer's resources. For
example AnVir tells me the worst Avast used was using 30% of the CPU in
the past hour and that was only for a second. The rest of the time it
was under 1%. I quit using AVG because later versions got very hoggish
over the resources and tied up the computer.

 

[Don Phillipson]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

Your cheapest option is a refurbished office machine 3 to 5
years old, e.g. IBM model M52, nowawadays widely available
for about $100, with 2.6 MHz CPU and at least 1 Gb RAM,
preferably more. These were built for only a single hard drive,
but two 2 DVD drive bays, one usually empty, so you can add
your old hard drive there: and later swap it for a Terabyte size
drive if you like.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Bob Willard:

If your HD is more than 50% full, it may be
advisable to throw in the towel and get a modern PC.

One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.

Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,

 

[Yes]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
background operations going on that I cannot find.

I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
anyway.

The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
culprit. (Not that I install much software).

I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
(Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
doesn't work at all on my system).

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.

The others have given good advice, but I agree with the suggestion
about Task Manager. Underneath processes tab you can see the processes
taht are running and both CPU usage and memory usage that can give you
clues. The performance tab gives more info.

Which version of XP are you using and have you installed SP3? Are you
re-installing from the XP install CD? During the install process, you
can use the advanced choices and be more selective about what software
options you install.

Is your graphics card an integrated circuit built onto the mobo or is
it a stand-alone card? If it's built in, it's more than likely using
part of your system's 512Mb memory and slowing things down somewhat.

As someone mentioned, pagefile size could also be slowing down your pc.
IIRC, you can check out how much it's allocating on your HD looking
under system, IIRC, for system environmentals and manually change it if
it seems excessive. I think the rule of thumb was a multiple of your
memory size. You'll need to check that out.

The 512Mb RAM is(was) Microsoft's recommended minimum, so more RAM can
help. Your mobo determines how much more RAM you could add if you go
that route. In any case, the max that XP (32 bit, IDK about 64 bit)
can take advantage of is 4Gb. Repeating my caveat, your mobo may not
be able to take that.

Others have mentioned AVG and Avast. I used AVG for a long time but
got fed up with it because it hogged my pc's resources. I have no
experience with Avast. I use Microsoft's Security Essentials and am
satisfied. It too is free and MS updates the definitions fairly
regularly.

WRT internet connection speed, you could try DSLReports. At one time
they could test your speed connection. Or pinging your localhost and
your ISP to look at response times might give you some idea.

For troubleshooting, if you're going to try another re-install (I
assume you do a clean re-install, btw), I would suggest not doing it
while connected to the net. Why give someone a free shot? It also
means that you want to install your AV s/w before connecting your pc to
the net.

You might also find, d/l and run a piece of software that inventories
the hardware and software on your pc. I use the freeware version of
System Information for Windows (SIW), but I'm sure there are several
other programs out there that do the same thing. That could give you a
start at answering hardware questions that were asked such as about
your CPU and mobo. Not to mention it's handy info to have for times
such as now

I noticed one other thing. You think the problem might be the
complexity of the s/w you install, but you don't say what you're
installing. It might be advisable to install your other software in
stages if you have the luxury. Your info doesn't indicate if your pc
bogs down before or after adding the other s/w. So it is not
immediately apparent (at least to me) if the problem arises after
installing WinXP and before installing the other software you're using.

And check what percentage of your hd is being used for software. My
experience is that the more that your hd is filled up, the slower
things go period. If you do a right click on the folder for your
drive, a window pops up that gives you info about how much space your
drive has and how much is being used.

John

 

[DK]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

Internet today is stuffed to the max with all kind of crap, requiring
pretty fast computer to run smoothly. Don't settle for minimum
hardware requrements because software developers will surely
find a way to make even more complex software that will require
better hardware. It's an arms race. For an end user, the speed
of everyday computing remained more or less constant over
the past decade (or even two).

Five years ago your machine ran Youtube videos just fine.
Today's Youtube is "improved" and so your computer no longer
keeps up with it. In 95% of the cases, end users ask for none of
these improvements. But it's the stuff that makes people buy
new computer hardware and ensures profits for hardware amd
software industries.

DK

 

[DK]

Per Bob Willard:

One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.

Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,

And don't forget to delete all of the downloaded fixes that
Windows keeps in
C:\WINDOWS\SoftwareDistribution\Download

*Everything* in this directory can be safely deleted after
successful update and reboot.

DK

 

[Paul]

Per Bob Willard:

One cause of a full C: drive that I have seen is Windows Updates.

Every update takes a little disc space for it's backup files and
after a few years, it can add up to enough to cause a problem
that was fixed by deleting all the backup folders like
C:\Windows\$NtUninstallKB971029$,

I added together all of those folders, and got 1.24GB. I've
never touched mine, and that is how much delta there is with
respect to an SP3 CD install.

How small a drive would you need, to get it filled up that way ?

I could see that happening, if I was still using my 12 year old
4GB WD IDE drive, but 1.24GB is a drop in the bucket for anything
a bit newer.

If you want to review storage on your PC, in a visual way, you
can use SequoiaView. Instantly, you'll see the pagefile and hiberfil,
as fairly large with respect to the rest, but may also be able to spot
data files that can be moved to another partition or to another disk.

http://w3.win.tue.nl/nl/onderzoek/onderzoek_informatica/visualization/sequoiaview//

http://w3.win.tue.nl/uploads/media/Sequoia3.1Install.zip

Paul

 

[Paul]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
background operations going on that I cannot find.

I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
anyway.

The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
culprit. (Not that I install much software).

I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
(Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
doesn't work at all on my system).

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.

Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

If that isn't working, that in itself could indicate malware.

Keep Task Manager up on your screen while you are working, and watch the
display during a random freeze. Yes, the Task Manager may also be frozen,
but watch the display for the first update after it unfreezes, and see
if some process happened to be running 100% at the time.

It could be something as simple as a bad hard drive.

*******

900MHz is not enough for any arbitrary video playback. 1.5GHz
is on the border of offering acceptable video playback, but some
formats or resolutions may still be left wanting (frame drop).
(This is based on some VIA mini-ITX designs, where the users
are on the edge of enjoyable video playback.)

The video card helps with some of these things. For example, I
had a couple older video cards, one of which did not support
a scaler for video playback. With a hardware scaler, you can
make full-screen video, with virtually no additional CPU cycles.
Without the hardware scaler, it took 40% of a 3GHz P4 processor
to do the scaling operation (fill the screen). So getting a
decent video card, can also make a difference to the user
experience.

A video card doesn't have to be expensive, to add these things.
But some of the features, are "gated" by the hardware interface
type used to plug in the video card. For example, the video card
driver may decide to disable 3:2 pulldown, if it detects the
card isn't in a PCI Express x16 slot, as opposed to a PCI Express x1
slot or a PCI slot. So when you pick up an "improved" video card,
even then, the manufacturer may rob you of some of the joy, based
on the interface type available for the card, on the motherboard.

With a new motherboard, with at least one PCI Express x16 video slot,
you can fit a $50 video card, and gain access to some of those
features. It will still take newer software (player software),
to use the features. The features don't tend to make ancient software
work faster. Adobe Flash, has had hardware acceleration for a number
of releases, but even that, occasionally you have to turn off
the hardware acceleration in the flash control panel, due to issues.
Some day, when Adobe Flash dies and all we've got is HTML5, there
will again be opportunities for hardware acceleration (via that video
card).

*******

I've done a couple "motherboard-CPU-RAM" upgrades, and generally
they can be done for under $300 with some very careful shopping.
DDR3 RAM now is dirt cheap, so the RAM is almost free.

This advert is intended to show how cheap a kit can be. I am not
promoting this particular purchase, because it contains stuff
you don't need. The part I wanted you to be impressed with, is
the $280 that is giving you a new motherboard, CPU, and RAM. It's
one of their cheapest barebone kits. The CPU is Athlon II X3 445,
which was considered to be one of the cheapest CPU upgrades
you could do (looking at a curve of CPU performance versus price).

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2262855&Sku=B69-0542

We can look at the price/performance here, to see how the 445 rates.
You can see some of the Athlon II x3 and x4 processors, were in the
$65 to $80 price range. So that's what you'd be looking for in an
upgrade. Something high on a chart like that (depending on what
is still available for purchase).

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html

OK, here's a 450 for sale for $78.

Athlon II X3 450 Rana 3.2GHz Socket AM3 95W
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103886

Here is a motherboard for $60. The only thing I have against
Biostar, is their practice in the past of shorting 12V1 to 12V2,
which is not a good idea (it depends on the power supply, as to
how well that would be tolerated). This motherboard is a microATX,
so might be small enough to fit in your existing computer case.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138283

This is an Asus motherboard for $80. MicroATX. Room for a video card.
But also has built-in video. You don't have to buy a new video
card, for an initial test. If you like how the system works without
a video card, then it's fine as is. The back of the motherboard
(I/O plate) has DVI and VGA connectors for video, coming from
the 880G chipset.

ASUS M4A88T-M AM3 AMD 880G HDMI Micro ATX $80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131657

You can get 4GB of RAM for $29. That's all that WinXP 32 bit can
handle anyway.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820104203

So my total, if I go with the Asus motherboard, is 78+80+29= $187

*******
You should always look at the motherboard manual, for gotchas.
The support.asus.com web site has info, such as this manual.
On PDF page 20 ("1-8"), is a diagram of the motherboard. The
ATX12V power connector, is a 2x2 shape with four pins, and it
powers the motherboard. Your 900MHz computer, may not have
that power connector on the power supply.

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/socketAM3/M4A88T-M/E5907_M4A88T-M.zip

A possible substitute power supply, would be one by Sparkle.
It doesn't come with an AC power cord (thus the words "OEM",
meaning "cheap-ass-cheap"). It isn't the perfect supply, but
its a reasonable low-end choice. I have this as a replacement
for my oldest system. I couldn't find a decent choice locally,
and ordered one of these off the net.

SPARKLE ATX-400PN-B204 400W ATX 12V 2.2 Power Supply - OEM $45
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817103013

+3.3V @ 30A, +5V @ 28A, +12V1 @ 18A, +12V2 @ 18A, -12V @ 0.5A, +5VSB @ 2.0A

That should have plenty of power for a low end build.

1 x Main connector (20+4Pin) <-- main connector is 24 pins, but splits into two
1 x 12V (P4) <-- this is the ATX12V 2x2 connector (two yellow, two black wires)
5 x peripheral
1 x SATA <-- my B204 has four SATA power, which I don't use
1 x Floppy
1 x PCI-E <-- 2x3 power connector, for mid range gamer video

If you're making up an order for your upgrade, then throw a couple
Y cables into the order, just in case. That'll help, if you
need a bit of extra reach for some wiring. The wiring in my
old system, is too tangled to see how many "Y" cables I used

This is an example of a Y cable. This one has good construction, but
a poor price ($11 !!!). We used to be able to get stuff like this for
around $3. The cheap ones, they could use a smaller diameter wire, which
isn't the best. You may have to shop a bit more, to find one
which is well made (no "splice tubing"). I try to have a couple
spares like this around, before doing a build, just in case the
wiring is too short, or I need more connectors.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812196309

Our system upgrade price was $187, and has now ballooned to $252 with
the addition of a $45 power supply and a couple $10 cables thrown in.

The motherboard has a PS/2 keyboard connector, but no PS/2 mouse connector.
You might need a USB capable mouse, to complete the build.

Here's a USB mouse for $12. Now we're up to $264 plus shipping.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826104370

*******

The hardest part, is the details of the OS.

Since you refer to "after a new XP install", that implies you have
a real OS installation disc, and perhaps there is a migration
path for you to upgrade your hardware, and still get WinXP to
activate.

If you had a Dell, the OS wouldn't be installing on the new motherboard.
And then, that part would be most of the challenge (solving the
OS problem).

When the system is built up, you enter the BIOS and set the
disk interfaces in IDE mode. That's to negate the need for
any "press F6 and install driver" step. Since the motherboard
has no floppy interface, we'd have no way to install any
optional WinXP drivers. Which means sticking with bog-standard
BIOS settings, if at all possible.

So far, we've spent $264 on an upgrade, and got at least a 4x
speed improvement (assuming pessimistic single-threaded coding
in the software). That ought to help a bit.

If you want to shop for a video card later, there's a single
video slot on the motherboard for that. And then, you'd look
for a modern video card at a decent price.

For example, this is an ATI card for $28. HD 5450.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131339

650MHz core clock, 80 Stream Processing Units
(Cedar Radeоn HD 5400 Series UVD 2.2 video decoder)

And an Nvidia card for $45. GT 520

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121475

810MHz core clock, 48 CUDA Cores
(GT 520, Purevideo VP5 video decoder)

But you'd only shop for one of those later, as the motherboard
graphics should be tested first, to see if they satisfy your
needs or not, without spending more money on a video card.

Paul

 

[PeterC]

Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little less
fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.

 

[Jon Danniken]

You don't need Flash to play YouTube videos. I play them in VLC
Player.

How? Are you downloading them, or parsing the URL in VLC?

Jon

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Control-Shift-Esc does it on XP (at least) and, I feel, is a little less
fraught than the usual 3-fingered salute.

Control-Shift-Esc works on Windows 7, too. But I usually prefer to
right-click on a blank part of the Task Bar and choose "Start Task
Manager."

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP

 

[Paul]

Control-Shift-Esc works on Windows 7, too. But I usually prefer to
right-click on a blank part of the Task Bar and choose "Start Task
Manager."

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP

The original complaint, quoted from the OP was:

"Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my system

As far as I know, it should work, and the system should respond.
It can be disabled, and it's possible malware could disable it.

On my WinXP machine, Ctrl+Alt+Del causes Task Manager to appear.
The fourth tab over in Task Manager, has options such as "Restart".

Ctrl+Alt+Del might even work in the BIOS - if you needed to test it,
you could give it a try there and see what happens (as a "keyboard test").
I think if I'm in the popup boot menu of my BIOS, it works there to
cause the BIOS to POST again.

Paul

 

[John Doe]

The original complaint, quoted from the OP was:

"Ctrl+Alt+Del" doesn't work at all on my system

As far as I know, it should work, and the system should respond.
It can be disabled, and it's possible malware could disable it.

If so, it probably would disable the more straightforward Control
+ Shift + Escape?

I learned that here not long ago. Something I should've already
been doing.

On my WinXP machine, Ctrl+Alt+Del causes Task Manager to appear.
The fourth tab over in Task Manager, has options such as
"Restart".

Ctrl+Alt+Del might even work in the BIOS -

Restarts the PC here.

Good luck and have fun.

 

[glee]

Can someone give me an idea of what the minimum hardware requirements
are for a PC that will be used mostly for internet, as well as playing
DVDs? (I have a 900Mhz, 512mb XP system).

I ask because the system I've been using gets progressively more
sluggish after a reformat and re-install. There seems to be a lot of
background operations going on that I cannot find.

I alternate between installing Avast! and AVG after routine XP re-
installs and I usually disable as much I can in "Start Up" for all the
good it does because after a while the boxes tend to get checked again
anyway.

The sluggishness now occurs immediately after a new XP install, so it
is not malware. It seems that that problem may be that the increasing
complexity of software that I've been using for years may be the
culprit. (Not that I install much software).

I do have issues with jerky video at Youtube, and even worse issues
with loading pages at Photobucket, but that may be my connection.
(Even though I'm told by Verizon that there isn't a problem). But the
biggest problem involves random freezing of my cursor, freezing with
switching between tabs, freezing when typing, etc. Every operation I
perform with the mouse or keyboard can randomly get hung up,
necessitating a waiting period. At worse I have to reboot. Sometimes
going as far as having to pull the plug out the back of the PC case
because the pc case on/off button will not work. ("Ctrl+Alt+Del"
doesn't work at all on my system).

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Perhaps I missed it in one of the replies, but I did not see anyone
suggest running a hard drive diagnostic to test the hard drive. On a
machine of that age, especially if the hard drive is the original, that
should be the FIRST thing you do, after backing up any important data to
other media.

If you don't know the brand of your hard drive, you can use Hitachi
Drive Fitness Test (DFT) on almost any brand drive.
http://www.hitachigst.com/support/downloads/#DFT

 

[BillW50]

In

Control-Alt-Delete brings up Task Manager on my PC.

If that isn't working, that in itself could indicate malware.

Keep Task Manager up on your screen while you are working, and watch
the display during a random freeze. Yes, the Task Manager may also be
frozen, but watch the display for the first update after it unfreezes,
and see if some process happened to be running 100% at the time.

It could be something as simple as a bad hard drive.

I wish DPCs would show up in the Task Manager list. As when you have
high DPC usage you can see the CPU is busy, but you can't find out why
with the Task Manager. Although Process Explorer will show them.

*******

900MHz is not enough for any arbitrary video playback. 1.5GHz
is on the border of offering acceptable video playback, but some
formats or resolutions may still be left wanting (frame drop).
(This is based on some VIA mini-ITX designs, where the users
are on the edge of enjoyable video playback.)

The video card helps with some of these things. For example, I
had a couple older video cards, one of which did not support
a scaler for video playback. With a hardware scaler, you can
make full-screen video, with virtually no additional CPU cycles.
Without the hardware scaler, it took 40% of a 3GHz P4 processor
to do the scaling operation (fill the screen). So getting a
decent video card, can also make a difference to the user
experience.

A video card doesn't have to be expensive, to add these things.
But some of the features, are "gated" by the hardware interface
type used to plug in the video card. For example, the video card
driver may decide to disable 3:2 pulldown, if it detects the
card isn't in a PCI Express x16 slot, as opposed to a PCI Express x1
slot or a PCI slot. So when you pick up an "improved" video card,
even then, the manufacturer may rob you of some of the joy, based
on the interface type available for the card, on the motherboard.

With a new motherboard, with at least one PCI Express x16 video slot,
you can fit a $50 video card, and gain access to some of those
features. It will still take newer software (player software),
to use the features. The features don't tend to make ancient software
work faster. Adobe Flash, has had hardware acceleration for a number
of releases, but even that, occasionally you have to turn off
the hardware acceleration in the flash control panel, due to issues.
Some day, when Adobe Flash dies and all we've got is HTML5, there
will again be opportunities for hardware acceleration (via that video
card).

I disagree that 900MHz isn't enough for any arbitrary video playback. As
my two uses a 400MHz Celeron with a very wimpy Trident Cyber 9525 video
with only 2.5 MB of video RAM. And under Windows 98, it has enough power
to keep up with full screen DVD playback and can handle youtube video
streams up to 700k. Under Windows 2000, it is terrible. As now it can
only handle streams up to 100k.

Also most of my laptops support SpeedStep. And most of that time, they
operate at the slowest clock speed. And that means for this one the CPU
is running at 991MHz. And even at this slow clock speed, it too can
handle arbitrary video playback without a problem.

My Asus EeePC 701/2 netbooks are underclocked to 633MHz. And they too
can keep up with arbitrary video playback without missing a beat under
Windows XP, even on an external monitor running 1440x900. Oddly enough,
Linux on the same machine can't even come close.

 

[BillW50]

In

Internet today is stuffed to the max with all kind of crap, requiring
pretty fast computer to run smoothly. Don't settle for minimum
hardware requrements because software developers will surely
find a way to make even more complex software that will require
better hardware. It's an arms race. For an end user, the speed
of everyday computing remained more or less constant over
the past decade (or even two).

Five years ago your machine ran Youtube videos just fine.
Today's Youtube is "improved" and so your computer no longer
keeps up with it. In 95% of the cases, end users ask for none of
these improvements. But it's the stuff that makes people buy
new computer hardware and ensures profits for hardware amd
software industries.

This used to be true. As back in the 80's and 90's if your machine was 5
years old, it was now way too slow for newer software.

Although something happened really special somewhere at the end of '06
and just before Vista was released. As memory was very cheap and
multicore machines was plentiful. And XP was enjoying a long run and it
still continues somewhat.

I now have 16 laptops from this era alone. I love them. As they can run
older software and all of the newer software as well. You can run older
Windows and even the latest Windows 8 on them. I consider them the best
of the best. And so far, I have no interest in running any machine newer
than this. Nor do the newer machines offer me anything I am interest in
and won't run any of my stuff any faster than what I am doing right now.

I don't recall anything like this in PC history. Okay the Commodore 64
did sell for over 10 years without much in the way of changes. But that
is the closest thing I can think of to compare it with.