^^ You're using ZFS on your boot drive with Ubuntu? Weirdo.

@Agent of the BSoD

Did you benchmark your Pentium D rig?

Errius wrote:

@Agent of the BSoD

Did you benchmark your Pentium D rig?

Great, now I want to see Cinebench run on the slowest clocked Pentium D for laughs. 🤣

counting the everyday PCs then:

1. the modern configuration (this is the machine from 2006 already!):
Pentium D with 1.6GHz CPU, 768MB RAM, 40GB HDD
WinXP .
THis is the most modern configuration which I use for the webpages which require somewhat modern system.

Otherwise I put back the other HDD with WIN98SE for everyday use for the same machine.

2. (this is the machine from 1995).
electronics machine, for EPROM, and other programmers, dumpreader.
486 DX-4 100Mhz, 73GB UltraSCSI, some unofficial chinese modified DOS 7.1
10/100 ethernet

3. server (machine from 2007)
Pentium dualcore 1.86Ghz, 2GB RAM, 1,5TB HDDs,
SCSI,
4 optical drives: Bluray, DVD, and 2 CD-RW, CD-RW
gigabit ethernet.
Linux mandriva 2009

the rest of the computers are for music or lab which I am not counting.

jxalex wrote:

1. the modern configuration (this is the machine from 2006 already!):
Pentium D with 1.6GHz CPU, 768MB RAM, 40GB HDD

I don't think there's a Pentium D with such a low clock speed...
You should probably upgrade the CPU to a Pentium D 945, it can be found for $3 (with shipping) on eBay.
Even better, Core 2 Duo CPUs can be found for around $5 if your motherboard supports them.
That crusty old 40 GB HDD is probably dog slow, even the cheapest 120 GB SSD would probably dramatically improve usability.

ODwilly wrote:

Errius wrote:

@Agent of the BSoD

Did you benchmark your Pentium D rig?

Great, now I want to see Cinebench run on the slowest clocked Pentium D for laughs. 🤣

Mine isn't the slowest clocked Pentium D, infact it's the fastest Smithfield one, the 840 @ 3.2 GHz, so I can't grant you that one. If anything, I could upgrade it to a 940 but I really doubt there'd be any significant difference in doing so. I can't figure out how to remove the cooler anyway. It's a Dell setup and I've never figured it out.

I am running Cinebench 11.5 on it since that's the last version that supports 32-bit systems. For a comparison, I'll run the same version on my Ryzen 7 (64-bit though). Also including how long the pass took via stopwatch on my phone so you can get a better idea of how slow this thing is.

Pentum D 840: Score: 0.83, Time: 8 minutes 5 seconds
Ryzen 7 1700: Score: 14.92, Time: 27 seconds

Yeah uh, does this help prove my point? 🤣

My dual 3.6 GHz Xeon rig scores 1.05 in Cinebench 11.5 x64, which sounds about right. From what I gather, two single-core Irwindales should perform identically to a single dual core Smithfield of the same frequency and cache. (Both are based on the Prescott core.)

watson wrote:

I don't think there's a Pentium D with such a low clock speed... You should probably upgrade the CPU to a Pentium D 945, it can […]
Show full quote

jxalex wrote:

1. the modern configuration (this is the machine from 2006 already!):
Pentium D with 1.6GHz CPU, 768MB RAM, 40GB HDD

I don't think there's a Pentium D with such a low clock speed...
You should probably upgrade the CPU to a Pentium D 945, it can be found for $3 (with shipping) on eBay.
Even better, Core 2 Duo CPUs can be found for around $5 if your motherboard supports them.
That crusty old 40 GB HDD is probably dog slow, even the cheapest 120 GB SSD would probably dramatically improve usability.

Are you finished? 😀 to "dramatically improve usability" it is needed to go for some older platforms instead which have smaller footprint, since winXP has the slowest USER INTERFACE and thats why I wont even bother. It is slow on whatever CPU and how much RAM it has and the SSD!
Dont get me wrong! The system itself with new cpus and hdds are faster, but its user interface is still clumsy as hell and reacts with a noticeable delay compared to win3.x or win98se.
(There are video and game benchmark programs but not regarding about general GUI).
Thus, after applying the suggested upgrades, the zip-packer works faster, but the file commander utilities still start slowly, these wont change a thing for WINXP for responsiveness, unless it has all cached already. And after all that there are still many unneccessary things which are in that winXP system what is difficult to get rid off - the countless "my documents/videos/securityholes/..." and such, forced layouts, color schemes with hardcoded black color for letters etc.

Programs will start faster on win3.x and win98se on a much slower CPUs already, and after they get 4 times more RAM and faster CPU then these will be even faster, but this is not the case with WinXP even if it has 3GB RAM and dualcore CPUs. And now set aside machine with 3GHz CPU with 1GB RAM with win98se to do just ONE thing -- to start a MT2.6.1 or TC...

Core2Duo based laptop.
Fast but net stuff is a pain, luckily an old version of palemoon is nice enough to somewhat emulate "running". But stuff like FF5.x is a slide show though.
Nonetheless sufficent for what I do.

jxalex wrote:

Are you finished? :) to "dramatically improve usability" it is needed to go for some older platforms instead which have smaller […]
Show full quote

Are you finished? 😀 to "dramatically improve usability" it is needed to go for some older platforms instead which have smaller footprint, since winXP has the slowest USER INTERFACE and thats why I wont even bother. It is slow on whatever CPU and how much RAM it has and the SSD!
Dont get me wrong! The system itself with new cpus and hdds are faster, but its user interface is still clumsy as hell and reacts with a noticeable delay compared to win3.x or win98se.
(There are video and game benchmark programs but not regarding about general GUI).
Thus, after applying the suggested upgrades, the zip-packer works faster, but the file commander utilities still start slowly, these wont change a thing for WINXP for responsiveness, unless it has all cached already. And after all that there are still many unneccessary things which are in that winXP system what is difficult to get rid off - the countless "my documents/videos/securityholes/..." and such, forced layouts, color schemes with hardcoded black color for letters etc.

Programs will start faster on win3.x and win98se on a much slower CPUs already, and after they get 4 times more RAM and faster CPU then these will be even faster, but this is not the case with WinXP even if it has 3GB RAM and dualcore CPUs. And now set aside machine with 3GHz CPU with 1GB RAM with win98se to do just ONE thing -- to start a MT2.6.1 or TC...

Even with my favoritism for Windows XP on old machines, I would either run Vista or newer just to be stupid, or in reality, I'd relegate such old machines to running legacy software, and I'd just keep them at 98SE or ME.

Speaking of 98SE, there's a lovely ISO full of Windows Updates for such legacy operating systems, straight from Microsoft Support or some such thing, currently hosted somewhere on archive.org. It was handily linked on the PCem forum, but the staff there deleted the link, because 🤣 warezing Windows Updates that won't work without the original operating system already installed anyway.

Current specs of my desktop:

Asus PRIME X399-A
Threadripper 1900X
16 GiB (4x 4GiB) DDR4-2666
Geforce GTX 760 2 GiB
LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i with 4x WD Red 1 TB in RAID 10

I only upgrade components when they no longer do what I want the way I want them, so if you count the case or the optical drives it's *technically* a 10+ y.o. PC 🤣

That last line was added to machine before the last major rebuild (which was the MB & CPU), when I got two hard drive failures within one year followed by a load of OS config/setup shenanigans when I tried using "chipset RAID" with a pair of drives. At this point I pretty much refuse to have a single boot device on general principle.

Asus P8Z77-I Deluxe
Intel i7 3770
16GB (2x8GB) DDR3-1600
GeForce GTX 960 4GB (Asus STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5)
512GB Samsung 850 Pro SSD

This was originally built to run Windows XP (hence the older generation & older GPU - they were the last of their kind to natively support XP), although i've since converted it to run as my main PC on Windows 10.

These are the specifications of the PC I use on a daily basis:
Motherboard: Asus H81M-C
CPU: Intel Core i5 4460
RAM: 16GB DDR3-1600
GPU: Asus Radeon R7 240 4GB
Sound Card: Sweex 5.1 CMI8738
SSD: Adata SU650 120GB
HDD: Seagate Barracuda ST2000DM008 2TB

I'm running Windows 7 because it's the most Windows XP-ish OS that is supported nowadays. I really miss Windows XP and it was a real pain to move on after it's death. After the end of Windows 7's extended support in 2020 I'm planning to jump to Lubuntu, because to me that is a better Windows than Windows 10. I don't think any OS is ever going to top Windows XP's usability and stability.

I recently did upgrade my main PC to current config, and I hope, that I will live with it for some time (maybe GPU or SSD upgrade in future, but nothing major):

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z270X-Gaming K5
CPU: Intel Core i7 6700K @ 4.4GHz
RAM: 16GB DDR4-3000
GPU: MSI Radeon RX 470 4GB @ RX 570 (BIOS modded)
Sound Card: SB X-Fi Fatal1ty
SSD: Intel 530 180GB MLC
HDD: WD Black Mobile 1TB 7200rpm
OS: Windows 10 Pro

I also have spare laptop, even though I'm not using in too much.
Model: Lenovo ThinkPad T430
CPU: Intel Core i5 3320M
RAM: 12GB DDR3-1600
GPU: Intel HD Graphics 4000
SSD: ADATA SU650 120GB TLC
OS: Windows XP Pro + Windows 7 Ultimate

My everyday daily driver PC is (and I typed this on it, 🤣):

Motherboard: MSI 970a-g43
CPU: AMD FX8350 8-core 4.0 GHz
RAM: 16GB DDR3-1600 (1x Micron Technology "Crucial" 8GB, 2x SK hynix 4GB)
GPU: EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (unknown RAM)
HDD: Western Digital WD Blue 1TB
OS: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit

I also have my retro battle station at my desk:
Compaq Presario 425 (monitor + computer all in one, awesome thing)
Intel 486DX2 50 MHz
8MB RAM
Sound Blaster Vibra 16S
214MB Seagate HDD
Windows 3.1/DOS 6.22

I guess it counts as an everyday computer as well 🤣

My daily driver is the following:

MB: Asrock H110M-HDV R3.0
CPU: Intel i3 6100
RAM: 1x Kingston 8GB stick 2133MHz
SSD: Kingston UV400 120GB
HDD: WD Black 1TB
ODD: some cheap LG (a necessity for older stuff as we all know here 😀 )
PSU: FSP 350W (apparently 80+)
Case: some cheap noname M-ATX

Still running Windows 7 x64 and is used for everyday tasks. Got the clutter on this one so the actual gaming rig has less stuff hogging it down though I'm planning to leave it for the parents after I move out. 🤣

NZXT H500 Black ATX case
Seasonic M12II 620W modular power supply
Intel Core i7 9700K 3.6GHz 8 core processor
Scythe Kotetsu cooler (replaced by be quiet! Shadow Rock 2)
MSI Z390-A PRO ATX motherboard
G.SKILL 2x16GB DDR4 3200 RAM
MSI branded NVIDIA GeForce GTX1060 6GB PCIe video card
Western Digital Black 500GB NVMe M.2 SSD
Seagate ST2000DM001 2TB 7200RPM hard drive
Windows 10 Pro 64

2013 iMac 21" with 256GB SSD + 1TB HDD, 8GB RAM. Absolutely unimpressive, but it keeps running and running... Also since I don't game it is fast enough. 😉

But wondering if my next machine will be some self-assembled Linux PC again. Macs have become too expensive and un-upgradable.