Which RAM sticks do I need?

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by Swerve, Apr 25, 2008.

  1. Swerve

    Swerve OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,175
    Likes Received:
    3
    I was given an old PC the other day, and it's complete apart from an NIC card and the RAM.

    The sticker on the front says it's an Intel P3, there is no AGP slot on the mobo, just 3 x PCI and a small (approx 1.25" across) brown slot.

    I just tried inserting one of the 512 sticks I have in off my main desktop, and whilst the stick was the correct length, my stick only had one 'gap' along where all the pins are, whilst this boxes slots need sticks with 2 'gaps' along where the RAM sticks/pins go in.

    Any ideas?

    Thanks!
     
  2. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's gonna be SDRAM, which is very inexpensive nowadays. What I can't tell you is whether it's PC66, PC100, or PC133 speed. You'll have to do a search online for the motherboard model to see what it supports.

    EDIT: That small brown slot is an AMR slot, which was intended for use with modems and NIC cards. I think there may be a grand total of ten AMR cards ever manufactured, though -- not ten models, ten actual cards. It's worthless, don't bother trying to use it.
     
  3. Swerve

    Swerve OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,175
    Likes Received:
    3
    Thanks for the help. I picked up 2 x 128mb sticks today, and the ethernet card.

    It's a 667mhz PIII. Gnome seems to slow it down somewhat, but it's operational. Just installing 8.04 server ed. now.
     
  4. bowrofl

    bowrofl New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,555
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto, Canadia
    i hear about people running Ubuntu (or any linux distro) on older PCs to get life out of them. Does Linux run faster on slower PCs than XP would?
     
  5. jdw

    jdw New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    4,429
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ND

    :o

    That's half of why I"m excited to get the Q6600 based build done - so I can swap desktops (my current one) with my folks and go ubuntu on it. P3 196Mb, 8G HDD...

    Mad baller yo.

    On a side note, seems that the new Ubuntu is hot shit.
     
  6. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Much faster. The boot time sucks, but that's just part of using Linux.

    Anyway, you should try Kubuntu, or at least install the "kubuntu-desktop" package using the Synaptic Package Manager. I much prefer KDE to Gnome, even if it's bulkier. I'm running Kubuntu right now on a 700MHz P3 laptop with...I want to say 512MB of RAM, but it could be less. Anyway, it works fine, and it has a typical KDE polished feel to it.
     
  7. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Every new version of Ubuntu is hot shit. It's amazing what can be done when the sole purpose of your company is to take a stable product and make it user-friendly. I love Canonical, I even donated $137 (the cost of a WinXP OEM license) to them at one point.
     
  8. aim2kill

    aim2kill New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    Messages:
    631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    deployed.
    im hoping for a ubuntu build when i return home. i hate being gone, so many things i want to do and cant..... aww
     
  9. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    :ugh: the mis-information is horrible. Linux doesn't run any faster than a properly-optimized windows install of similar generation.
     
  10. Peyomp

    Peyomp New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,017
    Likes Received:
    0
    What does 'run faster' even mean? If he means 'A usable GUI that isn't shit slow' then he's right, and you're wrong.
     
  11. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fine, you're right, you can optimize Windows to run as fast as Ubuntu, but then you can optimize Slackware or Gentoo to whip the shit out of Windows. So let's talk stock vs. stock. Ubuntu is the closest to Windows right now in terms of noob usability, so we'll use it to compare against, and it's about on par with Windows XP graphically. Ubuntu it definitely runs faster out-of-the-box than Windows XP does; Windows does boot faster, though.
     
  12. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    negative ghostrider. Depending on the age of the machine, windows 2000 or windows xp with the eye-candy turned off will probably end up being faster.
     
  13. P07r0457

    P07r0457 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    28,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    I don't think you can call ubuntu faster than say, windows 2000.
     

Share This Page