SOLVED How much would Windows 7 help me?

[MikeSD]

I guess first I should find out if I can even install it, on my system. I assume I can but won't want to start, until I do a little research.

My Computer:
1) I have a Gatewood GM5424 (about 4 years old)
2) It's based on the Intel E6400 chipset, dual core, 2.13GHz
3) I have Vista Ultimate, SP1 installed (32bit)
4) I have 2G of RAM (8G possible with this OS)
5) 1 internal 400GB Hard Drive
6) 1 internal 1TB Hard Drive for data and backup
7) Both drives are NTFS file systems

Questions:
I plan to do a clean install. This will NOT be an upgrade. I am prepared to reinstall and reregister all my existing applications. My questions are only concerned with compatibility and performance.

1) Will Windows 7, 64bit install ok on this computer? The computer seems to meet the Windows 7 requirements.

2) Will the Windows 7 OS (64 bit) perform better, than Vista (32 bit), on a system with these resources?

3) Is there any difference in driver compatibility (or availability) on the 64 bit OS versus the 32 bit OS? This is relative to what might be in my system. I haven't added anything from the original GM5424. I know there could be compatibility on some other systems.

4) Is there any reason to stay with Vista Ultimate (32bit) over the Windows 7? What would that be?

5) I don't plan to create any special partitions nor will I have it dual boot. It will be a clean install to the 400G drive. Will both drives be affected by the install? Will I lose anything on the 1TB drive (it's data only)? That is, will the file system be changed or anything like that, that would render it erased?

Thanks,
Mike

 

[TrainableMan]

Download and run the w7 Upgrade Advisor. Nearly every machine that can run Vista can also run W7 but your machine has to have a 64-bit capable processor to run 64-bit so run the advisor. Also if you have very old 16-bit apps, like for example the old game ski.exe, it will not run in native 64-bit (32-bit OS runs 16 & 32-bit apps, 64-bit run 32 and 64-bit apps).

Unless you feel you need some features of W7 such as AeroGlass then there is very little reason to upgrade; it's cheaper to wait till your next hardware upgrade. I think it's funny that the first feature they list is homegroups which IMO stinks because they didn't make it backwards compatible, I still use workgroups.

Yes 64-bit drivers are different and if they are not available for your old hardware, such as printers, then you have to buy new or go with the 32-bit OS. Again the upgrade advisor may tell you about incompatible hardware if you turn it all on for the scan.

Will it perform better or faster than Vista? Not likely.

You must be careful to specify the install to the 400GB drive or better yet disconnect the 1TB while you install so you can't possibly make a mistake. If you install to the 400GB then the 1TB won't be touched.

 

[MikeSD]

Thanks, while waiting for someone to reply, I did some more research and found the W7 Upgrade Advisor and it said I can upgrade to Version 7. It also pointed out potential problem with existing software. There were only two that were "incompatible" and I don't use them anyway.

I bought some DDR2 RAM today, so I'll be upgrading the RAM first. I have 4 PC-6400 RAMs so I think I can only add 2 of them to the system. I'll test the doubling of RAM with Vista (4G), before I go to the bother with Windows 7 (there I may upgrade to 8G). There really only 2 reasons I'm considering upgrading.

1) I have a quad core, Windows 7 computer at work.
2) Upgrading to 64bit Windows 7 will force me to start with a clean system.

I have spent the entire day, rounding up all my source install files, for reinstalling my software. AND verifying I have the registration keys for all of it. Now, I'm in the process of backing up my 1T drive to my external drive. Never considered just removing the drive. Duh! Good idea.

Thanks,

PS: I'm a bit confused about the DDR2 RAMs I got (Crucial). The crucial web site said something about only being able to put 4G max RAM, if I use the 6400 RAMS, but their suggestion was to add 2 6400 RAMS, in addition to my existing 2G (1+1), making 6G. Very confusing that they say 4G max, using 6400, unless they mean 4G (of 6400 RAM). Wording is not clear.

Then some people get all wrapped around the axel, about changing the timing for this computer, while others say just use what the RAMS come with. So there are mixed signals on that. I'm going to just drop them in and see how it goes.

Mike

 

[MikeSD]

The other thing I wonder about

If I go with the 64 bit, I will have to boot from the DVR. With the 32bit direct upgrade, Vista has to be running, and the upgrade program can verify the vality of the "upgrade". With booting directly from DVD, for the 64bit, will the program be able to verify the validity of the "upgrade", since Vista won't be running? And it will immediately begin with a clean dirk. I ask this, because I don't think I have the original Windows install DVD. At best I might have had a recovery CD but don't know if I can even find that. I don't want any destruction to my existing OS, to only find out I can't qualify for the "upgrade". I mean, I do qualify but don't know if a boot DVR can check that validity.

Can anyone answer that?

 

[TrainableMan]

Your 32-bit Vista will only see about 3.25GB of RAM no matter how much your BIOS sees. If you switched to Vista 64-bit or W7 64 that would see any extra above the 3.25 mark.

From what I see of your computer specs it says you have 4 DDR2 DIMM slots with an 8GB max; this quite probably means the most you can put in one slot is a 2GB DIMM and it may need to be in pairs (newer boards don't require pairs but I'm guessing yours would prefer or even require it). It also says you started with 2x 1GB DIMMs. So you should get 2x 2GB DDR2 DIMMs. If you get 2x then those 4GB plus your original 2 give you 6GB which is great for most people unless you are doing heavy cadcam or top-of-the-line games (which your CPU probably couldn't handle anyway). You Could buy 4x 2GB DIMMs but then you must remove the 2x 1GB originals and with the 4x 2GB you will hit your max of 8GB ... twice the money for little to no improvement.

No matter what you install you boot to the DVD and it can detect Vista on the harddrive even though it isn't booted from it. The tougher one is if you format the Vista drive first, then you may have to do a double install but still not that hard, you simply install twice.

 

[MikeSD]

I just installed 2 of the 2G PC-6400 RAMS, giving me 6G. But exactly as you say, the system only recognizes 3.25 RAM. It sees the 6G but only makes available 3.25.

I used PassMark Performance Test SW and was amazed how suckie my computer is. At least in 3D Graphics. I downloaded a baseline results for the same CPU and found I was nearly the same as the baseline, with slight improvement in the RAM areas, since I had 3.5G and the baseline was 2G.

But on 3D graphics is was outperformed anwhere from 400% to 1500%. I have the nVIDIA 7300LE (64MB RAM) and the baseline had the nVIDIA 8300 (250MB RAM). Guess I could upgrade the graphics processor, or just add more memory. It can take up to 250MB. On the "simple" 3D graphics, my computer scored 25. The baseline scored 1309. 2D was on par with the baeline results.

It looks like the only upgrade route might be to 64 bit Version 7, which would allow me to have 8G RAM. I bought 4 of the PC-6400 RAMS, so I will have a full set.

Just for grins, I'm going to install the Passmark program on my work computer on Monday and give it a whirl. It's a quad core, 64 bit, Version 7, gaming computer. That should be interesting.

 

[Nibiru2012]

I would highly recommend that regarding your RAM sticks that you use two of the same brand and series and timings. Your system is upgradeable to a total of 8 GB of RAM. (4 DIMM slots for a total of 8 GB of RAM).

If the Crucial RAM you purchased is a matched set, even if its only 4 GB, then use it solely and don't mix in any other RAM, especially if it's another brand and especially if the timings are different; ie, 8-8-8-24 vs 8-9-8-27 and such or if the RAM frequencies are are different such as 1066MHz versus 1333MHz.

IF YOU MIX your RAM sticks the motherboard will automatically default ALL RAM settings to the lowest ones.

RAM may be very easy to configure or it can cause a lot of issues if a user makes careless assumptions about it. Too much advice is given out to users about RAM without letting them know the subtle nuances of RAM frequencies, timings, series and manufacturers.

I hope it all works out well for you. Keep us posted!

BTW, Welcome to the Windows Seven Forums website! :ciao:

 

[TrainableMan]

Nibs he did buy 4 sticks but his old Gateway is almost the same as mine.

I don't have settings in the BIOS for RAM timings; I just put them in in pairs with the slowest pair in Slot 0/1 and they all run at that speed.

 

[MikeSD]

Nibs he did buy 4 sticks but his old Gateway is almost the same as mine.

I don't have settings in the BIOS for RAM timings; I just put them in in pairs with the slowest pair in Slot 0/1 and they all run at that speed.

This is to both posters.

I did buy 4 identical Curcial RAM sticks. I just put the first pair in with the 1G sticks, because that was the only way I could max the system under Vista. I mad ZERO changes to the bios.

Then, after installing Windows 7, which I did today. It may have defaulted to the 1G speed. I'll have to check that I guess. But then, I turned off the system, and put all 4 of the same 2G into each slot and rebooted. Don't know if this fixed the bios or left it as it originally was. Again, I made no changes to the bios. I wouldn't know what to change anyway.

After this was running, I swapped out my 7300LE )64G RAM) and installed a EVGA GeForce 540Ti, which has 2G RAM and uses GDR5 ram, I believe. My 3D graphics went from 25fps to 2000fps and the graphics was very smooth and very nice. It went from looking at graphics that resembled a Mickey Mouse cartoon ;-) to watching something like Avatar.

My overall computer rating went from about 289 to 871 and I think I could squeeze more out of it. Some who have this process or score as high as 1600. But I didn't want to dump a bunch more money into a better graphics card, seeing as how I'm not a gamer anyway.

One thing I overlooked was the power supply requirement on the 540TI. It claims to need 400W, with 24A on the 12V line. Mine is 300W, with only 18A on 12V. Guess a new power supply is in order.

It's a great learning experience. Everything went very well... I think. Need to see if there is any tweaking of what I have, that can squeeze more power out of the system, as it is now. That RAM made a huge difference is speed of launching my programs and booting. It boots fast now. I don't really know if this is a Windows 7 thing or a RAM thing. But it's fast now.

Thanks,
Mike

 

[Nibiru2012]

Usually increasing and/or upgrading RAM will significantly increase your speeds.

You're definitely underpowered, probably the stock PSU in there for sure. I recommend you get at least a 450-500 watt Bronze Certified PSU. The modular ones are best in that you don't have any extra cables to deal with, but that's your choice.

I recommend either Corsair, SeaSonic, Antec or ThermalTake, they're all very good PSUs.

 

[MikeSD]

I'm looking at an Antec 500W power supply BP500U Basiq. But even at 500W, it's still not technically meeting the requirement, unless I'm missing something.

The 550Ti says 400W with 24A on the 12V. But it only mentions 1 line. Most of these supplies have multiple 12V power lines. I'm assuming that this requirement is for a supply of that power and not directly sucking 24A, otherwise it would have to be even larger.

So, what I'm wondering is would a 500W supply, that has multiple 12V power rails of 18A each, probably work. It's kind of hard finding a PS with 12V and 24A, unless I get up to 600W+ supplies.

What do you think? 500W, 12V1 = 18A, 12V2 = 18A. Think this would work?

This is the PS I'm looking at: http://www.antec.com/Believe_it/product.php?id=Njk=

PS: I wonder where you draw the line on upgrades.

 

[MikeSD]

Problem solved but I went for overkill.

The Antec would have worked well, but I don't know why exactly but I bought a 700W supply. Definitely an overkill, for what I was looking to do.

 

[TrainableMan]

Well now you have power for when you decide to upgrade your MOBO & run dual top-end graphics cards.

 

[MikeSD]

So that brings up another question. I have seen people talk about dual graphics cards.

1) Can any system, take any combination of dual graphics card?
2) Are only some graphics cards capable of dual graphics cards?
3) Does a dual graphics card require a different main motherboard CPU?
4) Do dual graphics cards require special software?

These questions are someting I wonder about for a future purchase.

 

[Nibiru2012]

To answer your questions regarding dual graphics cards:

1. Not just any system. The motherboard must have a minimum of two PCI-E graphic card slots. Usually one is at 16X speed while the other is an 8X speed. Remember both graphics cards need to be the same make and model and GPU chip to function properly. Inspect the internals of your system. Firstly, check that there is sufficient room in your PC to house a second card and ensure that the second PCI Express x16 slot isn't obstructed by cables or other hardware. Graphics cards can be quite lengthy and those that are fitted with large heatsinks can take up two expansion slots.

2. Nearly all middle to high-end graphics cards have Crossfire (AMD cards) or SLI (Nvidia cards) capabilities. It's a fact that SLI and Crossfire are identical in concept, but in practice they do differ from one another. Because of the technologies involved, it isn't possible to mix-and-match graphics cards from the two, so you can't pair a ATI graphics card and a Nvidia graphics card together, nor can you run two Nvidia cards on a ATI Crossfire compatible motherboard. So, it's important to bear a few things in mind when considering making the jump to a dual graphics card system.

3. Yes... see answer to question one. Most stock OEM made desktop computers don't have dual graphics card capabilities. Some do however.

4. All dual card setups need a connection bridge, usually just a simple flexible printed circuit flat ribbon with female connections on both ends. The name of the dual-video-card "bridge" that your video cards use will depend on the manufacturer. Once you know the name of the bridge, you can look for that compatibility in motherboard descriptions and select the right one.

Regarding the power rails of the PSU, most users now prefer a PSU with a Single Rail configuration on the PSU. The multiple rail setups have fallen out of favor and are limited by the capacity of the individual power rails in the PSU, so using a Single Rail setup is much more common now.

Here is some good info regarding Single Rail vs dual or multiple-rail power supplies: http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=548862