Upgrading a PC?

There are three main schools of thought regarding upgrades:

Faster is always better
The application is everything
If it ain't broke, don't fix it

Older Computers

Most people we talk to seem to be primarily focused on the speed issue -- usually, because their computers have fallen far enough behind the technological curve that they are indeed, much slower than current models. The good news is that a speed boost type of upgrade is generally very easy to implement, results in little if any incompatibility, and doesn't cost much. The bad news is that, for many users, the speed boosts aren't dramatic. A 200 megahertz Pentium with MMX, for example, isn't twice as fast as a 100 MHz model -- it is more like 40 or 50 percent faster, on average -- and these clock speed increases yield even less benefit as computers get faster.

For example, Intel's benchmarks (and, you can be sure they are picking the most favorable possible sets of tests) show that you will only get a speed gain of 53% to 75% from an OverDrive CPU that is supposedly "twice as fast," e.g., when upgrading a 90MHz Pentium to an MMX Overdrive at 180 MHz, or a Pentium 120 to 233 MHz chip. To go faster than this clock speed, Pentium I owners have to make some tough decisions: either upgrade the motherboard of the system (not always possible) or go to the AMD K6 family of chips, which may require voltages your motherboard can't supply and may thus require a motherboard upgrade anyway.

Even with such an upgrade, the processor MHz rating doesn't completely define the system's performance. Your hard drive, graphics card, system memory, bus speed and several other factors all contribute to overall system performance. In short, don't expect your system's performance to double just because you drop in a chip that's "twice as fast." Other bottlenecks (primarily related to the bus speed) hinder the performance potential of this upgrade and, indeed, of current PC architectures in general.

Those in the "application is everything" camp tend to understand that the fastest computer or most advanced operating system in the world is of no use unless it addresses your needs. These people (a group in which we like to count ourselves) take a more holistic view of computers, understanding that a productivity gain can often be better accomplished by working smarter, not just faster. Thus, an upgrade to a more recent version of one's chosen productivity applications and operating system can yield benefits that go far beyond mere clock speed enhancements.

The good news is that today's software is easier and more powerful than ever before and software upgrades are available to registered owners of previous versions at substantial discounts over the cost of the original package. The bad news is that "upgrades" usually require more RAM and/or disk space and may cause some degree of incompatibility with your existing data. It is prudent to keep your old version handy, just in case. At the time of its release, most Windows 3.1 users found Windows 95 a worthwhile upgrade. It is our experience that Windows 95 is still the best operating system choice for the vast majority of PC users with 120 MHz or slower computers, with a few caveats: because the retail version of Windows 95 (released in 1995) did not support Universal Serial Bus ports, FAT32 large hard drives or some recent graphics cards, it makes a poor choice if your system has subsequently been updated with any of these components. Windows 95B (released in 1996) addressed these issues, as did subsequent Windows releases.

Conversely, Windows Me, Windows 2000 or Windows XP all make poor choices for users with slower PCs. For starters, Windows Me -- the least demanding of the bunch -- won't install at all on a system slower than 150 MHz (unless you use the tip described on our WinMe Tips page) and, because it lacks support for real-mode DOS, avid gameplayers with a large collection of DOS-based games are no longer able to boot their hard drive back to a "no Windows" DOS prompt or configure their hard disk to dual-boot DOS and Win95 for 100% compatibility. (Setting up a DOS/Windows 3.1 PC to dual boot Win95 or Win98, is easy -- see our step-by-step instructions on installing and configuring Win95 here.)

Windows 98, therefore, sits in the middle: it's an okay choice for those who have a machine faster than 150 MHz, and it makes more sense than Windows Me if you need real-mode DOS compatibility. For many users, Windows 98 Second Edition is a good compromise, delivering compatibility with the widest array of PC hardware and software titles, and decent performance.

For those with a 500 MHz CPU or faster, Windows XP is the best choice. It has the ultra-handy System Restore feature that helps you back out of problems with ease, and its stability is unsurpassed in the Windows world. We continue to find the networking and security limitations of the Home Edition worrisome; the Pro edition is a better choice for those with multiple computers.

Don't Break It

The third category of users stoutly resist change, sometimes for fear of breaking a system that works, sometimes because the new version offers few compelling new features -- in other words, little benefit. Rather than decry such actions, we applaud those able to resist the marketing machines of Microsoft, Intel, et al, who are constantly reminding us that our investments are yesterday's news. However, we encourage these people -- and other users -- to pursue at least one upgrade-related activity. Please take the time and make the intellectual investment to upgrade your skills periodically. More than anything else, today's -- or even yesterday's -- systems and software almost always have the potential to make a task more efficient, if we just knew the tricks and shortcuts.

Similarly, the "just say no" crowd should not shirk their duty to keep their faithful workhorses in top form. We like to think of computers as we do our cars: a regular tune up can keep the system in better working order, and increase overall satisfaction and reliability. And, another way to keep "old faithful" in working order is to remember the human part of the equation: consider upgrading the chair you sit in, the keyboard you type on, and the desk you work at. Ergonomics are an important, but often overlooked part of the computer environment.

The Mac Alternative

We often hear Mac owners defensively claiming that their systems need fewer upgrades or otherwise fare better over the long term. Like most claims, this one contains a grain of truth, but in many ways it is based on history, not reality. And, considering that a top of the line 1990-era Mac IIfx cost about $10,000 (without a monitor or even a keyboard!), you had better hope these machines had a bit a staying power. Unfortunately, anyone who bought one of these machines now finds that:

It used a completely different kind of RAM than is used in current machines.
It no longer runs the latest version of the Mac OS.
The PCI expansion cards available for current Macs are incompatible with the NuBus slots it used.
It was about 10 times as slow as the current low-end Mac.
There are no motherboard upgrades available.

And, if we consider that all of these points except the last one was also true for first-generation (Power PC 601) Power Macs, second-generation (PPC 603 and 603e) PowerMacs and Mac clones, third-generation (PPC 604) Macs, and virtually every other Mac not currently being sold by Apple, the myth of Mac longevity starts to fall apart. However, Macs have tended to fare well in customer satisfaction surveys. Apple is often rated highly in overall satisfaction ratings (an astonishing 91% during the company's darkest days in 1997) when compared to other companies. Also highly rated in most surveys are Dell, Gateway, IBM, HP, and a handful of other major manufacturers. With that said, most computers from Dell, HP, Compaq and other big companies are almost always based on proprietary case and motherboard designs that are poor choice for anyone hoping for future upgrade flexibility.

In overall Price/Performance ratings, Apple frequently tops the list, with very good to excellent ratings in all categories.

Of course, you can still spend several thousand dollars for a wicked-fast Mac (or PC), and expect to get several years of useful life, but for many people, it might be better to buy a $3000 computer (or even one for $1000, if your budget demands it) and not expect it to last as long. And, despite what the sellers of $5,000 computers might tell you, two or three grand buys a lot of computer these days.

Why spend more? For some, it's the raw performance: more processing power, better graphics, a bigger and better monitor, and other fancy options all add up.

For some, it is the allure of deluxe quality many of these top-of-the-line models possess. (Apple's G4 Cube is a prime example.) After all, not everyone drives a Ford Escort, do they? In fact, we have found that "last year's model" of a premium brand's top-of-the-line computer is an excellent investment for those seeking a reliable machine in the under-$2000 price range. You can, for example, get a "uniprocessor" Apple G4 Tower for around this price, or a very nice PC rig with, say, a 4x CD burner instead of an 8x model, or a slightly less powerful graphics card. Quality of "top of the line" models tends to be high, all the bugs have been worked out, and there are usually lots of options and accessories at discounted prices. Don't buy too far behind the curve, however, or you'll have difficulty in obtaining parts and upgrades. Conversely, you can tell the pioneers -- they're the ones with arrows in their backs. Early adopters almost always pay too much and occasionally get stuck with a dead-end product. Our general rule is: don't buy version 1.0 of anything.

One has to maintain a sane perspective: is the machine performing a useful task? Is it meeting our needs? Is additional investment worthwhile? What's the payoff?

Generation Ex

So, can you still use a ten-year-old PC or Mac? Sure, if you're happy running 10 year old software. This argument also applies to the most ancient Atari, Amiga or Apple II computers. All remnants of bygone eras, many are still in use by "old timers" -- and not just for nostalgia's sake. In fact, a low-end machine running DOS or other character-based interface is, relatively speaking, much faster at screen updates and overall responsiveness than any machine running a graphical user interface. Of course, you have to put up with the fact that it's virtually impossible to find software in locations other than the bottom of the bargain bin at the used computer stores, and the arcane and often unpleasant aspects of DOS or, heaven forbid, Commodore BASIC, with its bizarre L-shift-O "$",8 syntax just to view a disk directory.

Reality: a Pentium 120 is, for most users, enough computer for the vast majority of tasks - especially when one adds the peripherals like a printer and modem that extend the functionality of the system. And, when that Pentium's not powerful enough anymore, you can upgrade it to a Pentium 233 or AMD K6 chip with MMX for under $100. Remember, an upgrade is like a wheel. It needs to be balanced in order to deliver the best performance. A fast CPU isn't the only part that matters. For most users, adding RAM, a second hard disk, and upgrading the operating system and/or applications, is the best plan in an overall system upgrade strategy.

Upgrade Issues:

Is it better to sell (or keep) the old machine and buy a new one, or upgrade components of the old model?
In the latter case, what components can you keep?

Here are some typical PC system configurations and our recommendations.

If you have:	You might want to upgrade to:	Approximate cost (CDN$)	Benefit:
1x or 2x CD-ROM	8x or better. Today's fastest CD-ROM drives are rated around 52X. You might also want to consider a DVD-ROM, CD-RW rewriter or DVD/CD-RW "combo" drive	$50 (CD-ROM) $80+ (DVD-ROM) $120 (CD-RW) $175+ combo drive	(CD-ROM) Smoother gameplay, faster loading of CD titles. (DVD-ROM) Play* DVD movies. (CD-RW) Low cost-per-megabyte storage; wide compatibility with other PCs and audio CD players.
16MB or less RAM	64MB or more (Most dealers will install it for you.) We recommend 32 MB for Win95; 64MB for Windows 98, Me, 96MB for Windows Me or NT and 128MB or more for Windows 2000, XP or the Mac.	$1 per megabyte	Better overall performance, especially when running multiple applications.
A nearly full hard drive	A second hard drive or removable media storage device. We recommend keeping at least 10% of the space free on your hard drive.	Hard drives cost about $5-10 per gigabyte. Removable storage drives usually work out to about 10-20 cents per megabyte.	Breathing room and backups.
A 486 or earlier model of PC	A new motherboard and Intel or AMD processor.	$300 or more, depending on speed and features. At this writing, a 533 MHz processor costs about C$130.	Faster overall performance, compatibility with the newest expansion options, plug-and-play, etc.
A slow video card, or one supporting only 256 colors or less	An accelerated video card with 3D graphics acceleration and at least 16MB of video RAM. *We recommend a card with DirectX 3D and DVD playback capabilities.	$70 - $300.	Faster screen redraws, better depiction of graphics, higher resolutions, less screen flicker.
A sound card without "wavetable" audio.	A Soundblaster Live Value Edition or better card. We recommend checking compatibility with games, etc.	$60. Other brands (PCI or ISA) are also available at various prices.	Better MIDI and game music playback; improved compatibility with entertainment and audio apps.
A BIOS (Basic Input/Output System) incompatible with a particular upgrade, usually a new CPU.	The latest BIOS version, usually freely available (and user installable) from the motherboard manufacturer's website.	N/A	Improved handling of newer CPU models, Y2K issues, recent graphics cards, shut down issues, etc.
A poor-quality monitor, especially those lacking digital controls.	A 17" or better monitor with a .26 dot pitch or better and a high-quality display.	15" = $200+ 17" = $400+ 19" = $600+	Crisper graphics, less eyestrain, more accurate color.
A black-and-white printer, dot matrix, inkjet or laser.	A color printer. (an inkjet model is the best choice for most users; consult your dealer to determine the most appropriate choice for your application.)	$100 up. We recommend considering consumable costs in your calculations.	Black and white or color printouts, better quality printed images.
33.6K or slower modem	56Kbps modem or, even better, consider switching to a high-speed Cable or ADSL internet account. Check with your local cable company and phone company to determine the standards supported. If you use a modem, we recommend a "hardware" modem for maximum performance and compatibility.	$25 up, plus monthly ISP fees.	Faster Internet or online access.
Interest in graphics	A color scanner or digital camera. We recommend a flatbed scanner with a USB interface if your operating system supports it.	$100 up.	Capture and edit color images; scanner can also turn printed pages into editable text.
A sore "mouse hand"	Graphics tablet, trackball or other comfortable pointing device -- see your dealer -- and/or your doctor.	$50 up	Greater comfort.
A Pentium II or Celeron-based PC with a 266 MHz or slower CPU.	A faster processor. See your dealer or the links below for upgrade options.	$100 up.	Improved performance, improved compatibility with current games and apps.

For further reading:

For more info, see our feature on Buying and Upgrading PCs.
Also, see the CPU and motherboard sections at www.pcbuyersguide.com/hardware

IT Library

The Techno Zone

User Account

Upgrading a PC?

Post new comment

More like this . . .

How many search commands do you have in your PC?

Linux News

A Mac OS X Overview

Editorial: MS World Domination Scorecard

Windows Server 2003

Alternative GUIs for Windows XP

Codename: Whistler