• Tag Archives AMD

  • Digital Archaeology: Dell Inspiron 1501

    Posted on by Azrael Comment

    The Dell Inspiron 1501 was released in 2006 as a budget friendly laptop. Part of what determines whether or not a laptop is low end or high end isn’t just the specific components that are used but the timing of its release. For instance, the Athlon 64 was a high-end processor when released. However, the mobile version, the Turion 64, was somewhat late to the game. In particular, by the time it was included in this laptop, there were better things on the market. The Core 2 Duo was released the same year as this laptop.

    While the CPU may be a matter of timing, the graphics solution in this laptop was always low end. The Mobility Radeon Xpress X200 was basically the ATI’s answer to Intel’s integrated motherboard video solutions. It was perhaps a little better but not enough to make a difference. Certainly not good enough to play then modern games very well.

    Specs of this laptop include:

    • CPU: AMD Turion 64 MK-36 @ 2 GHz
    • RAM: 3 GB DDR2
    • Video: Mobility Radeon Xpress X200
    • Screen: 1280×800

    For more complete stats, see the output of HardInfo here.

    I’m not sure what the stock memory configuration was. Maybe 1 GB. The manual states that the maximum RAM configuration is 2 GB but clearly that isn’t true. This laptop has 3 GB and I suspect 4 GB would probably work. That’s plenty to run Linux though for a Microsoft OS I probably wouldn’t try to go past Windows 7 though I’m sure Windows 8 would work and at least early builds of Windows 10 as well. It shipped with Windows XP and was labeled as “Vista Compatible”.

    The screen is a reasonable 1280×800 which is a nice step up from what would have been a common 1024×768. For a low-end laptop the somewhat higher resolution is a nice feature.

    The biggest limitation of this laptop for modern usage is the fact that it is single core and that the memory is limited to 4 GB. Still usable for light tasks but you definitely don’t want to start opening a lot of tabs in a browser. However, the fact that it has a 64-bit CPU means that it will probably work with updated Linux versions for years to come.

    As a retro machine, it is going to be somewhat disappointing for games because of the lousy video chip. No doubt you can play games that are quite a bit older than when this laptop was released but contemporary games would, at least in large part, be out of its reach. Otherwise, I’m sure Windows XP would be lighting fast, especially for applications that don’t do a lot of multitasking (the CPU being single core).

    Like all the other hardware I run, both old and new, I have this one crunching away on various BOINC projects when it is running. So far it has done work for Asteroids@home, Universe@home, Einstein@home, Rosetta@home and World Community Grid. You can also check out how it is doing overall at FreeDC.

    The images above were taken from the Dell Inspiron 1501 Owner’s Manual.


    📂This entry was posted in Computer Arcana 📎and tagged

  • Digital Archaeology: Sony Vaio PCG-FXA49

    Posted on by Azrael Comment

    It seems that all laptop makers like to use confusing model numbers. Sony seems to have been no different. This particular model is the Vaio PCG-FXA49. If there is anything to be derived from those seemingly random numbers and letters then I don’t know what it is. Except that I’m pretty sure every Vaio notebook ever made started with ‘PCG’.

    Over the years Vaio notebooks ranged from bulky and thick to thin like most others. This one is somewhere in the middle but tends more towards the bulkier side. But somehow even the bulky models seem futuristic. Sony was always pretty good at that aesthetic. However, the hardware inside was always pretty middle of the road at best and I also think their notebooks and computers in general tended to be overpriced.

    The PCG-FXA49 features:

    • CPU: 1200 MHz Mobile Athlon 4
    • Memory: 512MB PC100 SDRAM
    • Video: ATI Rage Mobility P/M with 8MB (AGP 2X)
    • Hard Drive: Hitachi DK23CA-30 (ATA-100, 30GB, 4200RPM, 2MB Cache)
    • Optical Drive: Matsushita UJDA720 DVD/CDRW

    While it has ethernet, one important thing it is missing is Wi-Fi. Fortunately, there are two cardbus slots so it is easy to add a wi-fi card.

    Go here for more complete specs as reported by HWiNFO.

    Screen shot

    The CPU is somewhat interesting and I have never used a computer with this particular model. The Mobile Athlon 4 turns out to have been in reality the first Athlon XP. It has the same Palomino core as the first desktop Athlon XPs. I think they went with the “Mobile Athlon 4” name to make it obvious that it was competing with the Pentium 4M (the mobile Pentium 4 variant). When AMD went to the next iteration with the Thoroughbred core, they renamed their mobile processor to the Mobile Athlon XP-M.


    Mobile Athlon 4 1200 CPU

    Being one of the first Athlon XP processors, this one is slower than any desktop variant at only 1200 MHz. It also has a slower bus speed than any desktop variant at 200 MHz whereas the desktop versions started at 266 MHz. This particular laptop also uses SDRAM and most desktop Athlon XPs would have used DDR (though there were some motherboards that could take regular SDRAM as well). However, these compromises helped lower the power requirements which is useful for laptops.


    Block diagram from service manual

    In terms of speed, the Mobile Athlon 4 probably fell somewhere between the Pentium III-M and the Pentium 4M. However, because the Mobile Athlon 4 was a cheaper chip, it was usually packaged with other cheaper components so as a whole, Mobile Athlon 4 based laptops were often slower and lower end.


    Exploded parts diagram from service manual

    The ATI Rage Mobility in this laptop is a pretty good demonstration of this. It was a common video solution on lower end laptops. It was at least a discreet graphics chip so it could certainly be worse but as far as mobile 3D cards of the time are concerned it was near the lower end. Also, the 4200 RPM drive is pretty slow. This speed was not uncommon in laptops but higher end laptops would have something faster. Then the screen itself is another example. This laptop has a fairly large and nice looking screen but the resolution is only 1024×768. Another compromise already mentioned above is the SDRAM. Many (though not all) Pentium 4M based laptops used DDR memory.


    Specs

    Still, the Mobile Athlon 4 was certainly competitive and the desktop Athlon XP would beat out the desktop Pentium 4 for a while. It was really the slightly later Pentium M and its lower power use that was difficult for AMD to compete with. Even when AMD has been competitive or even beat out Intel on the Desktop, Intel has always dominated the mobile market. That seems to be true even today.

    The 32-bit single core CPU and a maximum memory capacity of 512MB really kill this laptop for any modern usage, at least if you want to use a modern OS or web browser. However, it can still crunch tasks for both Einstein@home and MilkyWay@home and probably other BOINC projects as well, even with only 512 MB of RAM, though it certainly won’t break any speed records. Click the links above to see how this laptop is doing or check out FreeDC.


    📂This entry was posted in Computer Arcana 📎and tagged

  • Digital Archaeology: Compaq Presario 2240

    Posted on by Azrael Comment

    Is the Compaq Presario 2240 a retrocomputing pleasure or a piece of junk? It turns out that those are not mutually exclusive categories. If you were a PC power user in the late 1990s looking at computers, then this particular PC would have looked like one of the biggest pieces of junk out there. However, from the perspective of nostalgia, the unique though flawed design helps to make it a fun and interesting machine.

    So what is so bad about this machine that some would look on it as a piece of junk? First some basic specs:

    CPU: AMD K6-200 w/256KB pipeline burst cache on the motherboard
    Memory: 32MB 66MHz SDRAM standard (currently 48MB)
    Video: S3 Trio V2/DX w/ 1MB
    Hard Drive: 2.1 GB (currently using 64GB compact flash)
    Sound: ES1888 Audio Drive

    Of course those don’t mean a whole lot without the context of the time this machine was available and the cost. As far as cost, this computer (without monitor) retailed for $799 though I’ve seen another document that says $1200 so I’m not sure. But it could have easily varied by that much through the course of a year. It would have been in stores some time in 1998. I found an announcement for it dated January 1998 and have seen claims of it being purchased at the end of May 1998. For some context, I got my 333MHz Pentium II based Gateway 2000 computer on Christmas 1997.

    To be fair, this was meant to be a low-end, inexpensive computer. There is also nothing wrong with the AMD K6-200. It was actually faster than the Pentium 200MMX in most benchmarks. The problem comes from the fact that this computer was already borderline obsolete at its introduction combined with the fact that it was hamstrung by extremely limited upgrade options.

    Want to upgrade the CPU? Too bad. Though the motherboard is Socket 7, it does not support the required voltages for newer, faster processors. In theory, I would think you could at least get a K6-233 or Pentium 233MMX to work but apparently, from what I have read, that is not the case. So 200MHz is as fast as you will ever get.

    Ok, well at least you can add some more RAM, right? This system shipped with 32MB of RAM. 16MB is soldered on the motherboard and there is a single SDRAM slot that includes a 16MB module. Unfortunately, the largest module that this machine will recognize is 32MB. That means you can go from 32MB of RAM all the way up to 48MB of RAM. That’s a pretty mediocre amount (at best) even for 1998. I believe my Pentium II purchased up to 6 months before this machine was available came with 64MB. In any case, it was definitely expandable up to 384MB and had three slots.

    Ok, well at least you can add a kick-ass video card (for the time anyway), right? Maybe… The built-in solution is PCI and you do have a single PCI slot to work with. However, the built-in S3 solution is a pretty solid paring with this CPU and anything much more powerful might be overkill. Also, the power supply is only 75 watts. A PCI slot can provide up to 25 watts but I’m not sure I would want to push it that far. I’m not sure what the typical PCI gaming card consumed but I would be nervous about putting anything too power hunger in that slot. Since there is not built-in networking, I’m using the PCI slot for a network card after pulling out the ISA slot based modem.

    So basically, the only upgrade options are 1) Whatever you can add to a PCI or ISA slot keeping in mind the 75watt power supply, 2) Upgrading memory from 32MB to 48MB, 3) the cache module is upgradeable from 256KB to 512KB, and 4) Assuming you don’t elect to stick a different video card in the single PCI slot, the memory of the onboard S3 solution can be expanded from 1MB to 2MB via some sort of special EDO memory module.

    In addition to the crappy power supply and extremely limited upgradeability, there’s one other thing that really screamed ‘cheap piece of junk’ and that was the CPU cooling solution. It was quite common to passively cool CPUs through at least the Pentium 4 era by using a large heatsink and ducting the airflow from a case fan or the power supply fan. The designers were obviously attempting something similar here. However, in design terms, the way this was accomplished with this computer vs. something from Dell or Gateway is like comparing an architect building a mansion to a kid building a fort. A very thin piece of black plastic that I actually thought was construction paper at first (and is not much thicker) is glued to the power supply where the intake fan is. then it is folded over the CPU…more like half rolled and placed over the CPU. The heatsink on the CPU itself is pretty typically sized…maybe 10% larger than the typical Socket 7 actively cooled heatsink. The RPMs of the power supply fan are quite low so there isn’t all that much airflow and the heatsink was almost too hot to keep your finger on while running. I can’t imagine that was good for stability or reliability. I guess it saved them a few dollars per unit but I ripped that literal piece of garbage out and put a regular CPU heatskink/fan combo on. Thankfully the socket had the standard place to clip one on. It’s nothing special but now the heatsink doesn’t even get warm.

    In addition to adding a network card and fixing the cooling in my particular unit, I also had to change the CD-ROM drive as it wasn’t working. Unfortunately, the one I’m using now is black so it doesn’t match the case but I can resolve that later. I think the floppy drive is also dead but I’ve left that alone for now. Otherwise, it is in excellent physical condition. It also didn’t have a hard drive when I got it so I picked up an Compact Flash to IDE adapter and am using a 64GB compact flash card.

    As a retro PC, despite the above failings, it looks quite nice and suitably retro. It has the novelty of built-in JBL speaker that are actually of decent quality. Also, despite the lack of upgradeabiltiy and it being practically obsolete when released, it’s still pretty good for tons of old DOS games up through perhaps the Quake era (after that its probably hit or miss as to whether this system could handle it).

    The Presario 2240 shipped with Windows 95 and can handle Windows 98 quite well but you can’t go beyond that. It doesn’t have enough RAM (or technically the CPU speed) to handle Windows XP. I managed to install Windows 98SE without a problem (once I replaced the CD-ROM drive anyway) and even got it to dual boot Linux with a little help from an old version of Partition Magic though the only thing I could get working was an ancient version of Ubuntu and even then only command line (not enough memory for a GUI I think). I’m sure other ancient versions of Linux will probably work fine as well, but modern versions, even those designed for very low end machines, are going to be problematic. The first hurdle is the installation process itself which usually takes a minimum of 128MB. It can be done via a much more manual install process but it ends up being a lot more work than I was willing to do since it wasn’t something I really needed for my purposes.

    Normally, I’ll try to get BOINC running on any old machine I come across. However, there are limits. BOINC requires at least Windows XP to work. There are older version that will work on Windows 98SE but as far as I can tell, it will no longer connect to any projects. Theoretically, I might be able to get work for a project or two if I got BOINC running on Linux. However, with the old version I am using, I would have to try to manually compile it and I’m sure I would run into dependency hell trying to compile a relatively modern version of BOINC. Also, it isn’t clear that this machine could finish work units in time even if I could get a project working with it.

    However, there is at least one distributed computer/volunteer computing project that will work on this machine and that is distributed.net. This project has been around since 1997 and is even older than BOINC and Seti@home. Current projects include solving RSA Labs key challenges and finding optimal Golomb Ruler lengths. The nice thing about this project is it will run on tons of old hardware including MS-DOS machines and even an Amiga with a 68k processor (though oddly you need at least a PowerPC Mac). I had no problems find versions that worked on Windows 98 or the ancient version of Linux I’m using. Unfortunately, the statistics aren’t as fine grained and you don’t seem to be able to get statistics for a particular computer.

    Currently, this is the only computer using distributed.net but I’m sure that will change as a cycle through other older hardware.

    Other than that, I’ve been playing around with various screensavers, including just about every After Dark screensaver that has ever existed plus Star Wars Screen Entertainment which is Intermission based. Most of these were designed to work with Windows 3.1 but still work ok in Windows 98. At some point, perhaps I will install a few games.

    Go here to see more detailed specs of this machine as reported by HWiNFO.


    📂This entry was posted in Computer Arcana 📎and tagged