Merging two old-timers: Weekend project

I have this ancient relic sitting at home—a computer from roughly 2001, if my memory serves me right. My mother has basically claimed it as her own workstation—though "workstation" might be a generous term. She uses it strictly for reading the news, running basic software, browsing the web, and watching YouTube. That’s about the extent of its utility—it hasn't seen a Facebook login in years.
So, since I’ve had another machine sitting around my house for quite some time now—roughly from the same era as my current setup—I finally carved out a bit of time to merge them into a single rig.

Here is how things stand at the moment:
PC_1 |
------
- CPU: An Intel Celeron clocked at 1.7GHz—now there’s a nostalgic trip down memory lane. It’s the kind of hardware that makes you appreciate how far we've come, assuming you didn't spend your entire youth staring at a spinning loading icon. Honestly, trying to run anything modern on that chip today would be an exercise in pure, unadulterated patience.
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 440
RAM: 768MB — honestly, looking at this feels like stepping back into the late nineties. It’s practically prehistoric.512MB Transcend DDR400 DIMM CL3 + 256MB DDR 333MHz CL2.5—just in case anyone was actually looking for this specific relic.
- MBO: MS-6547
Power Supply Unit: MSI MS400W ATX P4
Just a quick heads-up regarding the layout: there are four USB ports available—two located on the front panel and two on the rear.

PC 2 |
------
CPU: AMD Athlon 1.11GHz
- GPU: The NVIDIA GeForce 6200—now there’s a piece of hardware that truly defines an era of disappointment. I remember picking one up back in the day, thinking I was finally upgrading from my integrated graphics to something "real," only to realize I had essentially purchased a very expensive paperweight. It was the quintessential budget card that promised much more than it actually delivered. If you were looking for anything beyond basic desktop tasks or perhaps a very sluggish round of Solitaire, this wasn't the chip for you. It remains a classic example of how "entry-level" can sometimes be a polite euphemism for "barely functional."
RAM: 1.25 GB (enough to run a calculator, maybe—but certainly nothing more.)I have a single 1GB Transcend DDR400 DIMM module with CL3 latency available. It’s an older stick—definitely nothing you'd want to put in a modern gaming rig—but if you're tinkering with some legacy hardware or just need a spare part to get an old machine breathing again, it's there. Let me know if you're interested. + 256MB DDR CL2
Motherboard: Soltek SL-75DRV4
Power Supply Unit: MSI MAG 400W P4
Just a quick heads-up regarding my current setup—it’s pretty much a relic at this point. I’m working with an old machine that only has two USB ports, and honestly, one of them is barely functional due to some loose connections. To make matters worse, the audio seems to have completely given up the ghost—I can't get any sound through the headphones, nor via the line-out cable. It's all dead air.

I would personally go with the bolded option—that’s how I’d handle the setup. As for the power supply, it looks fine to me. Both boards have three RAM slots available, so if I were to pop one of those two weaker sticks into the third slot, would that actually impact performance? I'm trying to weigh whether it's worth the move just to gain an extra 256MB of RAM.
I have three HDDs on hand—I’ll figure out how to best pair them up once I've finished testing. If anyone happens to have a recommendation for a solid, free utility to run some diagnostics, I’d certainly appreciate it.

Well, if anyone feels like tossing a suggestion my way—I’m all ears. 🙂

That's ancient history. Adding more RAM might help slightly, but honestly, you won't even notice the difference... A GF6200 is a massive step up from a 440... If you want a real bump, try dropping in a Pentium 4, though even that doesn't guarantee anything crazy... I actually spent a day messing around with a P4 2.6 on a decent board just because I could. Didn't really make any sense, though...

http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-MSI/64...(MS-6547).html

It’d probably be smarter to run a benchmark like Super PI on both machines to see which one actually wins, assuming there's even a noticeable gap... or use something similar... Those 1.7 GHz Celerons are pretty common enough

If you decide to swap out the motherboard entirely, go with AMD. Back then, their higher-end Athlons were a bit faster and definitely cheaper

http://www.cpu-upgrade.com/mb-Soltek/SL-75DRV4.html

You can fix that broken USB port by just grabbing a PCI card with four ports... It's the cheapest way to get it working again... Assuming you're running Windows XP, obviously

http://www.ebay.com/itm/motherboards-example
http://www.ebay.com/itm/graphics-cards-example

For $83, you’re looking at a machine that’s maybe three times faster... I mean, it's a pretty old platform, but you could probably upgrade it using some used parts—grab an extra 2GB of RAM, a much better GPU, and maybe a quad-core chip for around 300-$117. You'd likely need to swap out the power supply too, though.

I guess you could toss a GF 6200 into the PC_1 and end up with 1.75GB of RAM if you use three sticks, but honestly, it probably won't make much of a difference.

@Bryan Taylor6/">@@Bryan Taylor6, honestly—what are you even doing throwing that out? You’re basically tossing antiques into the trash. Give it a few more years and that stuff will be worth more than what you paid for it—assuming it's even still functional by then. 😁
To be honest, I ran Super Pi tests on both machines yesterday, and the results have left me feeling a bit perplexed. It appears that my AMD configuration is actually outperforming the Intel one—is that really what we're seeing here?
Is Super Pi testing just about the processor, or does RAM play a significant role too?

@crimsonstag84/">@@crimsonstag84 I follow your logic—what you’re suggesting actually makes sense—but I wasn't exactly planning on an upgrade spree. My goal here is just to squeeze every last drop of performance out of what I currently have, even if the results end up being somewhat underwhelming. 🙂 ). Iako $83 Upgrading isn't exactly a bargain these days—I mean, handing over a stack of cash for something that’s already aged and used? It feels wrong. You're basically paying top dollar for hardware that could easily decide to quit on you tomorrow. I just can't justify it.
I ran some tests on those hard drives yesterday—turns out they're all perfectly fine, not a single bad sector to be found. Today, I’m actually going to put this Celeron build through its paces now that I've bumped up the RAM and paired it with a decent graphics card. We'll see if it can actually handle the load.
If this setup holds up for what I’ve got planned—then fine, we’re good. But if it ends up being a total disaster, I might actually have to consider an upgrade.

Brian Thomas60 said:Hey everyone, I ran Super Pi on both my rigs yesterday and the results actually threw me for a loop. It looks like my AMD build is outperforming the Intel one?
What exactly is Super Pi measuring here—is it just the CPU performance, or does RAM speed play a role too?

Super Pi is a single-threaded benchmark, but since both CPUs are being tested on a single core, the difference is negligible. Back then, AMD had the edge with more advanced architecture—essentially higher IPC (instructions per clock)—which explains why you're seeing those numbers.

To be honest, those benchmarks are pretty much trivial nowadays (hardly useful even for basic web browsing); you can pick up significantly more powerful hardware for next to nothing these days.

What smartic suggested for $83 is solid

Out of everything you've listed, those processors are definitely your weakest link. Upgrading them will cost you about $17 on eBay... For that kind of money, you can snag top-tier chips from that era that actually fit those motherboards. As for testing performance, just hop online and see how they handle Flash animations or similar stuff... Watch for any stuttering while things are loading or moving... If you're using Chrome, try adding an ad blocker... It might run smoother if it isn't fighting through ads, though there's a chance the extra plugin might bog it down too much

A few years back, I had a rig with an Intel Pentium III that was throttled down to 1100MHz because that's how the board read it—I didn't feel like messing around with the BIOS settings at the time—plus 512MB of RAM... Had an N/A card, and it was enough to get me online (back when Flash was a bit simpler)... Naturally, I was running it on a CRT monitor at a resolution slightly higher than 800x600....

It's totally possible that an AMD chip would outperform a Celeron, so definitely test both options