What spec of PC is everyone using? (1 Viewer)

[davea300]

I'm interested to find out what spec of PC everyone here is using, more so for those of us who develop and work with access daily as part of their job.

Currently my pc at work is:

• HP Compaq dc7100 multiprocessor
• Intel Pentium 3.00 Ghz
• 512MB RAM ( I know! I'm getting 2GB upgrade!)
• 80GB HD
• Win XP Pro SP2
• Access 2003 (Have 2007 installed but databases developed in 03)

Find it very slow with one of my larger test databases when working with a local copy. I'm constanly having to crash out during development and sometimes it takes a while to get into the backend. All my live databases run off a network server and are split. They don't have any major performance issues for users. It's development time on my own PC that is slowing me down.

So what is everyone else running?

 

[KenHigg]

I would bench-mark your performance before and after the memory upgrade. Could be valuable data when trying to convince management to upgrade all of the machines...

 

[gemma-the-husky]

i have a similar system, probably even slower

HP510 laptop, cheapest I could find, £299

-------
I never have speed issues using local copies of data - is that what you mean, or are you still connected to the network.

Access2003 is definitely slower than access97 in my opinion, and offers few improvements - i tend to still develop in A97 unless there is a particular reason not to. I always make my backends A97, as they definitely seem to return data quicker - despite all the tips on performance issues (look at MS knowledge base "performance issues" for tips to speed up data fetching)

 

[davea300]

Ken - good idea, I'll do that, I'm hoping that the mem upgrade will speed things up.

Gemma - I notice slow speeds when using a local copy of a database stored on my own PC, granted there are some linked tables that have a path to the network but even some smaller stand alone test databases with no network connections are running slow. I do have a lot of VB code in my systems but I'm hoping a RAM upgrade will cure it.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

as I say, i have a similar, even less powerful system for you, and get no problems on local databases - even with v large files (over 100Mb data).

the more memory the better though, particularly woth A2003

 

[Pat Hartman]

I just bought an HP Pavilion Elete m9040n. It has an Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q6600 with 3G of memory running Vista. What a disappointment. Vista is such a hog that the machine seems slower than my laptop which is three years old and runs XP pro with 2G.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

good point - the reason i bought the hp laptop was that it still had XP, not vista. In fact, I got two, one for my son as well

 

[KenHigg]

Glad I read this as well. I was thinking about upgrading my laptop to Vista... Think I'll wait a while now.

 

[davea300]

Have heard this about vista as well, only know one who has had no problems with it so far with a homebuild pc. Think I'll wait as well though or just build a ridculously high spec pc .

 

[BarryMK]

I just bought an HP Pavilion Elete m9040n. It has an Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q6600 with 3G of memory running Vista. What a disappointment. Vista is such a hog that the machine seems slower than my laptop which is three years old and runs XP pro with 2G.

I've just bought a Dell Inspiron with AMD duocore 64 and 2 gb ram for home use.
At work now so can't put out the full spec but I too find Vista runs slower on it than XP on my old dying on it's feet Compaq.

I'm hoping the Vista Service Pack due out soon might help but I ain't holding my breath. Good old Microsoft - we get more and more powerful, faster machines and they build an OS that slows it down to archaic speeds.

 

[CatFish]

Glad I read this as well. I was thinking about upgrading my laptop to Vista... Think I'll wait a while now.

Wise choice I purchased a IBM Thinkpad with 1.6Ghz dual core and one gig of memory. Running Vista Business Edition with Office 2007. I ignored all the info I had read on the Internet about Vista and Office 2007 being a bad marriage. Needless to say the computer is extremely slow.

 

[davea300]

Just though I'd update everyone on this. Finally got my memory upgrade the other day. Up to 2.5GB now.

So far performace has been better and I haven't had to crash out of a database yet! I've noticed it when compacting and running large queries. Takes a lot less time now. Forms that used to "draw" themselves now come up a lot faster.

So far so good!

 

[ajetrumpet]

Currently my pc at work is:

• HP Compaq dc7100 multiprocessor
• Intel Pentium 3.00 Ghz
• 512MB RAM ( I know! I'm getting 2GB upgrade!)
• 80GB HD
• Win XP Pro SP2
• Access 2003 (Have 2007 installed but databases developed in 03)

• HP Pavillion dv6000 dual core processor
• AMD Athlon 2.2 Ghz
• approx. 2GB RAM (oh wait...that should be 2,048MB shouldn't it??)
• 120GB HD
• Win. Vista (no SP included)
• Access 2003/2007

 

[Ziggy1]

DELL Latitude D830

Intel Core2 Duo T7700 (2.20GHz,4MB L2 Cache)
2 GB 667MHz - 8.5 GB/s with dual channel RAM
XP-PRo SP2 ( we downgrade new purchases from Vista)


Memory always makes a big difference.

 

[ajetrumpet]

Does anyone if the new Intel XEON is worth it? Did I see that it has 4 processors? Quad core?

 

[odin1701]

Custom built.

Intel 3GHz Quad-Core CPU
8GB RAM
150GB Raptor Main HD (OS)
2 x 500GB HD's in RAID 1 (Data)
2 x 300GB External HD's RAID 1 (Backup)
Vista

 

[Fifty2One]

Old school computer for developing applications.
2GHz P4 CPU
1GB RAM
55GB HD
XPpro
Access2003
Using older technology intentionally in order to ensure speed performance once implimented over networks or as stand alone on PCs. If my apps run fast on my own slow equipment they will be blistering on newer set ups with better clock speeds and multi core processors.

 

[Ziggy1]

Does anyone if the new Intel XEON is worth it? Did I see that it has 4 processors? Quad core?

Isn't that used for servers?