Broadband too overwhelming for old PC's? Plz help :)

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:42 pm

Hey all, as some of you may already know, i just got the Linksys BEFSR41 router and there are 3 computers hooked up to it. One of them happens to be an old Pentium 90 16mb ram (win98se)

For some reason, the internet is barely working on it right now. Some sites pop up, sometimes; the only thing that comes up right away is google.com since its so small i guess. Anyway, you type in a url, it finds it, then it just like sits there and does nothing. When i tried to download a file it went very slowly, like 2KB/sec; and it didn't get very far before pausing.

My question is, is the broadband just too fast for the processor to handle? Common, even the 56k worked better on it, broadband doesn't even work right now.

Can i just like use lower settings in cablenut or something so that it might actually work? and what settings would you recommend that i use? 1500/128 aDSL

Anyone have any ideas what is going on here? the fast pc and the iMAC work perfectly. I know there isn't anything wrong with the cables cuz i transfered files from the pc to the old comp instantly

Thanks for all the help

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:53 pm

The minimum RAM reqirements to run 98 are 32MB, try upping the RAM and see how it runs, don't expect too much.... she's WAY past her prime.

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:00 pm

Heh, upgrade that old thing? i dont think its worth it :P

well i just formatted it to install win98se cuz win95 (osr2 or whatever) was even worse with the internet... nothing besides google.com came up, and i know 16mb is ok for win95, i guess :P So do you think its just cuz of the low ram? probably hehe

If im getting like NO speed with the broadband, but the 56k would work ok, doesn't that mean i should at least be getting 56k performance? which im not

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 11:11 pm

It takes a minimum of 32MB just to run 98 so you are using pretty much 100% swap file when you run the pc, as you can see it's slower than a snail. With only 16MB your better off with 95.

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 1:47 am

You wanna know what... actually you probably dont want to know, but here goes:

Since i transferred a big file from my fast pc to the P90 at 490KB/sec over AOL instant messenger, i kept trying to figure out why i couldn't browse web sites.

I somehow got to windows update site and started downloading the updates, stayed at 0, until all of a sudden when i minimize aim, and the progress starts moving and quickly gets to 265KB or whatever then stops. So then i restore it and eventually the progress starts moving again.

So i figured out that if i make the computer "chug" away, the download actually happens... how gay. This makes no sense at whatsoever. It only downloads if it's in the process of doing something else. Does this sound like a bad hard drive? cuz i have a new spare hard drive i could use if you think it's that. It's either that, or the cpu, or... i have no idea.

Plz give me your expert advice :P

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 9:03 am

Minimum specs for Win98 are 486dx/66, and 16 MB. Looking at one of my Microsoft Windows 98se Retail boxes right here. Win98 was actually better at running with minimal RAM than 95 is....it has better caching of the memory. But as far as the CPU goes....I'd lean more towards 95 with anything under a P100. 98 was a bit more CPU intensive than 95..but you're talking about internet, not boot up time. Hmmm.....which version browser are you trying to use?

Believe me, I'm not recommending running with only 16 megs...I prefer 64 megs minimal. Have you tried some of the tweaks from this site?

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 10:46 am

Hi rclayton17,

Just for the fun of it last week, I put an old ISA 3COM ethernet card into an AcerAspire 486DX2 computer, 540MB HDD, 36MB ram, Win95, IE5.5. I plugged it into my cable network and the thing averages 75-80KBs on real downloads.

Matter of fact it's kinda' fun....like driving a hopped-up 1955 Chevy!!

Spaceman

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:17 am

Yes I tweaked the connection a little
Used the DSL PPPoE settings on TCP/IP optimizer, but changed the receive window to 31944, and lowered the max connections to try to get a better result, but no luck.

And i updated to IE6, by opening and closing AIM, bah.

cyberskye · Post by **cyberskye** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 12:39 pm

Have you considered loading linux on that box? Runs a lot leaner and can handle web/aim - games are the only sacrifice you'd be making. 16M would be PLENTY without running xwindows...and you just might learn something

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 3:16 pm

Originally posted by rclayton17
And i updated to IE6, by opening and closing AIM, bah.

That may be an issue on older, slower machines....the code in the later versions of IE are substantially more "bloated"...you may want to ratchet back a few notches to say, the latest version of 5.0 or something, or just try another lighter browser. Some Opera fans here, and Mozilla fans....perhaps they'd have some suggestions.

I always stick with the latest versions of IE...but I'm wondering if they are just too much for a slower computer to handle.

To prove my theory wrong....in your first post, you mentioned the 56k worked better on it. Can you just connect via dial up, and see how it performs? Do a back to back comparison? If you find it works well on dial up, and not broadband, well, now we have something else to look at...like perhaps the NIC...drivers, IRQ conflict, some setting that doesn't get along with your router. Bad patch cable, or that patch cable plopped along somewhere that gets bad EMI.

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 5:08 pm

When win95 was installed, i downloaded opera, and it still had the slowness problems; or websites just didn't work at all.

The 56k will be the next thing i try, to see how it works.

That is so strange tho, cuz like i mentioned before, i can transfer data fast over the lan, but web browsing just ain't workin.

I still can't figure out why i have to make the comp "grind" away and make it process stuff b4 the downloads continue. Maybe theres a problem where the computer forgets to keep the processor going while downloading or whatever, so it just sits there? weird weird weird

oh, and i think the cable is ok cuz i moved the p90 next to my fast pc and used it's patch cable, and the problem still occurs.

Thanks for your input.

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 4:42 am

I'm connected to my ISP through the 56k right now. It's working like a 56k should be... slowly.

But hey, it IS working.

So what are the possible issues? anyone have any ideas?

There are no problems in my device manager (yellow question marks). Hmmmm, what could it be. Do you guys think it would make a difference if i removed the 56k?

Thanks for the help.

EDIT (5 minutes later): Ok, i think i fixed it. I was using the same NIC settings that i was using for my fast PC. For my fast pc i was using "60" for Early TX threshold, and i had PME Disabled.

Well I changed it back to its default, which is "10" for Early Tx Threshold, and i enabled the PME setting. Well one of those did it, but it was probably the Early Tx Threshold, eh?

I was moving at 60-70KB/sec when I did a test download of aol instant messenger. Hey! Should i reinstall Windows 95 since it runs faster!? Eh, win95 sucks. Man this sucks

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 9:09 pm

I'm not sure if the NIC settings are totally at fault, but they probably have a little to do with it.

When i was using the 56k, i had used the tcp/ip optimizer for 56k settings, of course. Although i selected the dial up adapter when i did this, i guess it affected the NIC as well, so when i went back to using the NIC, it was still using the 56k settings. But i think I also changed this NIC settings before i tested it out again.

So right now the MTU is 576 or whatever. What do you think a good setting would be because 1492 is a bit too much; if indeed that is the cause of the problem.

Sorry if i'm a little confusing, or confused

legalmind · Post by **legalmind** » Sun Jan 12, 2003 12:24 am

Whats to figure out.
I do not run as fast as I did at 18.
Take an old machine plus AOL?
Bad enough on a new one..........................

rclayton17 · Post by **rclayton17** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 2:50 am

Originally posted by legalmind
Whats to figure out.
I do not run as fast as I did at 18.
Take an old machine plus AOL?
Bad enough on a new one..........................

Point taken, but 56k performing better than broadband? It just doesn't seem right.

And I'm not sure if you think my ISP is aol. I was using aol instant messenger; opening it and closing it to get my cpu/harddrive/whatever chugging.

my isp is earthlink, i have aDSL.