Which computer is better for me to use?

Question

i do things like Photoshop, Youtube and gaming.
I was givin 2 towers by a friend. Which one is better for me to use. The information i posted was just from a google search. Need help from someone knowledgeable in waht i use my computer for.

1) Emachine- W3507 Desktop PC- Windows XP DVDrw- 5 USB slots--intel celeron D processor 352 3.20 ghz, ATI radeon experss 200 with available pci-express slot. also has a 9-1 memory card reader, 120 gb hd and 512 mb ddr2. It says its a multimedia pc..

2) HP Pavilion a1106n-
Video graphics
Integrated with up to 128 MB allocated video memory
Memory
Component Attributes
Memory Installed 512 MB (2 x 256)
Maximum allowed 4 GB* (4 x 1GB) requires the replacement of the installed 256 MB DIMMs

*Actual available memory may be less
Speed supported PC2 3200 MB/sec
Type 240 pin, DDR2 SDRAM
DIMM slots Four
Open DIMM slots Two

Hard drive

160 GB SATA
7200 rpm

16x DVD(+/-)R/RW DL LightScribe drive

must use Double-Layer media discs in order to take advantage of the DL technology
must use LightScribe-enabled media discs and supporting software in order to take advantage of the LightScribe technology

Answer 1

You didn't tell us what CPU the HP has. Looking it up

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c00389433&tmp_task=prodinfoCategory&cc=us&dlc=en&lc=en&product=501576

It seems it is a Prescott Pentium 4 516 2.9 GHz with a 1 MB cache CPUBenchmark 379

The HP is from 2005,



the EMachines is newer, mid 2006, with a CedarMill Celeron D 3.2 GHz with 512 KB Cache. CPUBenchmark 340 but a maximum RAM of 2 GB

http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/emachines-w3507-celeron-d/4505-3118_7-32144250.html



http://www.cpu-world.com/cgi-bin/CompareNParts.pl?PART1=Intel_JM80547PE0771MN&PART2=Intel_HH80552RE088512



The eMachines has a fairly crummy mobile Radeon graphics chip while the HP has crummy Intel 915GV with GMA 900 integrated graphics



They are both old and slow. Both machines desperately need more RAM, their processors are quite close in performance, that is they are both slower than an Atom powered $200 netbook. A new i5 is literally 20 times the computing performance of these CPUs.



Neither of them will play any games newer than 2005

THey will be painfully slow on Photoshop

I don't know if either of them will be comfortable on Win 7 - they meet the minimum requirements, barely, if you upgrade the RAM.



Bottom line: If you spend $60 upgrading the RAM to 4 GB the HP will barely scrape by

The EMachines, even though it is newer and has a marginally better graphics chip, is slower and limited to 2 GB



If you spend $400 -$500 you will get a non-gaming desktop machine with Windows 7 64 bit onboard, 4 GB or more of RAM, a larger faster hard drive which will be easily 10 times the performance for Photoshop. Then you could invest $125 - $200 in a video card if you wanted to game.

Answer 2

Honestly neither is that great. But you sure can't beat free. I personally would go with the EMachine. Primarily due to the processor. The HP comes with a Pentium4 with slower clock speed than the CeleronD. Both could run Windows 7, just maybe not optimally. For your Photoshop needs both would benefit from a RAM upgrade. RAM is cheap these days. Overall I say try to see how much you can sell the 2 for and buy a newer low end model which will out perform both of these machines.

P.S.- I bet some of your boot Marines would pay $100 for those machines to have in their barracks room.

Hope I've helped.

Answer 3

ALWAYS check the system requirements for the game or software you want to run!



The eMachine had a CELERON processor. OLD. Not enough ram. Skip it.



The HP mentions "integrated" - is this a laptop? Laptops are a poor choice for gaming because of the integrated video cards. These are usually not on the supported chipset list for video cards when looking at the system requirements. The game may run, may not run, or run poorly. Skip it.



For gaming - look to desktop PCs with NON-integrated video cards. What to get? -- Read those system requirements for guidance!!

Answer 4

None of them will run windows 7 smoothly without an upgrade.



The Emachine has a slight edge i think, with the CPU running cooler and a logical dual processor.

I wouldn't recommend getting Windows 7 on it but if you were keen, then get a minimum 4 GB of RAM,

If you were to just keep it with XP then 1.5GB of RAM is the minimum (because of the shared video memory)



Photoshop will be very slow, unless you were planning on using photoshop elements. 3D Gaming? forget it unless you were to upgrade with a very good video card, even then not recommended with only a Celeron processor.

Answer 5

some say they could, yet I even have been utilising mac as a results of fact that 1988 and have not yet had a deadly disease. i assume all computers can get viruses, it is purely very no longer likely on a mac for multiple motives. a million. Unix permissions 2. loss of human beings writing mac viruses. 3. greater helpful Kernel Isolation 4. confusing propagation: you may desire to truly installation an contaminated software to get previous the protection systems already in place. All mac viruses or rumors of mac viruses to this element have purely gotten into the gadget by utilising the consumer setting up an contaminated software and allowing it get right of entry to to the kernel by utilising coming into your protection key. (on no account supply a software this sort of get right of entry to until it is from an certain supplier)

Answer 6

from the specs you have posted the first emachines unit should be your choice it has a better spec but if you want to run windows 7 you will need to put more memory in it, you say it only has 512mb but windows 7 needs at least 1gb before you even start and if you use photoshop put 4gb in it...

Answer 7

Neither one will be able to play games or run windows 7 with the RAM you have also you didn't say what processor is in the second one so I can't say which would be best