Is the Pentium 4 processor still any good?

[swskeptic]

Long story short, I may be acquiring a desktop computer soon with half a gig of ram and a pentium 4 processor and a sizable hdd.

My question is whether the pentium 4 processor can run 10.04 well.

I do a lot of online video watching, very light photo editing occasionally, internet browsing, etc.

I'll be using this computer probably as a sort of entertainment hub for my tv and am just curious whether it would be able to handle something like that or not.

[dragos240]

A Pentium 4 is fine. It's got some power under it's hood still.

[speedwell68]

Long story short, I may be acquiring a desktop computer soon with half a gig of ram and a pentium 4 processor and a sizable hdd.

My question is whether the pentium 4 processor can run 10.04 well.

I do a lot of online video watching, very light photo editing occasionally, internet browsing, etc.

I'll be using this computer probably as a sort of entertainment hub for my tv and am just curious whether it would be able to handle something like that or not.

I installed 10.04 on a 5 year old Sony Vaio with a Celeron 1.7 and it ran fairly well. But it did have a gig of ram. I reckon Xubutu might be a better bet with only that much ram.

[swskeptic]

Even with the small amount of ram?

[dragos240]

Mint runs decent under 512 ram. If mint can run, I'm more than sure ubuntu can.

[Kingsley]

A Pentium 4 is fine. It's got some power under it's hood still.
its*

[diesch]

I'm using a P4 2GHz with 2GB RAM for WWW browsing, programming, video watching (DVD, YouTube, ...), some photo editing, ...

Upgrading your RAM to at least 1GB will get you much better performance, a badly supported graphic card can ruin it (II bought a cheap nVidia card when 9.04 didn't work well with the build-in Intel card).

[swskeptic]

First off, thanks for the insanely quick replies, I really appreciate it. I'm only now starting to get into Linux seriously and I love the support this community gives, it's pretty awesome.

In regards to the desktop, it looks like I can score another stick of 512megs of ram on Newegg for $20. I'm thinking 1gig total, hooked up to my external hard drive would make a nice little entertainment hub or sorts.

I'm wondering if I might want to just get two sticks that are 1 gig each? I dunno...

[Simian Man]

512 should be enough - especially if you ditch Gnome for Xfce. Why not try it before you buy another stick? I have run Linux well enough on machines with worse specs than those.

[Quake]

If you don't plan on gaming and working on video productions, you'll be fine.

But a word of advice, watch youtube with gecko-mediaplayer and with the Greasemonkey script: "Youtube without Flash Auto".
Result: MUCH less demanding on the cpu.

[cascade9]

You are probably better off checking what memory it is actually using (there are P4 chipsets that use SD RAM (old! slow! yuck!), DDR1 and DDR2) how many memory slots there are and what slots are filled.

1GB should be more than enough for your uses IMO.

BTW, to hook it up to a TV, a video card might be a good idea.....depending on what inputs the TV has. It might (should?) help with fullscreen online videos as well

[jerenept]

I have an AMD Sempron 3000+ (single-core, 2.35 GHz) and Ubuntu works just fine IMHO.
The P4 has a lot of features my Sempron doesn't- like HyperThreading, and most are more overclockable and much faster (my mom has a 2.53 GHz P4)
My guide: If winXP can run, Ubuntu can run. Simple.
(my neighbour has a 700MHz Duron with 256MB PC100 RAM. XP runs soooo sloooooow. Intend to recommend Lubuntu)

[swskeptic]

You are probably better off checking what memory it is actually using

I've got the guy following some directions so he can screen cap the specification screen for me. I'll report back and make my final decision then.


BTW, to hook it up to a TV, a video card might be a good idea

The tv has a VGA and 3.5mm audio input, so I'm going to basically be using it as a giant monitor.

[aklo]

Better to spend more money on at least a dual core and 1GB ram...So you can have many windows open at the same time without any issues. Dual core processor should be very cheap nowadays since the norm for now is a quad core ++

My experience came from using a P3 933Mhz 64MB ram computer...opening more than 3-4 browser would noticebly slow down the entire system...until i upgrade to a dual core processor.

I didn't use P4 before so I can't say if it is bad..but i can tell you dual core is very good and it can last you for a long time if you decided to do more intensive stuff on your computer in the future.

Edit: Of course P4 processor can run ubuntu but what are you going to do on it is entirely a different issue.

Are you those who open many firefox tabs, listen to music and have GIMP/Inkscape running at the same time?
Consider your video card is there is any chance for you to view a HD, blueray , high resolution video on your computer?? You may need a graphic card/better processor for that.

[diesch]

In regards to the desktop, it looks like I can score another stick of 512megs of ram on Newegg for $20. I'm thinking 1gig total, hooked up to my external hard drive would make a nice little entertainment hub or sorts.

I'm wondering if I might want to just get two sticks that are 1 gig each? I dunno...

If the money isn't a problem I'd get 2 GB. RAM for those old boxes will not get cheaper but you won't get it at all in one or two years. And it's nice if you don't have to close Firefox to get more RAM for editing your photos in GIMP.

[MaxIBoy]

Don't expect miracles, but for the usage you describe, it should be fine.

My biggest concern is online video. Adobe's Flash plugin runs very badly on Linux, not using any GPU acceleration. Unless you're going to use an alternate Flash plugin, video playback could be a bit problematic on high resolutions with an old CPU. Shouldn't be too big of a deal if you have few other programs running besides the video. However, I there's a plugin for Totem (the default media player in Ubuntu,) which allows you to search for and watch YouTube videos directly without using a browser. In that case, video playback will be problem-free.

[swskeptic]

With all the advice I'm getting here I think this computer is going to be find for what I wanted to use it for.

And even if it isn't I'm sure I could figure SOMETHING else to do with it.

Thanks again everyone, I still can't believe the amazing support that this community offers, very awesome!

[Quake]

Thanks again everyone, I still can't believe the amazing support that this community offers, very awesome!

The difference I feel with Ubuntu is that since it's not a "geeky" distribution, everyone tries to help each other settling in.

[mr clark25]

i have one of the first Pentium 4 cpus (1.3ghz), and it still runs fine. i can watch youtube and do everything else i can think of. i did half to upgrade to 512mb or ram for 10.04. 9.10 worked alright with 256mb or ram, but 10.04 almost wasn't usable with 256mb of ram.

once i got 512mb or ram, everything went fine :)

[andrewbrown22]

With all the advice I'm getting here I think this computer is going to be find for what I wanted to use it for.

And even if it isn't I'm sure I could figure SOMETHING else to do with it.

Thanks again everyone, I still can't believe the amazing support that this community offers, very awesome!

If it won't meet your semi-HTPC needs, it'll definitely still be able to be a perfectly adequate file server on Ubuntu.

Until just recently I was using a P4 with 512MB of RAM as my home file/print server, I also used it to download all of my torrents with the built in Transmission client and it's web GUI. The only reason I replaced it was because I ended up saving the money to build a slightly more powerful "server." I'm now using that same P4 box to type this message out, though. It should do fine.

[autonomy]

I also use a P4. Mine is 3.2 GHz w/ HT. I got the 2 GB sticks of RAM, but I probably only need them for virtualization. You can probably get away with 1 GB even for video editing.

[screaminj3sus]

p4 is fine for basic use in any os. I have a 3ghz p4 machine that runs win7 and ubuntu fine.

[andrewabc]

I installed 10.04 on P4 1.7ghz, 768mb sdram.

I don't use it anymore, but it seemed to work ok (I had it in storage, put 10.04 on it and put back in storage). Definitely too slow for me, but for basic web browsing device it could work. Although I have a nettop as web browsing device. Uses 20 watts, instead of P4 150 watts

Possibly worst part about old computers is the slow hard drive.
http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/7406/screenshot80gbharddiska.th.png (http://img688.imageshack.us/i/screenshot80gbharddiska.png/)
31mb/s
My 60gb SSD gets 221mb/s

[chessnerd]

The desktop I am sitting at right now uses a Pentium 4 (2.8 GHz) and it runs Ubuntu 10.04 nicely. I have two other desktops in my house that use Pentium 4 processors as well. One runs Windows XP and is a 2.0 GHz, the other dual boots Windows 2000 and Xubuntu 10.04.

The hyper-threaded (HT) ones even work like dual-core processors, so if it is a newer Pentium 4 that would help you out as well. Just check to see if there is an orange HT on the upper right hand side of the sticker. If there is, you have a hyper-threaded processor.

Unless you plan on doing a lot of resource intensive tasks, like video encoding, games, or kernel compiling, a Pentium 4 should serve you nicely. For your needs, it should be fine.

The Pentium 4 is old, but it isn't dead yet. In fact, you can still buy computers that come with hyper-threaded Pentium 4s. I consider it the Windows XP of processors. It just doesn't die...

[handy]

They are fine re. processing power. Their main failing in my mind is their power usage, they are notoriously heavy on juice.

[NullHead]

To me, it wouldn't be worth it.

I would go with an Intel Atom based system if you're looking for some light computing.

Otherwise any standard computer you can buy on the current market will be 9001 times better than a P4.

I wouldn't even dream of using a PC like this as an HTPC.

[SunnyRabbiera]

P4's are fine, my main desktop uses a P4

[smellyman]

P4 2.something, 1gb ram.

runs like a champ.....

[Khakilang]

Even Pentium 3 with 384MB RAM is still good to me. I install Lubuntu some other maybe use Xubuntu and its work great.

[RichardLinx]

I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on a P4 (2Ghz) with 512MB DDR3 RAM and thought it ran horribly. This was just your average Ubuntu install with GNOME. Even with Compiz turned off I still thought the performance was pretty poor. If you only have 512MB RAM I'd say install something lighter. (Lubuntu or something...)

[del_diablo]

A friend of mine is sitting with a Pentium 4 computer, running Mass Effect on decent framerate too

[snowpine]

To me, it wouldn't be worth it.

I would go with an Intel Atom based system if you're looking for some light computing.

My experience has been otherwise... I bought a dual-core Atom 330 nettop with 2gb of RAM, intending to retire my 3ghz Pentium 4. But the Pentium 4 outperforms it in every respect (except power consumption obviously). Pentium 4 is defintely still a workhorse with some miles left!

[NullHead]

My experience has been otherwise... I bought a dual-core Atom 330 nettop with 2gb of RAM, intending to retire my 3ghz Pentium 4. But the Pentium 4 outperforms it in every respect (except power consumption obviously). Pentium 4 is defintely still a workhorse with some miles left!

Interesting. I found my old P4 to be painful to even use. I much prefer my netbook over that old thing. My P4 was an older 2.x ghz one though ... perhaps the 3ghz ones are better off than mine was.

[andrewabc]

The discussion over how good P4 are really depends.
My P4 1.7ghz, had usb1.1, nvidia tnt2 23mb, 768 sdram. Made sense to upgrade to cheap nettop.

I hear some of the newer P4 have 3ghz, usb2.0, ddr2 etc. So 'upgrading' to cheap nettop doesn't make sense unless you need something small/quiet and use less power, as those would be the only advantages.
So that makes a big difference.

[pricetech]

With a gig of RAM the older P4s will even run XP decently. If you can get 2 gigs and have the pocket change to purchase them, go for it.

I think you'll be quite happy with it.

[angry_johnnie]

P4 is a very good processor. You should have no problems with it. I have Windows 7, Ubuntu 10.04, and Zenwalk installed on my box, which has a P4 ht @ 2.6ghz and 3 gigs of ram. they all run smoothly, even windows 7 :p

I have ubuntu and windows xp installed on a gateway E2100 with an intel celeron @ 2.2ghz and 1 gig of ram, both running smoothly.

For the most part, ubuntu won't demand all that much of your cpu, but if you can get a hold of a little more ram, it will perform a lot better.

[DeadSuperHero]

I have a P4 in my machine. It does fine for the most part, but someday I'd love to get a super-powerful machine.

[K.Mandla]

My question is whether the pentium 4 processor can run 10.04 well.
It'll work fine.

[Cam42]

I'm running Mint on a 2.0GHz P4 (upgraded from my machine's stock 1.8GHz) and 512MB of RAM. Runs just fine.

[cascade9]

Interesting. I found my old P4 to be painful to even use. I much prefer my netbook over that old thing. My P4 was an older 2.x ghz one though ... perhaps the 3ghz ones are better off than mine was.

The 3.0ghz and higher models are in general, are much faster than a 2.X Ghz P4. Not that Ghz is a good measure for system performance...and the P4s are a good example.

Original P4 2.8 (northwood)- 400Hmz FSB, 512k cache.
P4 2.8 (prescott)- 533FSB, 1024k cache
P4 HT 2.8C (northwood)- 800FSB, 512k cache, hyperthreading
P4 HT 2.8E (prescott)- 800FSB, 1024k cache, hyperthreading
P4 HT 620 (prescoot 2M)- 800FSB, 2048k cache, hyperthreading

BTW, that isnt even all the P4 2.8Ghz models..but the 511 is just a 2.8 (prescott) with different stepping, and the P4 520 a P4 2.8E with differnt stepping, and the P4 520j a P4 2.8E with different stepping and intel 64bit.

A late model P4 620 is a lot faster than a original P4 2.8. 4x the cache, 2x the FSB, hyperthreading (which doesnt help that much, but still)....

This is why just saying X.XGhz P4 really doesnt mean much ;)

BTW, there is more variation in the P4 models than any other Intel model range. From the original slowest P4- 1.3Ghz, 400FSB, 256k up to P4 HT 672- 3.8Ghz, 800FSB, 2048k. That is almost a tripling on the core speed, 8x the amount of CPU cache, and 2x the FSB- not to mention going from PC 133 SD RAM (or RD-RAm for the rick, and connected) up to DDR2 667 for the last models.