dadiOH wrote: > Bill in Co wrote: >> I was thinking about possibly upgrading my current 1.6 GHz CPU on my >> Dell Desktop with a faster 2.2 GHz CPU (which is compatible and >> available), but I had a couple of general questions: >> >> Would upgrading the CPU would require some, or perhaps most, apps to >> need to be reactivated again, due to tripping some copy protection >> features of the apps? >> IOW, will apps typically look at that alone and that's enough, or >> does it take 2 or more large changes to the system to normally trigger >> it? > > You have apps that needed to be activated?? Or are you talking about XP? > If the latter, I don't know if changing just the CPU would require a new > activation or not but if it does it is no big deal. > _____________ > >> Also, when making image backups on my system to my second internal >> SATA2 drive, I am now getting a throughput of around 1.5 GBytes per >> minute. Is that max transfer speed limit likely due to my slow CPU >> speed (I have a 1.6 GHz CPU), or more likely a limit of the disk >> drive (or other motherboard components)? > > Not the CPU. Drive or program doing the imaging. > ______________ > >> As I recall, I think the >> theoretical transfer limit of SATA2 hard drives is supposed to be >> around 3 Gbits per second, so I'm not sure if the hard drive itself >> is the primary limit here. If so, then a CPU upgrade wouldn't affect >> that transfer rate either. > > I get 76 MB/sec...4.56 GB/min. My older drive does about 60 of that, (60? 60 of what? You mean 60% of the 4.56 GB/min)? Well then, I don't get it. My Dell desktop system (Dell 530 Inspiron) isn't too old (dated around 200, and has two internal SATA-II drives, and I can't get anything close to that (using Acronis True Image to make the image backups). Instead, it takes around 10 minutes to create a 15 GB image (between my two internal SATA-II drives), which is 1.5 GB/min. For what you quoted above, it would only take you about 3 minutes, which is phenomenal! Wonder why the difference?