I have an old PC I am looking to upgrade. I mostly use the PC for general stuff (e-mail, web browsing, word processing, etc.). I am definitely not a "basic user" though I do not do stuff like CAD, video, graphics or serious gaming, which require a lot of RAM and CPU power.
Here are some basic specs on my PC:
Intel P4 Northwood 2.8C GHz CPU
Intel D865PERL motherboard
512MB DDR 400 RAM (2 sticks of 256MB)
128MB ATI Radeon 9200 AGP video card
The main reason I am looking to upgrade is Windows Vista. I'm not going to jump on the "Vista bandwagon" right away, but I would like to keep it in mind and have the hardware ready for it. I run Win XP Pro at home and it works OK, but extra RAM and even a newer video card wouldn't hurt.
If I keep my present motherboard and CPU, I am looking to either get two extra sticks of 512MB or 1GB RAM. Yes, there will be a big performance boost from 512MB to 1.5GB or 2.5GB, but is there really a performance difference in 1.5GB RAM and 2.5GB RAM? Also, I am looking at some "Vista ready" 256MB AGP video cards. With the extra DDR 3200 ram and new 256MB AGP video card, I am looking at spending roughly $150 - $250 total if I keep my present CPU and motherboard.
BUT, I could just start over, get a new motherboard (P965), Pentium D or Core 2 Duo CPU, DDR2 RAM, and PCI-X video card. This would set me back $400 - 600.
I have played around with the Windows Upgrade Advisor as well as other "upgrade advisors" (Crucial, ATI, NVidia, PC Pitstop, etc.). My present RAM and video seem to be the weakpoints. I guess what I am really trying to ask here is "how much is too much" considering I don't have tons of $$$ to spend.
So, I am wondering which one is going to give me the "most bang for my buck." The DDR RAM addition (I'm not sure how much RAM I really need to add, though I am thinking about those two 512MB RAM sticks) and upgraded video card seems to be what I'm leaning towards, though I may just get the extra RAM for starters. Would like to hear some other opinions about these upgrade possibilities.