Upgrading a Sony Vaio VGN-FS115S

Hi everyone!

Firstly, I'm really sorry if this has been covered anywhere else in the forum, I used the search engine but couldn't find what I needed.

Anyway, I'm looking to upgrade my Sony Vaio VGN-FS115S to boost it's performance and get a little more life out of it. It's current specs are...

Intel Pentium M Processor 1.73GHz (Dothan)
L1 Cache: 32KB
L2 Cache: 2,048KB
RAM: 1,024MB
NVIDIA GeForce Go 6200 with TurboCache 128MB 1280x800
HITACHI DK23FA-80 Hard Drive (80GB)
Windows XP Home

I've been told that 1GB RAM is the most the laptop can handle but what I'd ideally like to do is upgrade the Hard Drive and possible the CPU and graphics card. However, as this laptop is now pretty old, I'm having trouble finding out what components are compatible and what aren't.

Is there anyone out there that knows the following...

* Is 1GB really the maximum RAM that the laptop can handle? If not, how much more can it take?
* What hard drive would be compatible? I'd really like 120GB+ and a faster RPM but don't know the consequences in terms of heat production
* What's the best CPU I could upgrade to without causing the laptop to overheat?
* Is it realistic to upgrade the graphics card in this laptop? If so, what to and again, will it overheat?

I realise that this is a hell of a lot of information but if anyone can help I'd really appreciate it. Feel free to chip in if you know some of the info but not all!

Thanks in advance!

Flapjack001

 

According to Crucial and Kingston 1gig is indeed the max memory recognized using 2 x 512MB sticks. With that in mind you would probably be better off saving your money and get a newer laptop instead of performing a halfway upgrade on this one.

 

Hi Papa,

Thanks for confirming that. You're probably right that getting a new laptop might be a more viable option, but I've got a friend that can get me really cheap parts, so long as I can tell him exactly what I need, so if I can find out what can be done to upgrade the laptop I can weigh up the options and costs.

Thanks again!

 

Oooh, forgot to add...I've got a BT HomeHub 2.0 wireless router which is N compatible but the wireless card inside the laptop is only b/g so I'm not getting the advantage. Would getting a PCMCIA N wireless adapter card improve download speeds, online streaming and online gaming?

Thanks

 

- 1GB is indeed the maximum capacity of the FS. I recently checked this info on Sony's website for another NBR user.

- any 2.5" IDE or EIDE (Enhanced IDE) hard drive. You can get capacities up to 320GB, with a maximum spindle speed of 5400RPM, a limitation of the interface. Still, drives like the Samsung HM160HC deliver excellent performance. Click here for more info on this drive.

- A CPU upgrade most certainly will not be worth the cost. The only upgrade you can make from a P-M 735 is a CPU of the same architecture with a higher clock speed (up to 500MHz faster), but that would be very expensive (about $200) and it wouldn't deliver major performance increases.

- The Nvidia 6200 is an integrated card, meaning that it is soldered to the motherboard and therefore cannot be upgraded.

The Nvidia 6200 can handle Aero, so you could theoretically run Windows 7 on it, which would provide a significantly better computing experience in terms of software on such a machine. However, whatever upgrades you undertake you should keep the cost in mind and compare it to the price of an entirely new laptop, which can be quite cheap nowadays. It may be better to simply sell the FS as a used machine and put the money towards a brand new, fully capable laptop. The reason I'm telling you about this is that the RAM limitation of the FS sort of leaves it behind in terms of what OS it can run (Vista would crawl on it, and 7 would be a little better).

It would improve wireless performance, assuming that you were pushing the limits of your existing G network. Unless you stream HD media, transfer files, or do other bandwidth-intensive network applications, wireless N is not necessary.

 

Bog, thanks!

That's great info, just what I needed.

Cheers!

 

The thing to note is, assuming your download speeds, online streaming, and online gaming are going to external servers over the internet, that the speed of your ISP is _much_ more important. Unless you're running off university or company ISPs, the speed of most consumer ISPs is much less than that of even a G network, so upgrading to wireless N would just speed transfer of files (or local network video, or LAN gaming).

 

I have to completely disagree with that. Se7en will run slower and more sluggishly on that system with only 1gig of ram than XP would. I've yet to see Se7en provide a better computing experience than XP on ANY computer though. Aero is like putting a fancy new paint job on a Pinto. It might look nice but it still runs like a Pinto.

 

I would imagine you're not using powerful enough hardware. Windows 7 (as the rest of the world refers to it) is much more powerful in almost every aspect than XP ever was. On current, up-to-date hardware it's a pleasure to use, and when going back to XP you certainly feel the downgrade, especially in terms of UI.

People who had sub-par hardware had the same problem with Vista. I agree that XP will be much quicker on older hardware, but that's simply a result of it being released 9 years ago, when we were in the age of the Pentium III.

 

Windows 7 won't perform as well on the FS as XP will due to the huge difference in age of the latter OS, but 7 will nevertheless provide a superior experience. On the matter of RAM requirements, Windows 7 does scale back RAM usage when there is less available RAM.

With 2GB of RAM in my ThinkPad (which also has a 1.7GHz Pentium M btw), about 650MB is most commonly used. The most I've ever seen in use was 1.2GB. Of course, there are more formal tests out there confirming my claims, but many netbooks run Windows 7 just fine with similar computing power to the OP's FS.

 

I wouldn't consider a 3.4GHz C2D with 4gigs of ram outdated hardware.

As for the UI and providing a superior experience, that is a matter of taste. The Vista/7 GUI is convoluted, confusing, and considerably more complex as far as I'm concerned. EVERYTHING takes longer to do than it does on XP. It does NOT provide a better computing experience, just a massive headache that exceeds anything that Excedrin can deal with.

And this would be even more apparent on a system that can only have 1gig of ram.

But then you have your opinion and I have mine. Downgrading from XP to 7 is just that.