Windows won't boot after CPU upgrade unless two cores are disabled

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
K

king_donmike

Jun 14, 2018
9
0
10
Hello everyone,

I have an old computer rig that dates back to 2007, and willing to draw as much processing power as I could from it, I decided to make a cheap upgrade to its ancient processor. Before, it had an Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 installed, which, by today's standards, is very underwhelming in terms of multitasking and gaming. I wanted to spice up this old computer as much as I could and make it able to play several older video game titles without overclocking. I spotted an Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 for 10 euros on eBay and I bought it. I have an ASUS P5VD2-MX SE motherboard and an obscure 550W PSU that I will talk about later on. Now, if you check up on ASUS website, it doesn't list "Intel Core 2 Quad" as a supported CPU, but I figured that as long as the socket is the same, the FSB doesn't exceed the motherboard's limit of 1066MHz and the CPU itself doesn't draw too much power, I should be able to run it.

I booted the computer with it and I made it through POST. The BIOS was able to recognise the processor and offered me new configuration options for it, but it reported this error on boot: "Intel CPU uCode loading error. Press F1 to resume". I resumed and I did boot on Windows XP, but after that, the screen froze to blackness. Knowing the error meant that the required microcode for the processor to work efficiently was missing, I downloaded the latest BIOS from the ASUS website and replaced its existing microcode with one from 2010 using a program named MMTOOL. I flashed it and the computer no longer threw this error and could navigate anywhere. However, I couldn't boot into Windows. Trying to do so would result in Windows seemingly loading, and then restarting. working as intended. I don't know if it can access the other two cores, because unfortunately, it doesn't state that, but it was working without any additional configuration. I swapped to my previous CPU, booted into Windows successfully, ran "msconfig.exe", and changed the number of processors to two; half the cores the CPU offers. I turned off my computer, installed the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 again, and I could boot normally on to Windows. I attempted increasing the number of processors through msconfig.exe to three, but that resulted in the restarting problem again. I have decreased the number of processors through msconfig.exe to two again and I haven't encountered any problems ever since. I attempted running Hiren's Boot CD and entering Mini Windows XP, and it was working as intended. I don't know if it can access the other two cores, because unfortunately, it doesn't state that, but it was working without any additional configuration.

I'm currently typing this from the computer with the new processor installed, and while everything works smoothly, I'd like to use the other two cores that come with the CPU to make the upgrade truly worthy. I tried checking if the RAM is faulty through Windows Memory Diagnostic Tool, and it passed all tests successfully. I never encountered any problems with the RAM, anyway, so I believe we can safely cross that out. I checked the temperatures and the Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 sits at 37°C on idle while the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 sits at 50°C on idle. I figured this isn't too big of a deal, but please do correct me if I'm wrong. I read somewhere that motherboards with a 4-pin power connector. which my motherboard sports, have difficulties powering Intel Core 2 Quads. I doubt its validity since the machine does run using all cores except boot to Windows, but I could be wrong once again. I stated before that I'd talk more in depth about the obscure PSU. It's not a known brand; it's a Turbo-X PSU. I took a picture of the sticker on it with all the information that might be useful in resolving this issue. I uploaded it on my MEGA drive; here's the link: https://mega.nz/#!0loAzAza!K_UAOs9U_nO1Tez2K8zAilVhB2PEJOLrhNEDnSHBSwY

I'm sorry for making this too long and for pestering you too much with it, but I'd greatly appreciate it if I could receive a helping hand from this community and let the thread stay for others who might face the same or similar problems and need a solution. Thank you for taking the time to read and possibly reply to this; I appreciate any help I can get. :)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
A

asoroka

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2009
1,200
1
19,660
What version of Windows.

You may need to re-install your windows as the HAL may not detect the change from dual core to Quad core.

You can try to force the issue by running msconfig and manually setting the number of processors.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DSzymborski

DSzymborski

Curmudgeon Pursuivant
Moderator
Nov 19, 2010
20,873
5,106
106,640


Unfortunately, this is a very poor assumption to make. That the motherboard lists *no* four-core processors and *no* processors past the Conroe series is a very big red flag here. You're actually lucky it works at all. The Wolfdale CPU you're trying to use is quite literally two Conroes stuffed into a single CPU, so it's not a surprise that a motherboard was never designed to work with quad-core processors is only seeing two cores.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
K

king_donmike

Jun 14, 2018
9
0
10
Thank you for the replies.


That's a good idea, but I forgot to provide that little detail; I can't boot into Windows Setup with the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600. If I swap back to the Intel Core 2 Duo E4400, I can run it and install Windows, but that's missing the point. It seems that Windows Setup attempts to use more than two of the cores which results in the crash. It's doing what it should; It's not the setup that's at fault, but rather, my machine.


I understand what you're saying. I'm aware it doesn't list it in the "Supported CPUs" section, but the CPU was. in addition, released before the motherboard was created, which made me think that it's likely possible. Point of correction: It's a Kentfield CPU. Not a Wolfdale. The Kentsfields comprise two separate silicon dies on one MCM, similar to the Pentium D branded CPUs, which are supported by the motherboard, bringing me closer to that assumption. They both feature the 65nm process and are based on the same Core microarchitecture, so from my limited understanding of this, I don't see why it isn't supported other than the former requiring more power or generating more heat. I read that this processor requires 105W at most, which might be why it can seemingly only support two cores. As for the heatsink, it seems to provide sufficient cooling at the moment. I checked the temperatures and it reaches 58°C under load while using two cores. Maybe there's a culprit in these two?

Thanks again for the replies, and I'd love to know what's causing this. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DSzymborski

DSzymborski

Curmudgeon Pursuivant
Moderator
Nov 19, 2010
20,873
5,106
106,640


Sorry, was working from memory on the Quad.

But again, none of those Pentium Ds, which predate all these, were quad-core, as far as I remember; they're more or less Pentium 4s jammed together. That you have a motherboard that officially supports no quad-core processors and you have a quad-core processor on that motherboard that only works as a dual-core doesn't strike me as a coincidence. It doesn't appear to be a case of the manufacturer overlooking a CPU, which sometimes happens, given that quad cores are consistently missing across the board.

The PSU is, of course, frightening, but it was pretty frightening with any CPU installed, so I don't believe that this is causing *this* particular issue.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
K

king_donmike

Jun 14, 2018
9
0
10

It's okay. Everyone makes mistakes. I appreciate the fact you're trying to help me. :) Yes, that is correct. None of them are quad-core. What did you mean when you said the PSU was "frightening", though? Can you please be more specific? I attached a picture I took of the label in the first post, in case you need that. I did check the CPU support list on the ASUS website and I noticed there's a magnitude of processors which require a higher TDP than the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 to function (Intel Pentium D 960 and Intel Pentium 4 672 to name a few), which makes me think that the PSU might not be the culprit. It boils down to this in my mind:

1. The CPU is not working as intended due to the higher number or cores, as you said.
2. The CPU is generating too much heat and the heatsink is unable to keep pace, since it does reach 58°C under load with only two cores working.

What do you think of this? What do you make out of all this?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DSzymborski

DSzymborski

Curmudgeon Pursuivant
Moderator
Nov 19, 2010
20,873
5,106
106,640


I've never known a low-budget, non-name PSU, with a rail distribution like that, to be a competent PSU. The teardown I found that didn't even have branding on the capacitors scared me.

While it's on the hot side at idle, if you were having problems related to heat, the PC would shut down, not just cause these odd problems you're having. And if you've never pushed it past 58, you've never pushed it into the danger zone.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
2

2690173248

Commendable
Jul 7, 2016
8
0
1,520
1. You are using Windows XP, which does NOT support more than 2 threads. Use Windows Server 2003 if you want Windows XP with more than 2 threads.
2. There is no support for the Quad core CPUs probably indicate that if you stick one in (especially the Q6600/Q6700 with its whopping 108W TDP), chances are that the motherboard is not able to deliver the amount of power needed to run the CPU stably. Since that VIA chipset is one of the lower end ones, it is even more likely that your motherboard just simply couldn't deliver 108W worth of power to the CPU.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
K

king_donmike

Jun 14, 2018
9
0
10

Thanks for that. So it's the PSU? As for the temperature, no, that's not on idle. That's when the CPU is intensely pressured. On idle, the highest I have reached is 45°C but it's generally around 40-43°C. I recorded this while using two cores.


I'm sorry. I forgot to mention that I dual-boot Windows XP and Windows 7. Regardless of which one I pick, the operating system will seemingly start loading, but after a few seconds, the computer will reboot automatically. I can't boot into Windows 7 setup for the same reason. Please note that this only happens whenever I have two or more cores enabled. Everything works smoothly using two or less cores. I did manage to boot into Mini Windows XP, which is a part of Hiren's BootCD, but I don't know if it attempts to use more than two cores or not.

Thank you for the replies thus far!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom