Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Swaping CPU's Celeron/P4

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 8:40:02 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Seems like in the old days (486 and such) if you swaped processors and left
everything else the same you wind up having to re-install and reconfiguer
(man, doing that stuff before PNP was loads of fun). I haven't had to face
that for quite sometime but now my wifes "new" eMachine is too slow for her
and she wants a faster processor. She now has a 2.8 GHz CeleronD with 533
FSB, on an 478 mPGA socket running @ 1.25 - 1.4 volts, with 256 L2 cache
using the 845 chip set and PC 2700 RAM. All my (quite considerable) research
at Intels' site says that the 2.4A P4 with the same FSB, voltage, and and
mPGA 478 socket should wok with this MOBO. So, questions to the Gurus;
1) Would I have to flash the BIOS? Intel doesn't say (of course) and
eMachines won't answer the question.
2)Intel says that the Hyperthreading won't work for this chip set with
anythhing less than a 3.06 GHz porcessor, but eMachines says that it will!
(Ain't this fun?)
3) Any idea if the OEM Windows will take a hit from doing this? And if so,
would I be able to recover with Restore or Rapir (I've read a bunch a posts
in here and can't see if that is a problem or not, opinons seem mixed)
Anybody ever do anyything like this? Thanks for your time.
Magicky

More about : swaping cpu celeron

Anonymous
June 9, 2005 10:23:10 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

The problem with an OEM XP is that the computer manufacturer ties it to
something in the system and most of the time only he knows
what.........................I would check with EMachines to see if changing
the processor will make that OEM version useless.I cant quite remember but I
do believe that changing the processor does require you to do a Repair
installation before XP will function.Which is why you need to know if you
will be able to repair with a processor change.
peterk

--
It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about
the problem
"Magicky" <Magicky@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3936724D-55C5-4333-8346-7B1B00D9AD06@microsoft.com...
> Seems like in the old days (486 and such) if you swaped processors and
> left
> everything else the same you wind up having to re-install and reconfiguer
> (man, doing that stuff before PNP was loads of fun). I haven't had to face
> that for quite sometime but now my wifes "new" eMachine is too slow for
> her
> and she wants a faster processor. She now has a 2.8 GHz CeleronD with 533
> FSB, on an 478 mPGA socket running @ 1.25 - 1.4 volts, with 256 L2 cache
> using the 845 chip set and PC 2700 RAM. All my (quite considerable)
> research
> at Intels' site says that the 2.4A P4 with the same FSB, voltage, and and
> mPGA 478 socket should wok with this MOBO. So, questions to the Gurus;
> 1) Would I have to flash the BIOS? Intel doesn't say (of course) and
> eMachines won't answer the question.
> 2)Intel says that the Hyperthreading won't work for this chip set with
> anythhing less than a 3.06 GHz porcessor, but eMachines says that it will!
> (Ain't this fun?)
> 3) Any idea if the OEM Windows will take a hit from doing this? And if so,
> would I be able to recover with Restore or Rapir (I've read a bunch a
> posts
> in here and can't see if that is a problem or not, opinons seem mixed)
> Anybody ever do anyything like this? Thanks for your time.
> Magicky
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 1:26:39 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Is 2.4A an official Intel P4 model designation? The 2.4B is 533 MHz
Northwood. (The 2.4C is the 800 MHz model, which supports hyperthreading.)
I'm not familiar with Prescott and newer processors.

I wonder if a P4 2.4B is an upgrade over a 2.8 GHz Celeron D? I don't know,
but I wouldn't bet that it is.

If memory serves, in the 533 MHz FSB Northwood CPUs, the 3.06 GHz chip was
the only one in which hyperthreading was enabled. It's not a question of the
PC's chipset supporting hyperthreading; it wasn't available with slower
CPUs. There are slower CPUs that support hyperthreading, but I think that
they are all for the 800 MHz FSB, which isn't officially supported by 845
chipsets.

Does eMachines make BIOS updates available for download? I looked at a few
models on their web page, and no BIOS updates were in sight.

My guess is that the OS is somehow fouled up; a PC of that vintage ought to
feel fast in most applications. (Possible exceptions: video authoring, high
end games, etc. Not the sort of things most people would buy an eMachines
system for.)

If it's not messed up, how much RAM is installed? XP is supposed to be OK
with 256 MB, but better with 512 MB or more. (A symptom of too little ram
would be excessive hard disk access.) If the hard disk is a slow model (5400
RPM or slower rather than 7200), a replacement might be a little faster.

I doubt that you'd need to repair your XP installation with a new CPU.
Installing a newer version of the Intel chipset drivers might help

If you post your eMachines model, perhaps you could get specific advice. It
is sometimes possible to perform a swap that's way outside what is supported
by the manufacture: for example, I once sold a 700 MHz Slot 1 PIII to a chap
who got it to run in Dell that only officially supported up to a PIII 450.
(I vaguely recall that flashing an Intel board's BIOS over the DELL one may
have been required. That would not be recommended for the tyro.)

If it isn't clear from what I've written above, I think that upgrading the
CPU would probably lead to disappointment.

Good luck.


Address scrambled. Replace nkbob with bobkn.

"Magicky" <Magicky@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3936724D-55C5-4333-8346-7B1B00D9AD06@microsoft.com...
> Seems like in the old days (486 and such) if you swaped processors and
> left
> everything else the same you wind up having to re-install and reconfiguer
> (man, doing that stuff before PNP was loads of fun). I haven't had to face
> that for quite sometime but now my wifes "new" eMachine is too slow for
> her
> and she wants a faster processor. She now has a 2.8 GHz CeleronD with 533
> FSB, on an 478 mPGA socket running @ 1.25 - 1.4 volts, with 256 L2 cache
> using the 845 chip set and PC 2700 RAM. All my (quite considerable)
> research
> at Intels' site says that the 2.4A P4 with the same FSB, voltage, and and
> mPGA 478 socket should wok with this MOBO. So, questions to the Gurus;
> 1) Would I have to flash the BIOS? Intel doesn't say (of course) and
> eMachines won't answer the question.
> 2)Intel says that the Hyperthreading won't work for this chip set with
> anythhing less than a 3.06 GHz porcessor, but eMachines says that it will!
> (Ain't this fun?)
> 3) Any idea if the OEM Windows will take a hit from doing this? And if so,
> would I be able to recover with Restore or Rapir (I've read a bunch a
> posts
> in here and can't see if that is a problem or not, opinons seem mixed)
> Anybody ever do anyything like this? Thanks for your time.
> Magicky
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 1:26:40 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

2.4A is the designation for the Prescott, yes. The reason I've decided to try
that chip is voltage: the CeleronD uses a 1.2-1.4 volt range and the P4 2.4A
does too. The Northwood cores are 1.5-1.55 Volts, which wouldn't do to well
with this mother board (Intel D845 GVSR). Also the Prescott has 1 MB of L2
cache and the Celeron is like this (bulit in Nov. 2004 BTW):
Processor Model : Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.80GHz
Speed : 2.80GHz
Performance Rating : PR3080 (estimated)
CPUs per Core : 1 Unit(s)
Type : Standard
Package : FC µPGA478
Rated Speed/FSB : 2800MHz / 4x 133MHz
Multiplier : 21/1x
Minimum/Maximum Multiplier : 7/1x / 21/1x
Generation : G8
Name : P4P (Prescott) Celeron D 90nm 2.0-4GHz 1.25-1.40V
Revision/Stepping : 3 / 4 (0)
Microcode : MU0F3413
Maximum Physical / Virtual Addressing : 36-bit / 32-bit
Native Page Size : 4kB
Processor Cache(s)
Internal Data Cache : 16kB Synchronous, Write-Thru, 8-way set, 64 byte line
size
Internal Trace Cache : 12kB Synchronous, Write-Thru, 8-way set, 64 byte line
size
L2 On-board Cache : 256kB ECC Synchronous, ATC, 4-way set, 64 byte line
size, 2 lines per sector
L2 Cache Multiplier : 1/1x (2800MHz
Upgradeability
Socket/Slot : J2E1
Upgrade Interface : Socket 478
Supported Speed(s) : 2.80GHz+
All the above reported by SiSoft Sandra BTW. eMachine 's only reply for info
is that they think I'm going to void the warrenty and don't reccomend any
upgrades, accept what is avaliable at their site, mostly junk memory and
CD/DVD drives. The limitation on the L2 cache being what it is, 4-way set, 64
byte line size, 2 lines per sector, the P4 has 16X more addressability, whch
should make up for the 400 MHz difference by far. The box came with 256 MB of
RAM but I added a 512 MB stick of PC 2700 I had laying around and it works
fine. The Intel chipset ver. is the latest for the 845. Intel's site says
that I should be able to make the switch, but that is through very judicious
reading between the lines. They won't committ to anything, as I'm sure you
know. All in all, my only concern is having to flash the damn BIOS if it
won't let me reapir windows, should anything go wrong. If I do have to do
that, I'm pretty sure that I'll have to put my own Windows copy on as
eMachines says that any cnangeing of the BIOS (or MOBO) will make it
impossible to use the Recovery software. Thanks for the help...
Magicky
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 1:26:41 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Magicky" <Magicky@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030D1F77-03D7-4422-8C3A-4ADD56438A4F@microsoft.com...
> 2.4A is the designation for the Prescott, yes. The reason I've decided to
> try
> that chip is voltage: the CeleronD uses a 1.2-1.4 volt range and the P4
> 2.4A
> does too. The Northwood cores are 1.5-1.55 Volts, which wouldn't do to
> well
> with this mother board (Intel D845 GVSR). Also the Prescott has 1 MB of L2
> cache and the Celeron is like this (bulit in Nov. 2004 BTW):
> Processor Model : Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.80GHz
> Speed : 2.80GHz
> Performance Rating : PR3080 (estimated)
> CPUs per Core : 1 Unit(s)
> Type : Standard
> Package : FC µPGA478
> Rated Speed/FSB : 2800MHz / 4x 133MHz
> Multiplier : 21/1x
> Minimum/Maximum Multiplier : 7/1x / 21/1x
> Generation : G8
> Name : P4P (Prescott) Celeron D 90nm 2.0-4GHz 1.25-1.40V
> Revision/Stepping : 3 / 4 (0)
> Microcode : MU0F3413
> Maximum Physical / Virtual Addressing : 36-bit / 32-bit
> Native Page Size : 4kB
> Processor Cache(s)
> Internal Data Cache : 16kB Synchronous, Write-Thru, 8-way set, 64 byte
> line
> size
> Internal Trace Cache : 12kB Synchronous, Write-Thru, 8-way set, 64 byte
> line
> size
> L2 On-board Cache : 256kB ECC Synchronous, ATC, 4-way set, 64 byte line
> size, 2 lines per sector
> L2 Cache Multiplier : 1/1x (2800MHz
> Upgradeability
> Socket/Slot : J2E1
> Upgrade Interface : Socket 478
> Supported Speed(s) : 2.80GHz+
> All the above reported by SiSoft Sandra BTW. eMachine 's only reply for
> info
> is that they think I'm going to void the warrenty and don't reccomend any
> upgrades, accept what is avaliable at their site, mostly junk memory and
> CD/DVD drives. The limitation on the L2 cache being what it is, 4-way set,
> 64
> byte line size, 2 lines per sector, the P4 has 16X more addressability,
> whch
> should make up for the 400 MHz difference by far. The box came with 256 MB
> of
> RAM but I added a 512 MB stick of PC 2700 I had laying around and it works
> fine. The Intel chipset ver. is the latest for the 845. Intel's site says
> that I should be able to make the switch, but that is through very
> judicious
> reading between the lines. They won't committ to anything, as I'm sure you
> know. All in all, my only concern is having to flash the damn BIOS if it
> won't let me reapir windows, should anything go wrong. If I do have to do
> that, I'm pretty sure that I'll have to put my own Windows copy on as
> eMachines says that any cnangeing of the BIOS (or MOBO) will make it
> impossible to use the Recovery software. Thanks for the help...
> Magicky

Make sure the Prescott P4 CPU is rev. 8 or higher for SP2 compatibility. If
eMachines doesn't provide BIOS updates you may have problems with SP2.

http://msmvps.com/chrisl/archive/2004/08/22/12197.aspx

Kerry
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 4:26:51 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"peterk" <peterk@nomalarky.net> wrote:

>The problem with an OEM XP is that the computer manufacturer ties it to
>something in the system and most of the time only he knows
>what.........................I would check with EMachines to see if changing
>the processor will make that OEM version useless.I cant quite remember but I
>do believe that changing the processor does require you to do a Repair
>installation before XP will function.Which is why you need to know if you
>will be able to repair with a processor change.
>peterk

The SLP process for OEM versions of Windows XP ties the computer to
the specific motherboard BIOS.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 4:26:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

So by changing the processor you've made changes in the BIOS but have not
really changed the BIOS itself.
Does that mean the OEM XP will do a repair installation??
just curious
peterk

--
It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't know too much about
the problem
"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:nhnha156588vs0odp284llorhfs25v4g4n@4ax.com...
> "peterk" <peterk@nomalarky.net> wrote:
>
>>The problem with an OEM XP is that the computer manufacturer ties it to
>>something in the system and most of the time only he knows
>>what.........................I would check with EMachines to see if
>>changing
>>the processor will make that OEM version useless.I cant quite remember but
>>I
>>do believe that changing the processor does require you to do a Repair
>>installation before XP will function.Which is why you need to know if you
>>will be able to repair with a processor change.
>>peterk
>
> The SLP process for OEM versions of Windows XP ties the computer to
> the specific motherboard BIOS.
>
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
> --
> Microsoft MVP
> On-Line Help Computer Service
> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
>
> In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
> http://aumha.org/alex.htm
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 4:26:53 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

see www.intel.com


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"peterk" <peterk@nomalarky.net> wrote in message
news:o ra99BWbFHA.3240@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| So by changing the processor you've made changes in the
BIOS but have not
| really changed the BIOS itself.
| Does that mean the OEM XP will do a repair installation??
| just curious
| peterk
|
| --
| It's so much easier to suggest solutions when you don't
know too much about
| the problem
| "Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
| news:nhnha156588vs0odp284llorhfs25v4g4n@4ax.com...
| > "peterk" <peterk@nomalarky.net> wrote:
| >
| >>The problem with an OEM XP is that the computer
manufacturer ties it to
| >>something in the system and most of the time only he
knows
| >>what.........................I would check with
EMachines to see if
| >>changing
| >>the processor will make that OEM version useless.I cant
quite remember but
| >>I
| >>do believe that changing the processor does require you
to do a Repair
| >>installation before XP will function.Which is why you
need to know if you
| >>will be able to repair with a processor change.
| >>peterk
| >
| > The SLP process for OEM versions of Windows XP ties the
computer to
| > the specific motherboard BIOS.
| >
| >
| > Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
| > --
| > Microsoft MVP
| > On-Line Help Computer Service
| > http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
| >
| > In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
| > http://aumha.org/alex.htm
|
|
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 4:35:23 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Magicky" <Magicky@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Seems like in the old days (486 and such) if you swaped processors and left
>everything else the same you wind up having to re-install and reconfiguer
>(man, doing that stuff before PNP was loads of fun). I haven't had to face
>that for quite sometime but now my wifes "new" eMachine is too slow for her
>and she wants a faster processor. She now has a 2.8 GHz CeleronD with 533
>FSB, on an 478 mPGA socket running @ 1.25 - 1.4 volts, with 256 L2 cache
>using the 845 chip set and PC 2700 RAM. All my (quite considerable) research
>at Intels' site says that the 2.4A P4 with the same FSB, voltage, and and
>mPGA 478 socket should wok with this MOBO. So, questions to the Gurus;
>1) Would I have to flash the BIOS? Intel doesn't say (of course) and
>eMachines won't answer the question.
>2)Intel says that the Hyperthreading won't work for this chip set with
>anythhing less than a 3.06 GHz porcessor, but eMachines says that it will!
>(Ain't this fun?)
>3) Any idea if the OEM Windows will take a hit from doing this? And if so,
>would I be able to recover with Restore or Rapir (I've read a bunch a posts
>in here and can't see if that is a problem or not, opinons seem mixed)
>Anybody ever do anyything like this? Thanks for your time.
>Magicky

Their should be no problems with the CPU swap.

However I would not expect any *noticeable* change in overall
performance as the slower CPU clock speed will at least partially
offset the gains from having a larger CPU cache and (possibly)
hyperthreading.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

In memory of a dear friend Alex Nichol MVP
http://aumha.org/alex.htm
Anonymous
June 10, 2005 11:07:58 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

http://www.intel.com/design/motherbd/sr/sr_proc.htm

While this may not carry over to the eMachines system, an Intel board with
the same chipset supports the Northwoods. The Prescotts may be easier to get
at this time, I suppose. I hope that the current Prescotts don't share the
large power dissipation at idle problems of the early Prescotts.

I'm not competent to comment on the performance of the P4 with respect to
the Celeron. However, I recall a lot of disappointment with the Prescotts
when they first came to market. Even though they had 1 MB of L2 cache, their
performance was about the same as the Northwoods (512 MB). I still fear that
swapping in the P4 won't greatly speed up the machine.

"Magicky" <Magicky@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:030D1F77-03D7-4422-8C3A-4ADD56438A4F@microsoft.com...
> 2.4A is the designation for the Prescott, yes. The reason I've decided to
> try
> that chip is voltage: the CeleronD uses a 1.2-1.4 volt range and the P4
> 2.4A
> does too. The Northwood cores are 1.5-1.55 Volts, which wouldn't do to
> well
> with this mother board (Intel D845 GVSR). Also the Prescott has 1 MB of L2
> cache and the Celeron is like this (bulit in Nov. 2004 BTW):
(snip)
Anonymous
June 11, 2005 11:16:01 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

> Their should be no problems with the CPU swap.
>
> However I would not expect any *noticeable* change in overall
> performance as the slower CPU clock speed will at least partially
> offset the gains from having a larger CPU cache and (possibly)
> hyperthreading.
>
> Good luck
>
> Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
> --
> Microsoft MVP
> On-Line Help Computer Service
> http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
Well, the results are in:
1) The MOBO supports the processor fine, no trouble from the BIOS at all.
2) The amount of (subjective only so far) increase in speed is appreciable,
but not as much as I'd hoped. Windows does load slightly faster and
multitasking seems easier, with three or more windows open. Hey, my wife
likes it so 'ats a' alright.
3)This puppy runs hot, as Mr. Ryder fortold, even though it is a 3.3
revision. I installed with stock heat sink and fan, and some silicon paste,
it ran at 55-60 C. Tha's a' not too good, so I swapped that stuff for some
Artic Silver paste and a solid copper heatsink. Turned the heat down to 48-53
C, some improvement, but still toasty, IMHO. (I wonder if an increase in PSU
would help? This is only 300 Watts, but all it has to power is the
CPU/chipset/RAM, 1 HDD, and 1 CD-ROM)?
4) Intel was right, no hyperthreading. I DL'ed their app that tests for HT
and no dice. Well that was a long shot anyway.

Thanks to all whom responded it helped. I'm not going d mouth eMAchines for
thier equipment, tech support, or website, but... OK, yes! I WILL bad moyth
'em. I;m used to much moe in all three areas, and I would advise anyone who
asked me to avoid doing buisness with eMachines or buy any of their products.
!