I was told today that in Win 2000, when you upgrade your processor you need to reinstall Win 2000.
They went on to say that when you install, that the OS reads the BIOS for the cpu speed. Then if you upgrade the cpu, that information doesn't change with the new proc.
I was aware that the OS, 2000 or not, check the BIOS during installs to check for a required minimum cpu speed. I was always lead to believe that the hardware, OS, and applications ran at what ever the cpu cycles at.
Are they right, will 2000 control the over all speed to what cpu the original istall was on?
I agree. What morons told you that? Clock speed is irrelevent. The OS can't control it (except in certain laptop applications where the BIOS has extensions allowing "processor cycling" and the like).
Win2K does do a clock check before it installs, but it does this by it's own methods, not by checking with the BIOS.
You need to go kick whoever told you that.
if putting a new cpu in your system involves a new motherboard, then thats a different story, ok, windows will pick up on it, but chances are that in the near future you will have probs- definately with 98, probably with 2k, and may not even get past a blue screen on xp. Then again, you may have no probs at all, I've done it that way even thought I know what may happen, sometimes ok, other times not.
If they squeeze olives to get olive oil, how do they get baby oil?
Here's my own firsthand experience: Last week I upgraded my aging Celeron 466 to [a less aging :-)] P-iii 733. Windows found the new processor and it's much more snappy now. I even checked some drivers or applications that tune themselves for the CPU you have. Of course my mainboard's a BX and I'm running it at 5.5x110 right now because my MSI GeForce2 MX400 card doesn't like the AGP bus being at 89 MHz. It gave driver problems when booting Windows 2000...
About the motherboard, I had Windows 98 when I changed my mainboard 2 years ago (from Pentium133/VX to Celeron466/BX) and it adjusted itself fine. But I doubt Windows 2000 would do it. I've even heard if you take your Win2K hard disk to boot another computer, it will just refuse...
I've swapped motherboards on live w2k systems 3 times now. No problems at all. It found the new hardware, rebooted, and that was it. Now, NT4, you wouldn't dare do that with. But 2K has been very nice to me.
And you can swap the drive to another machine, it will go through it's hardware add/remove process again. Depending on the exact hardware and drivers it was using, it might crash. But it won't refuse to boot.
I think it has a lot to do with what you have and what you are upgrading to..........switching from an AMD Athlon 850 to an AMD Athlon 1.2 would be easy...same mobo..virtually the same CPU.
Now switching from an AMD Athlon 850 to a P4 1.8 would probably require a reinstall of 2K to operate effectively as it is a completely different chip/mobo. I am not saying it would not work just that it would probably be best to reinstall.
It may well refuse to boot, you may get a lovely STOP_ERROR_MESSAGE_LIKE_THIS!!!
Let me backtrack, unless the system is corrupted, you will still be able to boot into safe mode and remove any offending drivers. Now whether you can make it accept the correct drivers without dying again is another story.
hmm, i was under the impression that going from a tbird, to say an xp chip would require at least some system files to be reloaded. because of sse the xp has. i was pretty sure w2k detects these things during install and will install sys files/drivers accordingly.
I run duals because i multitask between notepad, outlook express and winamp