Duron owners. does windows find Duron or Athlon???

Forum CPU & Components : CPUs Duron owners. does windows find Duron or Athlon???

I saw on this website
http://www.virtualhideout.net/guid [...] dex3.shtml

info about modding windows info
I have done this info before but u can only add info
you cant change it to tell what Processor u have
Well this windows says AMD Duron processor
well i have a duron and my windows, every windows i have used says AMD Athlon

What do ur windows say?
Does anyone elses say duron who has duron?

-- They have found a way to harness the power of a thunderstorm and expell it with great force!--

Reply to Anonymous

Device Manager says,

AuthenticAMD
AMD Duron(tm) Processor

Windows 98SE

Reply to phsstpok

yeah i get the same, in system properties it say's i have an athlon instead of a duron
i'm running win98se

Reply to Anonymous

win98 se shows Duron alright. win versions that show athlons are probably those shipped before duron came around. since the core is same, they identify as Athlon. many older benchmarking and cpuid utils also show Duron as Athlon.

Besides, ALL these utils show L2 cache of Duron as 1k only, when it is really 64k, this bug is documented on the AMD site.

Girish

Reply to girish

Mine's the same, says it's a thorough-bred Duron. As posted, the problem is one of Win95, 98 & NT4 arriving before Duron.

Don't the chips have identifying info built into them? SiSoft 2000 calls my Duron a

Duron 600-1000Mhz

which is where a lot of the rumours of Duron's scalability came from. Is this title one that SiSoft put in, or one taken from the chip directly?

Reply to dandan

I am running windows ME
and 2000
both find my duron as Athlon

explain that

-- They have found a way to harness the power of a thunderstorm and expell it with great force!--

Reply to Anonymous

tbirdinside,

Damned if I know. My comment on 95, 98 & NT4 was based on the fact that for any hardware that arrives after the software running on it was released, the OS shows the hardware as an older version of itself. Indeed, the PIIs I used to use were referred to as PentiumPro by both 95 & NT4, which is the processor they heralded from. My Rage Pr card was the same in NT until a patch came out. Maybe Microsoft simply didn't bother to go into that much detail when checking, or the way to identify them changed from when AMD provided Intel the information to when they actual went into circulation.

This all assumes that the OS identifies the processor and shows you an appropriate message. If it physically reads the title from the chip itself, then the ball is definitely in AMD's court.

Does anyone know if the OS identifes the chip, or simplyasks it directly?

Dan

Reply to dandan

I was just kinda shocked to see that someones pc actually found it as a Duron

My duron i tired windows 98, 2000, and ME and all said Athlon

My old k6-2 350 once found Intel MMX technology
that was weird

I mean
Maybe its the processor which tell windows i think thru id id thingy
but i do have a newer Duron thou
The one in the link was a 700 so maybe well i dont know..

I just thought it was weird..

On Bootup my bios says AMD Druon
windows says Athlon
..

-- They have found a way to harness the power of a thunderstorm and expell it with great force!--

Reply to Anonymous

My own is a 700, though my friend has just bought an 800, so when I help him build it this weekend, I'll try to remember what 98SE says for him. Maybe they tweaked the chip very mildly at some point which changed the identifying part.

Another consideration is that the OS gets this info from the BIOS itself (which seems more likely the more I think about it). Then, this will vary according to the BIOS chip and revision used by an individual.

Sounds like a cop-out, but it seems the most plausible (after all, the PC is meant to ask the BIOS what components are in a PC, or it was meant to originally, hence the purpose of the BIOS)

Reply to dandan

I use Windows 98SE which is pre-Duron but the OS reports it's a Duron nonetheless.

Now, I seem to recall a Win 95 patch that allowed the OS to do a little better at detecting non-Intel processors but I don't recall a similar patch for Win 98SE.

Oh well, I will just chaulk up all these discrepencies as just more Microsoft quirks.

Ok, now, that's quirk #593, Windows correctly/incorrectly detects actual processor.

Reply to phsstpok

You misread my post.

Windows 98SE does recognize my Duron.

Reply to phsstpok

Standard Windows 98SE install.

These are the only updates installed:

All security updates
128-bit Dial-up Networking
Active Accessibility Update 1.2
Windows 98 Troubleshooter Update
Windows IDE Hard Drive Cache Package
DirectX 8.0a Upgrade
MSN Messenger Service 3.6
Windows 98 Games

Reply to phsstpok

This answers nothing

Why does windows 98se which is ANCIENT now
find Durons as Durons
and ME and 2kpro~~ find Durons as Athlons?

Why why why??

-- They have found a way to harness the power of a thunderstorm and expell it with great force!--

Reply to Anonymous

I think its within the processor because I built a Duron 600 and in both win98 and ME, it detected it as Athlon. I also built a Duron 700 and it was detected as a Duron. I also got the same results with win2k.

Reply to owais

I say check for a bios update, it fixed similar issues with my K6, K6 2, K6 III+ system.

----------------------
why, oh WHY, is the world run by morons?

Reply to 74merc

my Duron 800 is saying Duron 800 in windows, and bios... Which doesn't really help you... but my friend's 700Dur always says Athlon so i guess it might just be a thing with the older Durons... they might have had a flaw in the ID bit, you never know... all we can do is speculate..

But who really cares anyway???

Note to self: Never buy anything without checking with Tom first...

Reply to Anonymous

Ask the community Add a reply

Related content

See all topics related to "Duron owners. does windows find Duron or Athlon???"

Tom's Hardware > Forum > CPU & Components > CPUs > Duron owners. does windows find Duron or Athlon???

Go to:

Help |
Forum rules

There are 2031 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Page generated in 0.754 seconds

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel