Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I have a Dell, so I need help. (that rhymes)

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 7, 2002 3:54:05 AM

My system:
DELL XPS T600
Motherboard: Intel SE440BX-3
Processor: Pentium 3 600MHZ KATMAI @ 615mhz (lol, thanks to crashman and cpufsb)
Memory: 384Mb SDRAM PC-100
DVDROM: Toshiba DVD-ROM SD-M1212
HARD DRIVE 1: IBM DPTA-372730 25.5GB
HARD DRIVE 2: Western Digital Caviar AC31600H 1.5Gb
Video card: Diamond Viper V770 Ultra TNT2
Sound card: Creative CT4780 SBLive! Value
Network Card: 3Com Etherlink XL PCI TPC NIC (3C900B-TPC)
Monitor: Dell M780

As you can see, it sux. I was thinking of building a computer, I even posted the parts I was going to buy. But now that new stuff is about to come out, I was thinking maybe do a little upgrade so I can hold until the "good stuff" comes out. I am not looking to spend much, I need the money for the "good stuff" later on. I was thinking on gettin a good highly overclockable cpu, a mobo, some memory, and maybe a graphics card, the rest i can use from this Dell. I need your input on what parts i should buy, but remember it has to be highly and efficiently overclockable. maybe amd? maybe celeron? what do you think...

btw, the "good stuff" im waiting for is prescott, nvidia's NV30. tell me if its worth the wait, or i should build a new computer now.

the worst failure is not trying........so go ahead and TRY to overclock your cpu to 5ghz

More about : dell rhymes

August 7, 2002 5:14:18 AM

hmmm
to put it honestly to build a decent rig you will want to leave behind most of the hardware you have there. its just too old.

for something highly overclockable, you cant go past the P4 1.6A or 1.8A. can get 33% on them reliably.

the only things i would consider reusing is the 25gb hard drive (as a secondary storage device), the dvd player and the network card.
the rest is too slow.

<b>Before visiting THG i was a clueless noob. Now im still clueless, but look at my nice title!<b>
August 7, 2002 7:24:34 AM

I think, you may wait a bit and upgrade meanwhile.
The 2 basic componets you have to upgrade, are CPU and video card.
The memory is enough but it's doubtful if it is going to run at 133 MHz - if it can't, you have either to use the fastest possible Celeron (not with the Tualatin core), or to change the memory to 133MHz.
regarding video card - if you don't want to spend lots of money now, take nVidia MX2-400 64MB RAM. If you are ready to spend more bucks, take MX4-440, but because you probably watch DVD films, for the same money it's better to buy an ATi card.

<font color=orange>ÃÎËßÌ ÇÀËÚÊ ËÀÏÍÈ, ÃÎËßÌÀ ÙÀÍÃÀ ÂÄÈÃÍÈ!</font color=orange>
Related resources
August 7, 2002 7:53:47 AM

ok u said u wanna buya new CPU board and possibly graphics card only if its extremely OC'able.......in order to do that u NEED new ram...and ull NEED a new case and PSU.....therefore essentially ur building a new comp...

Here's what i propose.......

ASUS A7V333 KT333 Motherboard
AMD Athlon XP 1700+ OEM
256MB PC-2700 CL2 DDRRAM
Thermaltake Volcano 7 HSF & some AS3
Antec SX1030 Black Case w/ 300watt PSU
Abit Siluro GF4 Ti4200

ur SB Live! is good
Ur NIC is good
ur HDD is good enough unless u need more space....that can wait though
ur FDD is good.....

And i can almost 100% Gaurantee u u'll hit 1700Mhz AT LEAST.....

Or u can buy a Cheap P4 1.6A Retail and a good i845E DDR Based board and run it a 2.1 or 2.2GHz roughly......keep everything else the same....but either way...its all good.....the AMD route will be cheaper......and perform VERY well for the money....

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>
a b à CPUs
August 7, 2002 10:48:32 AM

You could get a Celeron Tualatin adapter kit with processor from Powerleap, then a new video card.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 7, 2002 2:21:22 PM

440BX mobo, not impossible, but very bad to OC over 100FSB, and does not support the 133MHz FSB.

the system now isn`t bad, a higher clock CPU might be a 600MHz coppermine celeron, which OCs to 900MHz. still, it has one forth of cache compared to the system u`re using now, and that does matter. overall performance will not improve darmatically, and on multitasking, the p3 will prove to be better.

i`d say, don`t try to upgrade this, and #1. wait for the system u`re waiting for now, or #2. buy a new athlonXP system. either way is good.

"Is Celeron good?"
"No. Celeron is bad."
LOL
August 7, 2002 5:07:30 PM

I would suggest going with a cheiftec case over that antec case. It'll save you about 30~50 bucks and it's pretty much the same exact thing.

"What kind of idiot are you?"
"I don't know, what kinds are there?"
August 7, 2002 6:41:39 PM

Quote:
You could get a Celeron Tualatin adapter kit with processor from Powerleap, then a new video card.

That was sort of what I was thinking too. I seemed to remember that the 440BX mobos were supposedly good overclockers and usually ran a 133MHz FSB without complaint. (Though it did put the PCI and AGP out of spec, so other hardware might complain.) So maybe even keeping the mobo could be worth it to save some cash.

So I was thinking along the lines of overclocking using a P3-750E and then tossing in a GeForce2 MX400 on top of that. (Maybe a 256MB PC133 DIMM would be needed as well, but maybe not.) Just up the FSB to 133. If it works, you have a 1GHz P3 with a GeForce2 MX and have spent only $140 ($170 if the RAM has to be purchased as well.)

It's not the most amazing of solutions, but it beats spending a fortune.

And then again, I might just be insane.

Crashman, do you think that the P3-750 would OC that well?

<A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/171.htm" target="_new">The corpse you find may be your own.</A> - Black Mage
August 7, 2002 7:47:40 PM

Ok well the i440BX was the best chipset produced known to man-kind.........and it DID like beign OC'd dude......and the PCI Bus stayed IN SPEC..onlt the AGP was out...so at 133 its at 89MHz or so......so u get faster AGP too...lol and almsot all cards produced after the TNT2 coudl handle that speed...therefore its all good =)
nd a coppermine based is NOT worth to buy.....a 600 @ 900MHz is still a POS compared to a 667MHz P3.....so yea......

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>
August 7, 2002 8:38:32 PM

I kinda like slvr_phoenix's and crash's idea. But will the P3-750E fit in my mobo? the shape of my cpu is like a board and u put it in as if it were a PCI card. Also, if i want to up the FSB to 133mhz: 1) i dont know if my mobo supports it and 2) i dont think i can change the voltages in my mobo. I like the idea but im a noob at older components, so i need further help....

the worst failure is not trying........so go ahead and TRY to overclock your cpu to 5ghz
August 7, 2002 8:58:15 PM

what rhymes? ..wait for prescott? can you wait year?

<font color=green> there's more to life than increasing its speed -Ghandi</font color=green>
August 7, 2002 9:08:45 PM

yea i think so... if i buy R9700 and P4 and in a few months I see prescott and NV30, i would feel soo bad...

the worst failure is not trying........so go ahead and TRY to overclock your cpu to 5ghz
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
August 7, 2002 9:28:55 PM

The short answer: sell your pc and build a new one.

the longer answer: your Dell/intel MB doesnt support OC-ing whatsoever, regardless of its BX chipsets. Your PSU is is NOT standard ATX (different connector layout), so even swapping your MB is not possible without buying a new PSU. Heck, even your case is NOT standard. You'll have a hard time mounting a standard ATX board, connecting your powerswitch, reset and leds. I know, I've had a dell like yours (bit older). I did manage to throw in an socket 7 board wit a duron 600@933 but not without drilling holes, soldering, buying a new PSU, etc. I mean, these Dells even have a strange sort of Fan/duct thing that you'd have to get rid off (well, thats the easy part really).

Trust me, you're better off selling your machine on ebay, and a buy a new one.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
August 7, 2002 9:41:17 PM

...???......???.....???......????.......????.....???
----------
|. . . . . .|
| HELP! . |
|. . . . . .|
----------
| |
| |
| |
|_|


the worst failure is not trying........so go ahead and TRY to overclock your cpu to 5ghz
a b à CPUs
August 7, 2002 11:23:02 PM

Coppermine was the core that replace the Katmai, the PIII 667EB was a Coppermine.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
August 7, 2002 11:28:16 PM

You'll probably never reach 133MHz FSB on that board because SoftFSB can't change the PCI divider to 1/4. You would need a board designed for it. Your best option is the Powerleap adapter with the Tualatin Celeron. Your form factor is Slot 1, PIII's were available in both Slot 1 and Socket 370 versions, and adapters were available to make the Socket 370 fit on a card in the Slot 1 slot. The Powerleap IP3/T is a special version of that adapter with onboard voltage regulator for the Tualatin. I'll sell you an ip3/T with Celeron 1200 for $129.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 7, 2002 11:41:11 PM

I also had a Dell p3 500 Morgan w/ intel 440bx. I just upgraded the mofo (with a little difficulty) to k7s5a sis745 mobo with 1ghz athlon thunderbird. Standard ATX boards WILL fit into the case. I did nothave to drill holes or solder anything. However, the power switches were a big problem, but I got around that by using keyboard power on. You'll probably need to get a new PSU in addition to your other upgrades & memory. But it is possible. Whether it is worth it...i don't know.
August 8, 2002 12:04:53 AM

Crashman i know the 667 is soppermine based....theres a copermine based 600 also......thats what i was tryign compare...
a copermine P3 667 is faster than a copermine celeron 600 @ 900.......comprenade ?

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 1:25:28 AM

Ah, but if your system supports the 667EB, the 600E is a far better choice. Why? The 600E becomes an 800EB when overclocked to the same bus speed as the 667 (133MHz). There were also two other versions of the PIII 600, both Katmia based, the 600 and 600B. And the 600E and 600EB were available in both Socket 370 and Slot One varieties. That makes 6 distict PIII 600MHz processors!

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 1:48:36 AM

damn i just got lost...
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 2:33:16 AM

Brief rundown:

First there was the Pentium. Intel later released the Pentium Pro with on-chip, full speed cache. This was an expensive processor because the technology required at that time to make cache that fast was hard to implement and resulted in a high rejection rate.

Intel had to do something to make the Pro cheaper, to replace the Pentium. So they moved the cache onto a card, at half the processor core speed. Now that both parts were on a card, they decided the easiest way to mount that card would be a Slot, enter Slot 1 and the Pentium II

As time passed, Intel realized that the memory bus would be the "weak link" in there systems. First they introduced the BX chipset with 100MHz bus support. But they knew they would need more.

Intel made a deal with Rambus, who had high bandwidth memory. Then they designed a chipset that would support Rambus and the Pentium II, the i840. About the same time they knew they would want a high end, cheaper desktop solution and designed the i820. The goal was high bandwidth using a 133MHz FSB.

At about that time, the chip designers were looking for a solution to AMD's 3D-NOW feature, and developed SSE. SSE was a lot more efficient than 3D-NOW.

So Intel released a Pentium II processor with SSE, called the Pentium III. 100MHz versions were released that would be backwards compatable with the BX chipset, and 133MHz versions were intended for the i820/i840 chipsets. That's how the "Katmai" core CPU's came to be available with the 600 at either bus speed.

Well, the slow half-speed cache wasn't cutting it. So they found a cheap way to put the cache on the CPU DIE itself. Initially it was available at 128kb on the Celeron. When they shrunk the die process, they were able to use more cache, and introduced the Coppermine series of processors.

Since off die cache was no longer necessary to produce an inexpensive processor with the Celeron, Intel came up with the Socket 370 to replace Slot 1, and cut the expense of the Slot 1's card.

Coppermines outperformed Katmai's and were cheaper to produce. They used the Soket 370 which was already available for the Celeron, but too many systems existed with Slot 1. Intel needed to make Coppermine processors to fit existing Slot 1 boards. Because so many of these systems were limitted to 100MHz FSB, they released them in both 100 and 133MHz FSB versions, in both Slot 1 and the cheaper Socket 370.

Now, Intel had to have a way to differentiate these processors. The old Katmai 600 went with the name PIII 600. Then they added a "B" to the model name to differentiate the 133MHz FSB version, the PIII 600B. They added an E to the Coppermine version, for "Enhanced Cache", and called it the 600E. The 133MHz FSB version was called the 600EB.

So the 600MHz processors are, inorder of release:

PIII 600
PIII 600B
PIII 600E, Socket 370
PIII 600EB, Socket 370
PIII 600E, Slot 1
PIII 600EB, Slot 1.

I should write a book!

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 4:52:08 AM

ohh i c.......i knew part of that story, but not all of it, thats why i didnt understand what u were talkin about....so where were we?
oh yea, we were talkin about my piece of silicon and aluminum. i think im gonna go your way, buy the adapter.

this is going a little out of topic, but if my mobo doesnt support more than 100mhz of FSB and neither does my CPU, what am i doing to my cpu and mobo if im running the FSB at 103mhz. my guess is nothing, but what if i ran it for example at 110mhz or 124 mhz? cuz im considering overclocking the celeron tualatin, is it possible?

btw: im considering your offer, is it new and boxed?

real philosophy of life: "do onto others what you dont want them do onto you"
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 6:05:31 AM

You can overclock it, I tested mine at 1480MHz, but you would have to use SoftFSB to do it. Powerleap offers a 1400MHz kit as well, for only $159, but it will cost you $180 after shipping!

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 6:49:09 AM

Very interesting:-)))
But I have to specify that before Intel's decision to move the CPU onto a card (and then return to the socket, ha-ha!) Apple had been producing such CPUs. Maybe there were another manufacturers too.
So many Intel's "innovations" are not new at all.
Of course, we won't discuss AMD here, which follows the Intel's steps...
By the way, integrating 3 math co-processors into K7's core was, by my opinion, not revolution but evolution - the AMD guys knew they couldn't reach the Intel's efficacy if only trying to improve the existing K6 math co=processor......
Gees...................... I must drink a bucketful of coffee!!!!!


<font color=orange>ÃÎËßÌ ÇÀËÚÊ ËÀÏÍÈ, ÃÎËßÌÀ ÙÀÍÃÀ ÂÄÈÃÍÈ!</font color=orange>
August 8, 2002 5:27:42 PM

Hey Crashman, thanx for the brief history lesson but i already knew that =)


And like i said, i was comparing a Celeron copermien to a PIII Coppermine....maybe i wasnt to clear.....ah well its all good....thanx for clearing it up anyhow =)

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>
August 8, 2002 8:31:30 PM

whatever, i understand whats going on... Crash if you say that i can overclock to 133 FSB even if the Celeron or my mobo doesnt support it, should i buy new pc133 SDRAM or just buy more pc100 ram. i have 384mb (128x3) and i dont think its enuff. also could i use pc100 and pc133 together?
also im thinkin of buyin a cheap 64mb GEforce2 cuz my 32mb tnt2 aint cutting it. what do u guys think?

real philosophy of life: "do onto others what you dont want them do onto you"
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 8:54:08 PM

With the Tualatin adapter, you can use the Tualatin, but you'll never reach 133MHz FSB. I would be happy with the stock speed with either the 1200 or 1400 if I were in your position, but you should be able to overclock at least a little.

There is no PC100 on the market right now. The stuff you see labled PC100 is actually relabled PC133. The only difference between PC100 and PC133 is the rated max speed of the chips. So I never buy PC100, I always buy PC133, even when upgrading old 66MHz bus systems. There is no "minimum" speed the chips can operate at. That also means you can mix PC133 and PC100 on the same board, as long as you don't try overclocking the PC100 beyond it's ability. Most original PC100 is 8ns, which supports bus speeds up to 125MHz.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 8:54:29 PM

Actually, that would be 10, the 8 listed on the lower portion are all Coppermines. But then if you count the mobile versions...

But anyway, there were 6 varieties. The 8 Coppermine desktop processors listed are production variations of the four I listed.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 9:28:01 PM

but isnt PC133 more expensive than PC100?...oh i was looking at memory, they have the CL2 and the CL3 types, i dont remember well which one was better. i just kinda remeber that cl2 was better?
and whats that 32x64 and 64x64 etc. that i see?

anyways...anyone interested in buying a Pentium III 600 Katmai? hehe

real philosophy of life: "do onto others what you dont want them do onto you"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by grassapa on 08/08/02 05:33 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b à CPUs
August 8, 2002 10:43:59 PM

PC133 is usually cheaper than PC100, because it cost the same to produce, but is in higher supply! Cas2 is better than Cas3. And I'll make you a trade for that CPU, heck, I'll sell you my Celeron Tualatin kit for $100 with trade of your old CPU (I can always put that CPU in one of my refurbs when I sell it).

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 8, 2002 11:35:32 PM

can some1 explain quickly what does 32x64, 64x64, etc, etc means when u buy memory?
crash, ive heard and seen that my cpu costs more than 30 bucks. ive seen them go up to 50 or 60 bucks. heck, in ebay i see some1 bidding 90 bucks for it, but thats too much. is ur kit boxed and new? One reason that that i wanna buy it from www.powerleap.com is that just in case i cant use it or it sux, i can return it, and also i get a gurantee on it and i dont mind payin 10 or 20 bucks more, but just so i can play it safe you know. dont take this offensively, its just that (since im not as good as u in computers) i like to play it safe... plus i know that 1 cpu more or 1 cpu less is nothing to u.

real philosophy of life: "do onto others what you dont want them do onto you"
a b à CPUs
August 9, 2002 12:47:27 AM

My kit is boxed and new, and I'll give you a reciept. I'm poor, so take it easy on me for looking for deals! Remember that your CPU only raises the resale value of a system I sell by $30 over a Pentium II 400, and that I only pay $140 for Pentium II 400 systems.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
!