CPU Replacement - Socket 775

[ForestHIllsRob]

What determines whether the CPU can be upgraded?

I have an Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHZ, Socket 775 on an ASUS motherboard. For general use, including my business as a CPA/Tax adviser, the Pentium is great. I'm not into gaming other than than the three major Train Sim programs.

The option of buying a new computer, and being stuck with Vista, doesn't work for me, even if a dual core or quad core would make Train Sim run perfectly.

Thanks,

Robert

[Hawk]

Basically the motherboard determines the upgrade ability of the CPU, but it will have to be a socket 775 CPU.
You need to check the motherboard specs.

[ForestHIllsRob]

Basically the motherboard determines the upgrade ability of the CPU, but it will have to be a socket 775 CPU.
You need to check the motherboard specs.

Hawk:

What MOBO specs are relevant? The CPU socket is 775, and the computer is an HP purchased in 2004.

Thanks,

Robert

[Hawk]

The MB specs should tell you what the fastest processor speed it's compatible with. There is more than one processor that fits a 775 socket.
Do a Google search for your MB and see what you can find.

[ForestHIllsRob]

The MB specs should tell you what the fastest processor speed it's compatible with. There is more than one processor that fits a 775 socket.
Do a Google search for your MB and see what you can find.

Hawk:

Here's the specs:

# ASUS PTGD1-LA Socket 775 ATX MB w/P4 3.4GHz

# General Features:
# Supports Hyper-Threading Technology
# Supports up to 3.4 GHz CPU
# Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.4 GHz pre-installed
# Socket 775
# ATX Form Factor
# 800 MHz Front Side Bus
# Supports up to 4GB DDR266/333/400
# One FDD connector
# RealTek ALC650 8-channel audio with Intel High Definition Audio CODEC
# Supports 4 Serial ATA devices
# Realtek RTL8101L LAN
# 10/100 Mbps Fast Ethernet controller

Is this compatible with today's processors, i.e dual core and quad core?

Thanks,

Robert

[Hawk]

# Supports up to 3.4 GHz CPU
# Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.4 GHz pre-installed

There's your answer right there. It already has the top processor that MB supports.
In other words, you can't install a faster processor (CPU) without a new MB.

[chucksc]

# Supports up to 3.4 GHz CPU
# Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.4 GHz pre-installed

There's your answer right there. It already has the top processor that MB supports.
In other words, you can't install a faster processor (CPU) without a new MB.

More than likely because HP may not have updated the bios to support newer/faster processors - however you should check that out with HP just in case they have...

FWIW 775 is still a current Intel mobo spec and with the appropriate bios and components on the board will support up to a 3.2 ghz quad (Mine does) but note that is all dependent on what is on the motherboard and what is in the BIOS so check with HP

[Hawk]

Thanks for the help Chuck.
Maybe that will point him in the right direction. ;)

[kevinculla9]

What determines whether the CPU can be upgraded?

I have an Intel Pentium 4 3.0 GHZ, Socket 775 on an ASUS motherboard. For general use, including my business as a CPA/Tax adviser, the Pentium is great. I'm not into gaming other than than the three major Train Sim programs.

The option of buying a new computer, and being stuck with Vista, doesn't work for me, even if a dual core or quad core would make Train Sim run perfectly.

Thanks,

Robert


hmm odd you ask this question i built the computer at my store, and that has a p4 3.4 in it....runs all of the train sims just fine as well as all of my work software and even newer games like COD4 im kind of confused as to y you want to upgrade??

Granted my quad core on my gaming system is a whole lot faster.....any way motherboard and chip combos can be had for decent money its all in what you are trying to accomplish.....and BTW Vista is a joke im not very happy with it at all......thats my $.02

[ForestHIllsRob]

hmm odd you ask this question i built the computer at my store, and that has a p4 3.4 in it....runs all of the train sims just fine as well as all of my work software and even newer games like COD4 im kind of confused as to y you want to upgrade??

Granted my quad core on my gaming system is a whole lot faster.....any way motherboard and chip combos can be had for decent money its all in what you are trying to accomplish.....and BTW Vista is a joke im not very happy with it at all......thats my $.02

Kevin:

Actually, I mentioned the CPU upgrade because many posts here have mentioned the advantages of the new CPU's. Also, I never get the frame rates others mention, both in MSTS and Rail Sim.

What video card do you have in your p4 computer? I'm running the 8500GT, which I purchased when I was much less computer savvy. The 128 bit memory bus is probably the issue. I'm thinking of going to an 8800GT, but I would also need a psu upgrade, as I currently have an Antec 350 watt unit.

Robert

[saxmusickman]

In addition to your socket number (i.e. 775), your type of Chipset will also determine what type of processor you can use. While it may be the same pin number, older chipsets will not support Dual or Quad Core procs. If I have read my PC mags correctly, there were two socket types for the Pentium 5 procs - 478 and 775. The 775 was introduced as the P4 was being phased out in favor of Core Duo procs, and only the last of the series of P4's (and Extreme editions) were LGA 775 compatible.

Even if you could, you probablly wouldn't want to jam a dual or quad core proc into and older 775 board. As I said above, the Chipset (the north and southbridge chips that control things such as memory interface and data-flow across the board) probablly would not support the procs top speeds on the Front Side Bus. For exm, my older computer had a Pentium 4 Prescott processor that ran on a board with an 800Mhz front side bus. Thats the max for that board, so it wouldn't do my Q6600 any good in that board, as it can run as fast on an FSB as fast as 1333.

Best thing to do is just build a new computer, starting with the mobo and working up from there. Even though in this economy your cash flow may not be all that good, believe it or not, you could probablly build my computer (Q6600 proc, ASUS Board, 3GB RAM, 1.2 TB Storage) for about half of what I paid this time last year). Memory prices are awesome right now, and I checked out a Q6600 at Frys last week for about $250.

[kevinculla9]

Kevin:

Actually, I mentioned the CPU upgrade because many posts here have mentioned the advantages of the new CPU's. Also, I never get the frame rates others mention, both in MSTS and Rail Sim.

What video card do you have in your p4 computer? I'm running the 8500GT, which I purchased when I was much less computer savvy. The 128 bit memory bus is probably the issue. I'm thinking of going to an 8800GT, but I would also need a psu upgrade, as I currently have an Antec 350 watt unit.

Robert


I am running an 7950GT in my p4 computer.........

on my gaming system i ran an 8800gt until i recently just purchased an 9800GX2......the 8800GT is an awesome card for the money i loved it 100% but yeah you will definelty need a bigger PSU.........

your best be t if you want to upgrade to a dual or quad core is to get a new motherboard....unfortunatly to get full benefit you will need , CPU,Board,Memory, Power supply.......so its pretty much a whole new system...........i just built one for a friend for about $800 with a core2 Duo it was pretty fast and completely upgradable down the road......any way hit me up i'll help you the best i can!!!

[kevinculla9]

.....is your board PCI Express? if not an 8800GT isnt gonna work for you

[saxmusickman]

This is getting off topic here, but this is really important if you decide to build a computer that you are going to use for gaming.

Do not, I REPEAT DO NOT, put Windows Vista on your computer. I have had this OS since 6:00am the day it was released, and I can tell you straight up that it's not worth the time and energy that you are going to have to expend to get it to run right on ANY computer system. Program, Driver, and Hardware inconpatibilities, as well as new problems that pop up on a week to week basis as you download new hot-fixes and updates will drive you mad! (aka the COM Surrogate error). My biggest beef with Vista though is how much it slows down gaming performance. I can run my route, the W&A, on my Vista rig with an 8500GT video card and get stuttering and poor framerates during the run (yes, I have the latest and greatest of EVERY driver for my system). I can then dual boot and run the same route in Xp, and it's smooth as glass, forwards and back.

Windows is a resource hoggin piece of crap, basically a Windows ME, version 2. Grab you a copy of Widows XP professional while you can!

[daniellouwrens]

Hi

the ASUS site has an excellent support section where you state your MOBO and it tells you which CPU's are compatible, I had a P5SD2-X MOBO with a 3.2 HT installed and was able to install a Pentium D (Dual core) Extreme edition 3.2.

regards

Daniel

[rdamurphy]

As you can see in the specs, the motherboard supports hyperthreaded Socket 775 CPU's, so it WON'T support dual or quad-core processers. There's actually been (at least) three different versions of the 775 socket. The socket isn't what is important in selecting the CPU, it's the chipset. Having said that, there's a chance that a BIOS upgrade can get you a faster CPU, but it's doubtful.

You probably have integrated graphics with shared video memory, both are not good for gaming.

HP (and others) are notorious for building computers that can't be upgraded. After all, if you could, why would you buy another one from them? It's called "planned obsolescence."

Robert

[saxmusickman]

HP (and others) are notorious for building computers that can't be upgraded. After all, if you could, why would you buy another one from them? It's called "planned obsolescence."

Robert

Ahh, not quite true. Read this months Maximum PC article on upgrading store-bought computers. Is it worth it, or not?

As far as obsolete, you could at least "Borgerize" the computer. Unless it's a micro-ATX or BTX form-factor, you could probablly reuse the case and maybe the power supply if nothing else.

[Amtrak7]

To replace a CPU, do you need to do anything with the BIOS? (replace or update?)

[saxmusickman]

From my perspective, it's always best to have the latest BIOS installed to make sure that you are getting the most from your motherboard. From what I have read (MaxPC) some boards DO require a BIOS update before upgrading the CPU, and some don't. The best thing to do would be to consult the motherboard manual, if you have one, or the vedor website and tech-support if it's mass-produced type PC.

[rdamurphy]

saxmusickman:

I read an interesting article in eWeek magazine, I don't know if it's available online or not, but only 1/3rd of all new computers sold since Vista came out actually have Vista. 2/3 have either XP, some flavor of Linux, Mac OS, or no OS at all.

Robert

[saxmusickman]

If you are using Vista, or have used Vista in the past, you will find that there is a good darn reason why Vista is not being adopted.

It's crap!

I rushed out and bought the P.O.S.O.S the day it was released. It took THREE DAYS to get it installed and working on a computer that I had built only a month before. No hardware support, no older programs support.

Well, not much has changed, save for the fact that people have wised up to Vista's problems (thanks to word-of-mouth and Apple's dead-on TV commercials) and stayed away from it. Over that last month, i've built two computers for family. One requested Windows Xp be installed, the other got theirs with Vista. The ones that got Vista want me to remove it and install Xp!

[Hawk]

Vista has been referred to by many as Microsoft's newest ME.

[rdamurphy]

I think that is a mischaracterization, Hawk.

It should be referred to as Microsoft's latest ME!

Or perhaps Microsoft's latest Microsoft Bob.

Robert

[Hawk]

I s'pose latest would be a better word in this case. :D

[chucksc]

If you are using Vista, or have used Vista in the past, you will find that there is a good darn reason why Vista is not being adopted.

It's crap!

I rushed out and bought the P.O.S.O.S the day it was released. It took THREE DAYS to get it installed and working on a computer that I had built only a month before. No hardware support, no older programs support.

Well, not much has changed, save for the fact that people have wised up to Vista's problems (thanks to word-of-mouth and Apple's dead-on TV commercials) and stayed away from it. Over that last month, i've built two computers for family. One requested Windows Xp be installed, the other got theirs with Vista. The ones that got Vista want me to remove it and install Xp!
Sax with all due respect - your position comes out of the Mac propaganda - and has very little relationship to actuality - the things you are whining about are changes that were driven by security concerns - FWIW MS worked closely with NIST to develop them and other security fixes - you lot whined about security problems with XP and MS makes a major effort to cure them and now you whine about the consequences of that - Sheesh! - I don't know where you get the incompatibility issues - all of those that I have investigated revolve around poorly written legacy code that used undocumented (read hacked) features in NT or 95/ME - You do know that you can set your legacy apps to run in (pick one or combo) Administrator mode (which is what most legacy apps need since the original coders ignored the prescription against using elevated privileges) XP Compat. mode, 95 Compat. mode, 98/ME compat. mode, NT 4 mode, 2000 compat. mode and server 2003 mode - along with 10 or so display and theme modes - you just have to get off your duff and do the experimentation to find out what runs for your game - after all it appears that the game designers have by and large abandoned the games since they don't appear to have done the research for you - when you get down to it the 10% or less that you cannot make work are IMHO true junk based on today's programming standards - note that T-S which is DX7 legacy code will actually work under Vista (I run it (in a 32 bit window w/XP compatibility and admin priv.) on Vista 64 fine and I will note that while the peak FPS appears to be down the jerkiness is a lot better with the combo of bin and Vista)

Sheesh!

P.S. in the interest of full disclosure - I am an MCP & MCSE for 15 years (almost the beginning - I was a CNE and a mainframe guy for over 20 years before that) and Manage System Engineers and software engineers -

[rdamurphy]

Apologies, Chuck, but most people don't want to be a Computer Administrater, a MCP or an MCSE. They just want to install their stuff and have it work.

Robert

[saxmusickman]

>>>Sax with all due respect - your position comes out of the Mac propaganda - and has very little relationship to actuality <<<

Without any respect, due, or undue...

Chuck, what are you smoking? Did you not read my post at all? Reality is this - I've been with this O.S. since day one of it's release. The first time I tried to install, on a computer a month old, it took three days of working around hardware and software that Vista didn't want to play with. There was no driver support for the video card or sound card, the TV card was just flippin' broke for good, and the memory and CPU hogging OS took a high end Intel P4 copmuter that had run smashingly good numbers with Xp down to the level of a Commodore 64! I fully believe MS was in conspiracy with the computer industry as a whole on this matter. Give the public a new OS that won't run on even the newest of older systems and it will force them to upgrade their computers.

Now Chuck, lets talk about software. I've got a whole CD spindle full of programs, EXPENSIVE PROGRAMS, that were made obsolete by my Vista experience (another conspiracy with software makers?). Pinnacle Studio 9, Partition Commander Pro 10, Microsoft Train Simulator, Nero 6, to name a few. Tell me why it is that even though Vista is the SAME core file system, my older programs do not work on it? I don't remember having that problem when I upgraded from Windows 98 to Windows Xp, and the few that did cough up a hairball or two got patches or fixes for the problem.

Hey, and while we're whinning, Chuck, lets talk about the &$^@ed up way the OS itself runs! You like to answer the fecking User Account Control pop-up everytime you want to run your MP3 encoding program? Or how about the way the program takes 10 minutes-to-infinity to delete an item from your computer ("The Long Goodbye")? Do you like the way Vista transfers files from one folder to another in say, ohh, the time it takes you to roast a Turkey? Hey, and then there is the latest irritation, the COM SURROGATE error, every time I want to view my Xvid encoded files (all thanks to the stupid Data Execution Prevention, which can be disabled BTW).

Now, let me whine about Product Cracktivation. Chuck, do'ya think it's fair that after about six times of upgrading my computer with different hardware schemes (I build my own computers and frequently upgrade them) Microshafts Cracktivation scheme makes me have to call Calcutta and read off about 5,000 numbers to someone who can barely speak English in order to get this P.O.S. working again? It was annoying in Xp, but it seems that with Vista, the number of times you can reactivate online has been shortened by a good bit!

Chuck, it amazes me that anyone, and I mean ANYONE, can defend the product that Microsoft has put on the table this time and call it good. It seems that there is an endless stream of errors, slow-downs, and vulnerabilities that have to be fixed with this OS. I mean come-on, when you've got people who have been using Windows 98SE for the past 8 years begging to go back to it, you know something has GOT to be wrong with the new OS!

Vista is a huge screw-up, plain and simple. It's well publisized, and more than just a few other computer users have let this be known by asking MS to keep Xp on the store shelves. Vista has some trappings of what could have been a great OS, but MS dropped the ball by rushing it out the door before it was truly debugged and ready. Vista has not worked well in the past, and still does not work well. Someone like me, who sees the guts of computers on a daily basis and knows his way around things can live with this and find work-arounds for it. But John-Q-Public, who just needs a computer that works, really got shafted!

[rdamurphy]

I might add, that I'm at work at a rather large corporation, one I'm sure every one of you has heard of, and every computer that we own is XP...

Including the new ones.

Robert

[chucksc]

Apologies, Chuck, but most people don't want to be a Computer Administrater, a MCP or an MCSE. They just want to install their stuff and have it work.

Robert
Good point - probably the cut rate coders that Kujunk and others use should then follow the published standards - but they don't :(

[chucksc]

>>>Sax with all due respect - your position comes out of the Mac propaganda - and has very little relationship to actuality <<<

Without any respect, due, or undue...

Chuck, what are you smoking? Did you not read my post at all? Reality is this - I've been with this O.S. since day one of it's release. The first time I tried to install, on a computer a month old, it took three days of working around hardware and software that Vista didn't want to play with. There was no driver support for the video card or sound card, the TV card was just flippin' broke for good, and the memory and CPU hogging OS took a high end Intel P4 copmuter that had run smashingly good numbers with Xp down to the level of a Commodore 64! I fully believe MS was in conspiracy with the computer industry as a whole on this matter. Give the public a new OS that won't run on even the newest of older systems and it will force them to upgrade their computers.

Now Chuck, lets talk about software. I've got a whole CD spindle full of programs, EXPENSIVE PROGRAMS, that were made obsolete by my Vista experience (another conspiracy with software makers?). Pinnacle Studio 9, Partition Commander Pro 10, Microsoft Train Simulator, Nero 6, to name a few. Tell me why it is that even though Vista is the SAME core file system, my older programs do not work on it? I don't remember having that problem when I upgraded from Windows 98 to Windows Xp, and the few that did cough up a hairball or two got patches or fixes for the problem.

Hey, and while we're whinning, Chuck, lets talk about the &$^@ed up way the OS itself runs! You like to answer the fecking User Account Control pop-up everytime you want to run your MP3 encoding program? Or how about the way the program takes 10 minutes-to-infinity to delete an item from your computer ("The Long Goodbye")? Do you like the way Vista transfers files from one folder to another in say, ohh, the time it takes you to roast a Turkey? Hey, and then there is the latest irritation, the COM SURROGATE error, every time I want to view my Xvid encoded files (all thanks to the stupid Data Execution Prevention, which can be disabled BTW).

Now, let me whine about Product Cracktivation. Chuck, do'ya think it's fair that after about six times of upgrading my computer with different hardware schemes (I build my own computers and frequently upgrade them) Microshafts Cracktivation scheme makes me have to call Calcutta and read off about 5,000 numbers to someone who can barely speak English in order to get this P.O.S. working again? It was annoying in Xp, but it seems that with Vista, the number of times you can reactivate online has been shortened by a good bit!

Chuck, it amazes me that anyone, and I mean ANYONE, can defend the product that Microsoft has put on the table this time and call it good. It seems that there is an endless stream of errors, slow-downs, and vulnerabilities that have to be fixed with this OS. I mean come-on, when you've got people who have been using Windows 98SE for the past 8 years begging to go back to it, you know something has GOT to be wrong with the new OS!

Vista is a huge screw-up, plain and simple. It's well publisized, and more than just a few other computer users have let this be known by asking MS to keep Xp on the store shelves. Vista has some trappings of what could have been a great OS, but MS dropped the ball by rushing it out the door before it was truly debugged and ready. Vista has not worked well in the past, and still does not work well. Someone like me, who sees the guts of computers on a daily basis and knows his way around things can live with this and find work-arounds for it. But John-Q-Public, who just needs a computer that works, really got shafted!


The hardware stopped working because it was obsolete and was not on the WHQL list - mostly because the manufacturer did not provide MS with drivers - they had a couple of years to do that - THEY not MS forced you to buy new HW (think Creative Labs and ATI)

If XP had been replaced at 3 years or so like NT or 95 or 98 you would have been screaming then too - It's only because of XP's long run and I believe the peripheral folks just as much as MS wanted it made obsolete so they could sell more H/W....

So buy a Mac and quit whining! LOL! ;)
Then you can have the computer equivalent of a "Nanny State".....

I too build machines for a hobby (and did it part time as a "business" when I was consulting) the phone call to India is not that onerous once in a while -------
Now if you want PITA calls to India - call Dell or HP Customer Sport (aka support) :)

P.S. your P4 is obsolete and was largely so for XP also (especially if you used MS Office 2003 or the latest incarnations of Word Perfect)
you cited the computer equivelent of a '49 Hupmobile.....

You have heard of Moore's law as it applies to technology haven't you?

P.P.S. John Q public usually buys his PCs with a new office package on them too and new applications for sound and graphics - only geeks try to keep their 8 bit Sound Blaster "non PCI" sound cards alive.... And I'll bet you were using an ATI agp graphics card too, eh?

[rdamurphy]

Somehow, I don't see the big difference between a letter typed on an IBM Selectric and Word 2007. I mean, I can tell, but there's people that can't even tell the difference. Like Dan Rather!

Robert

[saxmusickman]

Riddle me this Chuck, if thou dare...

...if my Xp computer, which was a 3.02GHz P4, 2GB Ram, 1.2TB total drive space, and Nvidia 7600GT graphics card was obsolete when Vista came out (you claim obsolete for Xp), then tell me why I would be pulling 50FPS in MSTS (35 while running FRAPS) in Xp, then when I switched to Vista, framerates went 20FPS and FRAPS wouldn't run at all because it would kill the framerates?

The computer was identical in it's configuration in every way, save for one - the Operating System! I once again maintain that Windows Vista is a resource hogging piece of garbage!

We can argue this point all day long, but there is one fact that you cannot ignore. The masses of computer users are speaking with their wallets on this matter. People are asking Microsoft to extend Windows Xp availability, and Microsoft has complied. People who have Vista are switching BACK to Xp. Heck, even Microsoft is backing away from this fiasco, trying to get our attention focused on a supposed new operating system that is coming out sometime within the next 18 months, while at the same time extending support for Xp through 2014. Vista and the problems it came with have just caused to many problems to be salvaged now - there is no faith in it.

And for a final thought, I have to agree with Murphy on a statement he made earlier. 95% of computer users aren't gurus. They expect their computers to perform like their cars; you turn on the button, it gets done what you expect it to get done, and you shut it off. Unfortunately, Vista doesn't qualify in two of the three of those categories, so it's being shunned, just like ME was. It doesn't matter how much MCPE, WHSQL, DMV, RSVP or whatever that you code into an operating system - if it doesn't work consistently on a day to day basis, reliably, and without to much trouble, its going to be a turd, period. As an enthusiast, I might go out and shell out a few bucks here and there for new programs or bits of hardware that play nicer with the OS, but the general public who has no interests in being elbow deep in computer chips, ain't gonna spend hard earned cash on a computer that won't meet their needs.

BTW, no I don't have an 8 bit soundblaster card - it's an Audigy Platinum. However, if I could find an ISA slot on a modern motherboard, i'd resurrect the Voyetra (now Turtle Beach) sound card I had in my IBM Aptiva without a second thought! The Audigy series doesn't hold a candle to that bad-a card!

BTW-2, Moore's "theory" has hit the wall. Read up on it!

[djt1]

then tell me why I would be pulling 50FPS in MSTS (35 while running FRAPS) in Xp, then when I switched to Vista, framerates went 20FPS and FRAPS wouldn't run at all because it would kill the framerates?



Now let’s look at XP vs. Vista with applications that use something other than an archaic eight to nine year old DirectX 7, CPU bound engine.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2303830,00.asp

It pretty much mirrors what I and others have experienced using Vista as of late, little to no difference in performance between the two. I’m currently using Vista Ultimate 64 bit without any problems.

As with any OS if it’s not properly installed with the latest drivers and updates, your performance will be compromised.



And for a final thought, I have to agree with Murphy on a statement he made earlier. 95% of computer users aren't gurus. They expect their computers to perform like their cars; you turn on the button, it gets done what you expect it to get done, and you shut it off.


If this 95% you mention have no interest in learning about system maintenance then they should probably limit their PC use to creating word documents. This is just one of the many reasons why many “non-gurus” have turned to the console.


ASUS RAMPAGE FORMULA (Intel X48 chipset) BIOS 403
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 w/Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme
OCZ Titanium XTC 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)
2x Western Digital Raptor 74GB (RAID 0) - Vista Ultimate 64 Bit/SP1
2x Western Digital Raptor 74GB (RAID 0) – XP Pro/SP3
EVGA 8800 Ultra “Superclocked” (175.16 drivers)
Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty
SILVERSTONE OP1000 1000W
SILVERSTONE TJ09-B