• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Do you always need to reinstall XP?

I'm not planning on doing this for months btw, as I've got GFX and memory upgrades planned, but how easy is installing a new CPU. Do you need chemicals and things or is it just a case of delicately pulling the old one out and slotting the new one in? (Like memory/GPU)?
 
wilders said:
Just remove the old one, use some paste on the cpu / heatsink, thats it.
Not sure what sort of increase you'd see as the 3500 is a capable chip already!
Click to expand...

Well this is what I thought, but the gurus over at the Graphics Forum say the X1900XTX I'm buying will be limited because of my CPU.

Anyway, hopefully games will start to use the dual core aspect of the X2s soon.
 
I might be wrong but I've got a feeling that if Windows is installed with a single core cpu, which you later replace with a dualcore one, it won't be functioning as a dualcore cpu.
 
There really shouldn't be any need to do that, certainly not with XP Pro (Home version may be different in this respect, I just don't know).

In most cases, the moment Windows boots up and sees the X2, it automatically updates the HAL to the multiprocessor version, restarts, and you're good to go.

If it doesn't you can still update the HAL manually:
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Hardware/Microchips/Q_21672878.html
 
Hairydavey said:
From a personal experience, I upgraded from a 3500+ to a X2 4400+ and nothing untoward happened at all. Really was just a case of swapping the cpu's and rebooting. :)
Click to expand...

Where you happy with the performance gain or was it not as noticeable?

thanks.
 
I didn't notice a massive difference in most applications, although it did make a difference to my games and loading times decreased quite a bit. I find the 4400+ to be a great cpu, but then again the 3500+ is pretty damn fine itself, and when I had mine it was clocked to a 3700+ all the time with no troubles or heat issues.

So basically, the 4400+ will make a difference, but don't expect it to be life-changing. :) So the jump from 3500+ to a 4200+ would be negligible and I would personally hold off till your next pc rebuild, although if you really feel the need to upgrade and if you can afford it, go for a 4400+ as it has 1mb cache per core as opposed to 512kb for the 4200+.
 
Last edited:
PARUK said:
There really shouldn't be any need to do that, certainly not with XP Pro (Home version may be different in this respect, I just don't know).

In most cases, the moment Windows boots up and sees the X2, it automatically updates the HAL to the multiprocessor version, restarts, and you're good to go.

If it doesn't you can still update the HAL manually:
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Hardware/Microchips/Q_21672878.html
Click to expand...

Yep that's how it went for me when upgrading from a 3700SD to an Opty 170.

No problems.
 
To the OP you would be better getting an 3800 x2 or an 4400 x2 that is if your happy to clock them i have my 3800x2 clocked at 2.7 on air and its fine and dandy.
 
when i put my fx60 from fx57 i got a lower 3d mark score, didnt realise about the patch, installed that, and i was as happy as larry, if ya change chips also check in task manager to see if ya have 2 graphs for ya cpu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom