TechSpot

Dual core upgrade

By baz2126
Oct 29, 2008
  1. Hi, I'm just about to upgrade my Mesh Matrix Premier (AMD Athlon™ 64 3500+ with ASUS A8N-VM - Nforce 410 PCI-Express Mainboard) to a AMD Dual Core 64 4400 CPU.

    Does the team think that Windows XP (SP3 installed) will cope with the change or should I plan to re-install XP?

    And then! if I were to upgrade to Vista, would it be worth installing the 64 bit version?

    or should I just burn my anorak?
     
  2. almcneil

    almcneil TS Guru Posts: 1,277

    You probably can get away with a Windows XP repair. The current installation won't work as the memory map for the new board is not the same as the old one. A Windows XP repair will update the memor map accordingly. Also, it will update the chipset device drives too.

    Best,
    -- Andy
     
  3. baz2126

    baz2126 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Thanks Andy, that's what I'm hoping.

    Baz
     
  4. almcneil

    almcneil TS Guru Posts: 1,277

    I should point out that it may not work. Most likely it will. Also, the Windows activation software will go off. If you copy of Windows is retail, you're OK. You will have to call in the MS call centre to activate and they will ask if you made hardware changes. So long as your copy is retail, it should go through.

    Best,
    -- Andy
     
  5. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 5,431   +28

    For just a simple CPU upgrade, I don't think you'd have any problems. A motherboard upgrade usually requires a clean installation, but for a new CPU, your current one will work just fine.
     
  6. Poppa Bear

    Poppa Bear TS Enthusiast Posts: 237   +7

    My experience tallies with the response from Rage_3K_Moiz. Can't do it on a new mobo, but can do on a new CPU.

    Presume you've checked the specs of your mobo for compatability with new CPU?
     
  7. gbhall

    gbhall TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,425   +77

    Nobody has responded to your query about Vista, so I will.

    It seems to me that there is no point in going to Vista-32, as it is no better (many say worse) than XP-32. Xp-64 is a non-starter, ('most buggy OS MS ever produced'), so if you go Vist at all, go Vista-64. However, beware of poor or non-existent support for old hardware, incompatibilities with a great deal of current software, which is supposed to be able to run in compatibility mode but wont....

    In short, Vista-64 is very much a work in progress, but gradually improving all the time. So the soundest advice is research that all the software, games etc you rely on will work on Vista-64, or if it won't is there a 64-bit alternative?

    Good luck....we'll all have to go there eventually....if we stay with MS at all....but you will be doing MS development testing for them, so if you really depend on anything you run now, stay where you know you are fine, since Vista-64 is not known for all it's wonderful, unbeatable, secure, new features.
     
  8. baz2126

    baz2126 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Quote: ('most buggy OS MS ever produced'),

    What! even DOS 4???

    Thanks gbhall, that's all very good thinking.
     
  9. Poppa Bear

    Poppa Bear TS Enthusiast Posts: 237   +7

    I would like to confirm statement by gbhall:

    I have both XP Pro and Vista Ultimate (32-bit) on one PC. Truth is I hardly ever use Vista, because a lot of my favorite games won't run on it, such as Reversi on-line with other XP users; although I certainly want it to keep up to speed on the latest MS operating systems. Also, not only is there no back-up, but it actually stops you using certain ancillary programs which are really important.

    For example, I have an HP Photosmart 7200 printer primarily because of it's photo-quality printing capability. However, Vista loads it's own drivers for this printer and won't allow you to load the original HP program, which contains a utility that is used to configure the print heads on new ink cartridges.

    In this particular instance, there is a work around because the print-head configuration memory is retained in the printer and not in the hard drive of the operating system. Therefore, I configure the printer heads using XP so it runs properly when I use it with Vista.

    Ironically, instead of XP being my ancillary OS, I now use it about 80% of the time.

    Having said that, Vista has other features that are extremely useful, such as the "Disk Management" utiltiy which is much more versatile than that of XP. For example, it allows you to increase or decrease the size of existing partitions... very handy if you're reloading ghost images which only reload to the original partition size. You can then adjust partition size using the MS Disk Management utiltiy. It also has a specific icon in Control Panel to turn off "Auto Play" on your CDROM drives.

    I'm not claiming Microsoft did it just for me, but I took them to task about a year before Vista came out, specifically on the inability to mark partitions "Active" using the XP-Disc "Recovery Console"... they claimed in one of their KB ariticles that this could be done, and I challenged them to show me how. I also challenged them on the fact that the option to turn off "Auto Play" on the optical drives never worked properly in Win98, Win98 2nd Ed, or XP Home or Pro.

    I must be honest and admit that I accused them of not listening to the feed-back from users of their programs, so I probably have to eat humble pie. Please accept this an apology MS, if you happen to read this thread... LOL!
     
  10. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Going from a single core to a dual core processor should still warrant a Windows repair if not a reinstall. Otherwise the system could end up only recognizing a single core out of the two.

    I know in the Windows 2000 days it would install a specific ACPI system & that could lead to some problems if you kept using the same installation after altering the system.
     
  11. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 5,431   +28

    Vista x64 is better than what most people think, and I've yet to have a single BSOD with it. It's as stable as XP x86.
     
  12. hynesy

    hynesy TS Maniac Posts: 389

    I am using Vista x64 too and I haven't had any BSOD's either, runs flawlessly, though I do have 4gb of RAM. The only problem I've run into with Vista x64 is Cisco VPN Client is not supported and there is no workaround to my knowledge, though this can be fixed by using a virtual machine. I have found it is the most stable OS I've used, but that is a matter of oppinion and may be a result of my hardware/software configuration and what I use my computer for, everyone's experiences will vary. At the moment I am also using the PDC build of Windows 7 x64 and it runs much faster then Vista, no driver problems etc so lets hope MS is on the right track by working with their partners to ensure Windows 7 is fully supported both x32 and x64.
    Cheers
    Hynesy
     
  13. baz2126

    baz2126 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Thanks for that hynesy, I have installed the dual core CPU with no more trouble than plugging in a USB device! Both cores are recognised and displayed in AMD's Power Monitor utility so that part of the job is done. Thanks again for everyone's advice.

    Now I just need to decide whether to upgrade to OS.

    Cheers all
     
  14. hynesy

    hynesy TS Maniac Posts: 389

    I would follow gbhall's advice, check that all your programs/games are supported on Vista x64 along with all your hardware. If all your hardware and software is supported then your definately best going with Vista x64, among many things its more secure and also, for the future anything that works on Vista will/should, according to MS work completely on the upcoming Windows 7 release in late 2009/early 2010 so your future proof to a degree.
    cheers
    Hynesy
     
  15. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Do both cores show up in the Windows Task Manager ?
     
  16. baz2126

    baz2126 TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Hi Didou,

    I use Process Explorer in preference to Task Manager and yes, I get two windows now - one for each core.

    Baz
     
  17. gbhall

    gbhall TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,425   +77

  18. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 5,431   +28

    That article fails to mention SP1, which has fixed a large portion of the bugs in the OS. Vista x64 with and without SP1 are very, very different. And the "23 million registry entries" thingy is plain BS. He probably thinks having a 32-bit and a 64-bit registry tree is "duplication". Which begs the question as to how in the world he managed count all the entries. And whether or not he used a 32-bit app for it. Now that would be interesting. ;)

    The article becomes even murkier by claiming that Office 2007 and Adobe's Flash have no 64-bit versions and implying that their 32-bit versions do not run on Vista x64, which is, again, total BS.

    Maybe there's a reason this guy's retired. ;)
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...