TechSpot

Pentium 4 3.60GHz upgrading to Pentium Dual Core E6800 3.33GHz

  1. Hi guys.

    I'm thinking of upgrading my Pentium 4 660 3.60GHz processor to a Pentium Dual core E6800 3.33GHz.
    Would there actually be any point in changing CPU or would it actually improve performance significantly? Also would my system be able to handle the CPU itself or not?

    My system specs are as follws:
    Operating System - XP Home Edition SP3
    Current CPU - Intel Pentium 4 3.60GHz
    Motherboard - GA-8I915PM-FS
    ROM - 1x230 GB
    RAM - 2GB PNY DIMM DDR 400Mhz PC3200
    Graphics Card - NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT

    If you need any other info then please just ask me and I'll let you know.
    Hope someone can help please. Thank you.
  2. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    I'm absolutely certain you won't be able to do that, period. That newer Pentium Dual Core is not in any way, backwards compatible with your motherboard.

    Well, it is the same socket. So, it would go in, but it surely won't run. Intel 915 chipset is 32 bit only. Thus, you couldn't even go forward to Cedar Mill core P-4s, which are 64 bit.
  3. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    And why is that exactly?
    They have exactly the same socket. Don't mean to be neive it's just the specs of a dual core seem like they'd work fine with my computer.
  4. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    Do it then, see if it works.
  5. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,849   +679

    In a word or two -voltage regulation (VRD) and FSB
    Your motherboard does not support the front side bus (1066MHz QDR) of the E6800, nor does it support the voltage regulation compatible with Wolfdale/Penryn CPU's.

    @ cc
    Succinct
  6. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    Thank you. that's all I wished to know. Better than some asinine fool saying 'try it' when all I asked for was a reason why. Much more helpful.
    Again, thank you for telling me what I wanted to know. saved me a lot of money.

    Another question. Is there a better CPU that would run better than the one I have at the moment and also work on my motherboard?
  7. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,981   +1,488

    He only said that because you choose to ignore what he said. He mentioned the 915 chipset being a 32-bit chipset and would not support 64-bit CPU's. If you hadn't thrown what he said out the window, his reply might not have been quite so sharp.

    I would say no, not if you are restricted to 32-bit CPU's.
  8. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    Ok thank you. And the reason I answered the way I did was because I can swear that what he's put it now wasn't there before. If it was then I apologise. I've been busy doing some stuff on componants so could have quickly missed it.
    And in other words, to use a Pentium dual core I'd have to have a completely different operating system?
  9. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,981   +1,488

    You wouldn't need a different operating system but you would need a motherboard with a chip-set that supports the CPU's you are wanting to use.
  10. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    As I'm pretty much a novice with this would you advice getting a new motherboard and putting all my existing tech into it or buying a more up-to-date pc?
    If I did have a new motherboard would it affect any software I have and would I need to get new software to run the new 64 bit chipset?
  11. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,981   +1,488

    If you did decide to upgrade, there is not much you could use in the PC you have now. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, thats the price one pays when technology rapidly changes.
    • You could probably still use your case and power supply.
    • Your memory modules are probably DDR when tech today is DDR3.
    • If you have a graphics card it's probably an AGP card when tech today is PCIe.
    • Your drives are probably IDE drives when tech today is SATA.
    Can you see where I am going. :(

    There is no easy way to say this so here goes. If you bought a new motherboard, everything else would need to be replaced. Use your PC the way it is or buy/build a whole new system.
     
  12. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    This is my full system specs for you. Sorry if I seem like I'm beating around the bush but I like to know the entire scale of things. Sorry.

    CPU - Intel Pentium 4 660 3.60GHz
    OS - Windows XP Home Edition SP3
    Motherboard - GA-8I915PM-FS
    ROM - x2 230GB Serial ATA
    RAM - x2 1GB DIMM DDR 400MHz PC3200 (200MHz)
    Chipset - Intel i915P/i915G
    Graphics card - PCi Express nVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT
    BIOS - Award Software International inc. version 10P

    If there's any other infor needed to help then I'll gladly find it for you.
  13. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    Call me an "asinine fool" again, and I'll report the post.

    Since you admit you know very little, "it's not backward compatible" should have sufficed.

    If I was trying to be rude, commensurate with my ability, I would have said this, "probably 50% of Intel 915 boards are, or will be shortly be, available at a flea market near you". That said, why do you expect that you'd be able to jack at CPU with a 2009 launch date into one, just like that?

    DBZ brings valid considerations to the table. However, it's actually simpler than that. You can't put 64 BIT CPU, into a 32 bit board. And yes, that's even if it is the same socket.

    The average noob has ingested any number of specifications, and he or she doesn't even come close to knowing which ones matter, Then, the net result is usually the same as in this case, they think they understand the situation, and proceed to ask the same question over and over, in an attempt to get the answer they desire.
  14. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,981   +1,488

    OK - I'm confused now.

    Going by what CaptainCranky said about the 915 chipset being 32-bit. I tried finding information supporting this for myself, before I posted the first time. Now here you are posting you are using the P4 660 which is a 64-bit CPU. Not being absolutely sure is why I posted "if you are restricted to 32-bit".

    Sadly I tried finding details about you motherboard as well.I'm afraid I came up short handed there as well. The most I could find is that there seemed to be some link between that board and one of Packard Bell's computers. Without finding more details about the motherboard, I can't suggest anything further.
  15. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    I have no intentions of saying it again. I'd just asked for a simple reason why I missed the bit written underneath which was my fault and I except that so I'm sorry I offended you. The reason I'd said it was because you replied with an unhelpful comment that would have be pointless and stupid.
    Not ashamed to admit I'm a novice, that's why I'm asking for help and not criticisms.
    Still like to thank you as well though because you've helped explain why I CAN'T use an E6800.

    I have CPU-Z and it tells me that that is the CPU I have. If you say it's actually a 64 bit CPU then I'm even more confused because as far as I know XP Home edition doesn't have a 64 bit version. But everything I've told you has came from CPU-Z or from visually looking inside my PC.

    Here is the link to download the PDF for my motherboard. You'll have to copy and paste it, sorry.

    uk.ts.fujitsu.com/rl/.../GA-8I915PM/Man_GA-8I915PM_uk.pdf
  16. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,981   +1,488

    A 32-bit OS can run on 64-bit hardware. Hardware has been 64-bit for years and people are just now moving to 64-bit operating systems. Using a 32-bit OS on 64-bit hardware simply means you are only using half the bandwidth available.

    The link you added is incomplete, it was shortened and part of the path was replaced by three periods.
  17. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    The 915 chipset is a contemporary of the Prescott CPUs. If an Intel CPU has the "EM64T" instruction set, it cannot be used with Intel 915. In the case of the CPU you've found, I'm guessing that some provision was made to allow it to run under 32 bit hardware.

    The final production runs of P-4 and Celeron were codenamed, "Cedar Mill". These were 64 bit CPUs 65 nm process, (Prescott was 90nm). They possess the EMT instruction, and won't run in 32 bit hardware.

    In fact the 915 chipset won't even present a full 4GB of RAM to Windows.So, with this hardware, is not 32 bit Windows that's shorting you the memory, it would be the board itself.

    This memo brought to you from the eMachine T-5026 of captaincranky. (Which BTW, has an Intel 915GAG motherboard). I could punch up the manual if you like, as I've done so many times in the past.

    The number of bits in the OS works like this; you can run a 32 bit OS on 64 bit hardware (*1). But, as in the case of the board you can't run a 64 bit OS, on a 32 bit board.

    The new 64 bit Windows versions, are all running on 64 bit hardware. 32 bit programs are installed to the "x86 (32 bit) folder, and then Windows run "Windows on Windows" (32 bit Windows on top of 64 bit Windows).

    The 64 bit version of Windows didn't really become mainstream until the release of Windows 7. However, hardware has been 64 bit for years. XP Pro has a 64 bit version, and it's memory capacity is on the order of 192 GB, as opposed to about 3.25GB for a thirty 32 bit OS. "2" to the 32nd power equals 4GB, that's all a 32 bit OS can "remember "in terms of memory addresses
  18. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    OK now I am really confused. Are you saying I have 32 bit hardware with 64 bit CPU or the otherway round?
  19. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    With all due respect the point is somewhat moot. But yes, your board is 32 bit and the CPU possibly 64 bit. As I said earlier the "EM64T" instruction is what disallows a 64 bit CPU into a 32 bit board. Since this is an early CPU, it may not have this instruction, and is able to function in a 32 bit environment. "EMT", stands for "extended memory technology". So, please go back and reread what I wrote about memory capacity in the precious post.

    I not sure why it comes as a surprise that you can't take a 2009 CPU, and stuff it in a 2004 board. The first "Core 2 Duo" releases were 1066 FSB. Less than a year later, the 2nd generation C2Ds had 1333 FSB, and needed new boards to run them..

    Since you mention your board is by Gigabyte, they are one of the best manufacturers for allowing "forward compatibility" in their boards. In simpler terms, their boards will take most ancient CPUs and run them fine, but the reverse is almost never true.
  20. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    Thinking of the year difference yes it's not surprising. Thank you for clarifying everything. I may see if I can save for a new pc in that case. It would be cheaper than buying all the tech I'd want seperately.
    I would love to build a computer from scratch at some point though.

    Again, thank you very much for helping me with this before I wasted so much money.
  21. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    After a bunch of research at Intel, I've learned a couple of things. First, your CPU is indeed 64 bit.

    Intel's memory map of the 915 GAG and 915 GAV boards, shows they will only present to the OS memory addresses of 4GB, which is 32 bit. http://downloadmirror.intel.com/15197/eng/D915GAV_D915GAG_TechProdSpec.pdf (PPGs 56 & 57 of the PDF).

    Then they claim that a BIOS update is necessary for 64 bit operation. That said, it is possible that the boards are 64 bit, but normally restricted to 32 bit operation by the BIOS. That's sort of moot as well, since you're running 64 bit hardware, into a 32 bit net result....:confused:

    In any event an E6800 still won't work, for a plethora of reasons. Here is list of compatible boards for the E6800: http://processormatch.intel.com/COMPDB/SearchResult.aspx?ProcNbr=E6800&Lang=en-US Take note of the 2 digit base chipset numbers. (instead of their older boards 3 digit convention).

    Keep in mind that a rose by any other name, yadda, yadda.......Or, if an aftermarket manufacturer's board carries Intel's chipset number, then it was manufactured by Intel, and the iteration is then up to Gigabyte, Asus, or whomever. I don't want to tackle licensing agreements for manufacture, as those are dark and scary things unknown to me.

    OK, just one, Foxconn makes Intel motherboards.

    In conclusion, here is Gigabytes CPU support list for your board: http://www.gigabyte.mn/support-downloads/cpu-support-popup.aspx?pid=1801
  22. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    What I gathered from those links there are that Basically what you said before, I can't use the E8600. I was pretty adamant in thinking I could use it but I undderstand now. There's all kinds of things I need to take into concideration for it. I'd pretty much need a new board, chipset, RAM, BIOS, and possibly otherstuff.
  23. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 10,690   +884

    I suppose better late than never on some final thoughs on your quest for the Pent E6800.

    Socket LGA775 is dead. We've moved two generations past it. Currently, Intel's current desktop board chipsets are using socket LGA1155. There are still "Pentium" branded CPUs in the lineup, and they are economy offerings in the line, just as the E6xxx Pentiums were in relation to the LGA775 socket.

    Basically, your immediate options for an Intel build, should be considered from this lineup of LGA1155 socket CPUs: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...1 50001157 600095610&IsNodeId=1&name=LGA 1155
  24. STAVOsanguinius

    STAVOsanguinius TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 22

    Thanks. I'd pretty much guessed I'd have to go for Core i CPUs next. I'd just originally thought of just upgrading my CPU to help my current comupter rather than buying a complete new one.Ah well, You've still seved me money and time and gave me more knowledge when searching for this kinda thing so I'm very grateful.


Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...


Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.