| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Dimension 8400 Processor
I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I
wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. |
Dimension 8400 Processor
Hi!
Not having tried it personally, I can't say for sure. However, Dell's BIOS is pretty tolerant of different CPUs. The Dim8400 power supply and motherboard should definitely be up to it. I would update to the latest Dell BIOS for your system and give it a try. William |
Dimension 8400 Processor
Thank you for your reply William. The Bios is already at A09 which is the
latest that is listed on Dell's website for the Dim 8400. I shall give it a try once I have my hands on a suitable processor. Bruce. "William R. Walsh" wrote in message ... Hi! Not having tried it personally, I can't say for sure. However, Dell's BIOS is pretty tolerant of different CPUs. The Dim8400 power supply and motherboard should definitely be up to it. I would update to the latest Dell BIOS for your system and give it a try. William |
Dimension 8400 Processor
On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote:
I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. No single core processor is going run Photoshop very well, even a version as old as CS3. I wouldn't waste my money...you'll never be able to see the difference. Bob |
Dimension 8400 Processor
On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote:
I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. |
Dimension 8400 Processor
"Christopher Muto" wrote in message t... On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote: I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. Christopher, thank you for your reply but I think you have the motherboards mixed up, its a 8400 not 8200. The 8400 has a 925X chipset which does support speedstep processors. What I wanted to know was if anyone had tried this processor on a 8400 m'board and if so what if any advantage did it give, if any. Bruce. |
Dimension 8400 Processor
On 2/23/2011 9:21 AM, Bruce Varney wrote:
"Christopher Muto" wrote in message t... On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote: I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. Christopher, thank you for your reply but I think you have the motherboards mixed up, its a 8400 not 8200. The 8400 has a 925X chipset which does support speedstep processors. What I wanted to know was if anyone had tried this processor on a 8400 m'board and if so what if any advantage did it give, if any. Bruce. right, after reading that lengthy thread about the 8200 and large disks i was indeed thinking 8200 and not 8400... still i have my doubts about the sl96h working in the dimension 8400. i *think* the 3.6 prescott is the best you can do in the 8400 and it really isn't worth the effort (SL7J9, SL7Q2). there is a chance that the 3.6 or prescott, dubbed the 'extreme edition', would work. the extreme edition processors had 2mb l2 cache (vs the 1mb on yours) and the system documentation states that the 8400 does support p4 ht processors with 2mb l2 like only the extreme editions have. the prescotts are all 90nm vs the higher density 65nm of the cedar mill - and that is why i do not think the 8400 would support the sl96h you asked about. but i don't think it would hurt to try it, however it may not post. trying the prescott extreme edition has potential but depends on the cost of them these days for the marginal performance improvement it provides. they were very expensive in their day (over $1000) and not very popular so are pretty rare. let us know if you try anything and what results you experience good or bad. |
Dimension 8400 Processor
"Christopher Muto" wrote in message ... On 2/23/2011 9:21 AM, Bruce Varney wrote: "Christopher Muto" wrote in message t... On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote: I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. Christopher, thank you for your reply but I think you have the motherboards mixed up, its a 8400 not 8200. The 8400 has a 925X chipset which does support speedstep processors. What I wanted to know was if anyone had tried this processor on a 8400 m'board and if so what if any advantage did it give, if any. Bruce. right, after reading that lengthy thread about the 8200 and large disks i was indeed thinking 8200 and not 8400... still i have my doubts about the sl96h working in the dimension 8400. i *think* the 3.6 prescott is the best you can do in the 8400 and it really isn't worth the effort (SL7J9, SL7Q2). there is a chance that the 3.6 or prescott, dubbed the 'extreme edition', would work. the extreme edition processors had 2mb l2 cache (vs the 1mb on yours) and the system documentation states that the 8400 does support p4 ht processors with 2mb l2 like only the extreme editions have. the prescotts are all 90nm vs the higher density 65nm of the cedar mill - and that is why i do not think the 8400 would support the sl96h you asked about. but i don't think it would hurt to try it, however it may not post. trying the prescott extreme edition has potential but depends on the cost of them these days for the marginal performance improvement it provides. they were very expensive in their day (over $1000) and not very popular so are pretty rare. let us know if you try anything and what results you experience good or bad. Installed 3.60Ghz processor. As soon as power lead inserted PC powered on and stayed on with no video. Turned PC off and back on no video. So I conclude that the motherboard doesn't like the processor. |
Dimension 8400 Processor
On 2/24/2011 7:17 AM, Bruce Varney wrote:
"Christopher Muto" wrote in message ... On 2/23/2011 9:21 AM, Bruce Varney wrote: "Christopher Muto" wrote in message t... On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote: I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. Christopher, thank you for your reply but I think you have the motherboards mixed up, its a 8400 not 8200. The 8400 has a 925X chipset which does support speedstep processors. What I wanted to know was if anyone had tried this processor on a 8400 m'board and if so what if any advantage did it give, if any. Bruce. right, after reading that lengthy thread about the 8200 and large disks i was indeed thinking 8200 and not 8400... still i have my doubts about the sl96h working in the dimension 8400. i *think* the 3.6 prescott is the best you can do in the 8400 and it really isn't worth the effort (SL7J9, SL7Q2). there is a chance that the 3.6 or prescott, dubbed the 'extreme edition', would work. the extreme edition processors had 2mb l2 cache (vs the 1mb on yours) and the system documentation states that the 8400 does support p4 ht processors with 2mb l2 like only the extreme editions have. the prescotts are all 90nm vs the higher density 65nm of the cedar mill - and that is why i do not think the 8400 would support the sl96h you asked about. but i don't think it would hurt to try it, however it may not post. trying the prescott extreme edition has potential but depends on the cost of them these days for the marginal performance improvement it provides. they were very expensive in their day (over $1000) and not very popular so are pretty rare. let us know if you try anything and what results you experience good or bad. Installed 3.60Ghz processor. As soon as power lead inserted PC powered on and stayed on with no video. Turned PC off and back on no video. So I conclude that the motherboard doesn't like the processor. I assume that the 3.6ghz that didn't work was the 65nm cedar mill sl96h that you initially asked about. Looked at the prescott extreme editions on ebay and the few there seem to be about $100 which is way too much for what they offer (and which also may not work, but probably will). |
Dimension 8400 Processor
On 2/24/2011 11:05 AM, Christopher Muto wrote:
On 2/24/2011 7:17 AM, Bruce Varney wrote: "Christopher Muto" wrote in message ... On 2/23/2011 9:21 AM, Bruce Varney wrote: "Christopher Muto" wrote in message t... On 2/21/2011 2:37 PM, Bruce Varney wrote: I have a Dimension 8400 fitted with a Pent 4 3.20 GHz processor SL7J7. I wish to change the processor for something a little faster, can I substitute a SL96H 3.60 GHz processor. The Motherboard already has 4Gb of PC2-5300 (DDR2-667) memory fitted. I finding that the PC is a little slow when running Photoshop CS3 especially when going through the procedure to set up printing. It is running on Windows 7 Ultimate. Otherwise the machine runs fine. Bruce. i have not attempted what you are considering but i suspect that it will fail. below is a link to a side by side comparison of the two processors on intel's site. though they are from the same 'family', use the processor socket, and are pretty close in terms of wattage and voltage requirements, there is one big difference. the sl96h is a speedstep processor. when speedstep processors are installed in motherboards that do not support speedstep they will work at their lowest speed ratting. you can think of it as having an internal multiplier that defaults to a low multiple of the buss speed and only when instructed by the system to speed up does it operate at it full potential speed rating. as far as i know the dimension 8200 does not support speedstep. it has an 850 chipset and the earliest chipset that could support speedstep was the 910. would like to hear your findings if you give this a try. use cpu-z to identify the processor and the internal speed that it is operating... http://www.cpuid.com/ link to intel for side by side comparison of the two processors... http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=27485,27468, example: i recently tried replacing the celeron m 2.4ghz in an inspiron 1000 with a pentium m 2.4ghz and it ran at 1.2ghz because it was a speedstep processor and the system did not support speedstep. the processor speed would not increase when under load. Christopher, thank you for your reply but I think you have the motherboards mixed up, its a 8400 not 8200. The 8400 has a 925X chipset which does support speedstep processors. What I wanted to know was if anyone had tried this processor on a 8400 m'board and if so what if any advantage did it give, if any. Bruce. right, after reading that lengthy thread about the 8200 and large disks i was indeed thinking 8200 and not 8400... still i have my doubts about the sl96h working in the dimension 8400. i *think* the 3.6 prescott is the best you can do in the 8400 and it really isn't worth the effort (SL7J9, SL7Q2). there is a chance that the 3.6 or prescott, dubbed the 'extreme edition', would work. the extreme edition processors had 2mb l2 cache (vs the 1mb on yours) and the system documentation states that the 8400 does support p4 ht processors with 2mb l2 like only the extreme editions have. the prescotts are all 90nm vs the higher density 65nm of the cedar mill - and that is why i do not think the 8400 would support the sl96h you asked about. but i don't think it would hurt to try it, however it may not post. trying the prescott extreme edition has potential but depends on the cost of them these days for the marginal performance improvement it provides. they were very expensive in their day (over $1000) and not very popular so are pretty rare. let us know if you try anything and what results you experience good or bad. Installed 3.60Ghz processor. As soon as power lead inserted PC powered on and stayed on with no video. Turned PC off and back on no video. So I conclude that the motherboard doesn't like the processor. I assume that the 3.6ghz that didn't work was the 65nm cedar mill sl96h that you initially asked about. Looked at the prescott extreme editions on ebay and the few there seem to be about $100 which is way too much for what they offer (and which also may not work, but probably will). the SL7Z5 is an extreme edition prescott that will probably work and is available on ebay for $35 delivered (item number 270706002365). at 3.6 ghz it is a little faster than your 3.2 and it has twice the amount of l2 cache but still a 90nm prescott so the changes are good that it will work in your system. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:39 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HardwareBanter.com