View Full Version : New processor?
I've decided it's too annoying having to reboot each time I want to run windows 7 in 32 bit - so I want to replace my processor with a better one that has VT so I can run virtual XP. But the question is, which proc? I currently have an E5300 (2.6ghz, 2mb L2, 800mhz). Any thoughts on a noticably better proc for about £100?
Here's the ones I can use:
http://processormatch.intel.com/CompDB/SearchResult.aspx?BoardName=DX48BT2
I haven't got a flipping clue what's what these days :( I'm thinking maybe an E7600 from Scan at £93. Can I get better?
Ta :)
Stan_Lite
07-01-2010, 05:25
I would be tempted to go for a quad core - that way you can assign two cores to the VM and 2 cores to the host. The cheapest, a Q8300, can be had from Ebuyer for about £105. It runs at 2.5GHz, so 100MHz slower than your E5300 but has 4MB L2 cache as opposed to your 2MB - it'd be almost like having two of your current CPUs in one machine.
Q8300 doesn't always support (http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLB5W) virtualisation (http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SLGUR) though, so might not help him.
Processors that Support Intel VT (which is what you need to make use of 'XP Mode' in Windows 7) are:
Core 2 Duo
E6300, E6400, E6320, E6420, E6540, E6550, E6600, E6700, E6750, E6850, E5400, E7600, E8200, E8300, E8400, E8500, E8600 and some versions of the E7400 and E7500
Core 2 Quad
Q6600, Q6700, Q8400, Q8400S, Q9300, Q9400, Q9400S, Q9450, Q9550, Q9550S, Q9650 and some versions of the Q8300
The Q8300 depends on the stepping. SLB5W has no VT, SLGUR has VT. Might be easier to just grab a Q8400 if you're going that route, don't need to worry about getting the correct stepping.
Stan_Lite
07-01-2010, 15:22
Well, you learn something new every day :)
Apparently the SLGUR stepping was available from June but there's no guarantee the Ebuyer ones aren't old stock :confused:
Indeed, my Q9550 ended up being a C1 stepping chip despite the E0 having been available for something like 9 months before I bought mine. I don't know of any stores that will guarantee steppings on anything except maybe top end parts.
Stan_Lite
07-01-2010, 15:39
Ouch - my first Q6600 was a B1 and was hotter than magma. You tend to find that vendors will state that the stepping on popular CPUs like the Q6600 and the i7 920 are the good ones but don't bother on less popular lines.
Had a bit of a look round and Aria (http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Components/CPUs+/+Processors/Intel/Core+2+Quad/Intel+Core+2+Quad+Q8300+LGA775+'Yorkfield'+2.5GHz+ 4MB-cache+(1333FSB)+Processor+-+Retail+?productId=38434&page=2&rqcType=) stated in an answer to a question back in November that their stock at that time was SLGUR. No guarantee that's still the case but there's a reasonable chance and, if they answered the question once, they'll probably answer it again.
Well I'm confused ;D
Why the heck are there so many processors available? Surely they aren't all that different from each other :angry:
My bwain hurts :(
Might ask ebuyer if they can tell me what their Q8300s are. Again, you'd think intel would call it something different if they changed it!
Have sent a question. Don't really want to spend more than a ton. I don't push it all that much (although it's always nice to have something pokey :)
Figures, wait 2 working days to be told customer services aren't technically trained and I should ring (10p min!) pre-sales. So they can't ask pre-sales to look for me?
In the phone queue for them now (on a geographical number so out of my phone minutes fortunately)...
... which was a waste of 15 minutes ;D
Given up waiting for ebuyer to finally give me an answer, so have a Q8400 on the way for £118 :)
Given up waiting for ebuyer to finally give me an answer, so have a Q8400 on the way for £118 :)
And today ebuyer replied and it's the right one :rolleyes:
Stan_Lite
26-01-2010, 05:42
Typical :rolleyes:
Remember to overclock the nads off that Q8400 :D
The MB I have is designed for overclocking (Intel manufacture too so hopefully reliable!) - not overclocked anything in years though.
Stan_Lite
26-01-2010, 10:11
I've had a look at reviews for your motherboard and, despite being advertised as an overclocking motherboard, it's apparently shockingly poor at overclocking.
You should be able to get something out of it but maybe not as much as you would from a different board - still, something is better than nothing.
Admiral Huddy
26-01-2010, 11:57
Well I'm confused ;D
Why the heck are there so many processors available? Surely they aren't all that different from each other :angry:
My bwain hurts :(
Might ask ebuyer if they can tell me what their Q8300s are. Again, you'd think intel would call it something different if they changed it!
It's how they come off the fab line. This and different socket requirements etc etc. that makes the whole process not quite as plain as it used to be. The newer intel chips also have on board memory controllers so adds more complication ove the outgoing c2d.
I did read a lot of reviews on the board before I bought it (for a bargain price new and sealed off ebay!). More than one reviewer said they couldn't get the memory working at 1600 but that worked straight away, so hopefully overclocking, if I decide to do it, will work too on the proc. Didn't buy it for OC'ing though so won't be too bothered if it doesn't work :)
Huddy what's c2d?
New proc arrived today (was sent special delivery, but the postie of couse left it by my front door... One day something is going to go walkies!).
Play time later :)
c2d = Core 2 Duo
c2q = Core 2 Quad
Previously:
Did a quick WIE on the fresh install:
Processor: 6.1
RAM 6.1
Aero Graphics 6.8
Gaming Graphics 6.8
HDD 5.9
Basic spec is Dual core 2.6 with 4gb 1600 DDR3 and a Radeon HD4670 512mb GDDR3.
Now:
Processor: 7.2
RAM 7.2
Aero Graphics 6.8
Gaming Graphics 6.8
HDD 5.9
First time I re-ran it there was no change! :shocked:
Now how to get that HDD up to speed?
Yeah... maybe next week :p
Going round in circles now, enabled VT in the BIOS and the poxy detection program just keeps saying it's not enabled :( Gonna try and install virtual xp anyway...
Nope :( Any thoughts? All the VT and VA options are enabled in the BIOS but no luck :confused:
Any thoughts? How about I'm an idiot! I didn't read the bit in the BIOS about having to cycle the power before it would come into effect. Switched it right off and on again, and we're there :D
edit: Hurrah for hours of updates etc. :/
Go and sit in the corner, your dunce hat will be here shortly :p
Stan_Lite
29-01-2010, 06:13
Any thoughts? How about I'm an idiot! I didn't read the bit in the BIOS about having to cycle the power before it would come into effect. Switched it right off and on again, and we're there :D
edit: Hurrah for hours of updates etc. :/
D'oh :p
That's the worst bit of a new install, doing the ****ing updates and installing all the stuff you need. Especially nowadays with Windows 7 being so much quicker to install than previous Windows versions. Twenty minutes to install Windows 7 and two hours to install programs and updates etc.
Dymetrie
29-01-2010, 18:56
I found this (http://ninite.com/) a few months ago.
Looks like a nice little idea to make installing standard programs nice and easy after a fresh install :)
Interesting :) Although probably the only stuff installed on this virtual xp is all the windows updates and a couple of old Saab progs that are too obscure for that :)
Might be usefull for if I ever have to do a reinstall of 7 :)
Admiral Huddy
02-02-2010, 17:04
I found this (http://ninite.com/) a few months ago.
Looks like a nice little idea to make installing standard programs nice and easy after a fresh install :)
Used this a lot :) dead handy.
Service packs would be handy but it breaks Windows licensing - apparently.
Previously:
Now:
Processor: 7.2
RAM 7.2
Aero Graphics 6.8
Gaming Graphics 6.8
HDD 5.9
First time I re-ran it there was no change! :shocked:
Now how to get that HDD up to speed?
Buy an SSD :p
Now:
Processor: 7.2
RAM 7.2
Aero Graphics 6.8
Gaming Graphics 6.8
HDD 6.8
Put one of these in :)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingston-SSDNow-64GB-Desktop-Upgrade/dp/tech-data/B00378KHUK/ref=de_a_smtd
Slightly slower than the V+ version, but was £40 cheaper at the time!
I've just noticed your (presumably stock speed) Q8400 achieves a CPU rating of 7.2, a mere 0.1 behind my 570MHz overclocked Q9550. Useless index.
Nice improvement with the SSD though! :D
Stan_Lite
08-06-2010, 23:09
I've just noticed your (presumably stock speed) Q8400 achieves a CPU rating of 7.2, a mere 0.1 behind my 570MHz overclocked Q9550. Useless index.
It is a bit laughable when my i7 920 clocked at 4.0GHz is 7.7 :D
My netbook is showing an Atom as 2.2
It seems a slightly odd scale really.
I've no idea why they capped it at 7.9 either, such an odd figure.
Stan_Lite
09-06-2010, 07:51
It does all seem a bit random with very little headroom built in for the most part.
Both my i7 rigs have 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM, which is far from top spec, and both get 7.9 for the RAM rating. My photo editing rig has a lowly HD4890 GFX card at 7.7 and my gaming rig has a GTX295, which has been overtaken a couple of times now, at 7.9.
The only thing that seems to have any future-proofing is the HDD with Nutcase's SSD only at 6.8.
It would be pretty pointless running the benchmark if you have an overclocked 980X, 2000 MHz Ram and a GTX480 :dunno:
I just look at it as higher is better :)
The SSD has made a noticable difference (fortunatley!).
LeperousDust
09-06-2010, 18:44
I just look at it as higher is better :)
Higher is better if they have a scale. They pull the numbers our of their **** most of the time! ;D
It isn't a benchmark. It wasn't intended to be a benchmark either. It's simply a measure of how well your system is likely to be able to do the things Windows wants to do. Higher means 'more capable of running Windows' and nothing more.
If you want a benchmark, you're much better off using PCMark/3DMark/HDtach/whatever else. :)
Higher means 'more capable of running Windows' and nothing more.
They clearly intend it to mean more, else they wouldn't bother setting up stuff like this:
http://i46.tinypic.com/1zh36vo.jpg
OK - more being 'and other Microsoft software'. They've used the WEI score there in the same way they do for Aero etc. It's still only a rough guide to system performance, not a benchmark.
Stan_Lite
09-06-2010, 22:27
If we're being pedantic, the dictionary definition of "Benchmark" is:
A standard by which something can be measured or judged.
In which case the WEI, being a standard by which system performance can be judged, would seem to me to be a benchmark.
LeperousDust
10-06-2010, 00:28
Exactly my thoughts, you can line different systems up in a row and number them in order and then not compare and call it a benchmark. Its just a **** version of one :p
Just a shame it doesn't go up to 11 ;)
LeperousDust
11-06-2010, 02:10
Exactly its all arbitrary numbers!
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.