Will A Core 2 Duo With Higher FSB Match Mobo's Slower FSB Rating?

Hi,

I upgraded the CPU in my son's Gateway MX8738 from a T2080 (533 FSB, 1.73Ghz) to a T5200 (also 533 FSB). My goal was to allow him to upgrade to a 64-bit OS.

When I bought the T5200, I was only concerned about matching the FSB. I didn't realize the T5200 is clocked at 1.60Ghz. He's noticed a performance drop.

My questions:

1. Could I replace the T5200 with a T5600 (SL9SG (B2), 1.83 GHz, 667 MHz FSB), or even a T7200 (SL9SF (B2), 2.00 GHz, 667 MHz FSB), T7400 (SL9SE (B2), 2.17Ghz, 667 MHz FSB), or T7600 (SL9SD (B2), 2.33Ghz, 667 MHz FSB). All the above parts are Socket M.

The question is whether the Intel CPU would adjust to the lower FSB-- Intel's site is a bit unclear on this point. I know that with the lower-end Intel943GML/GMA950, it's locked to a 533 MHz FSB).

2. If the above is not possible, then could we overclock the T5200 that I just installed? The installed memory speed is 667 MHz DDR2.

3. Lastly, by moving from a Dual Core to a Core 2 Duo, I know he now has support for the 64-bit extensions. Could we increase the installed RAM from 2GB to 4GB? (There are two slots). I guess I'm asking if the issue is a mobo one, or RAM address-ability (x64 vs. x32) issue.

Thanks, in advance for any help!

BTW, his laptop specs are: Dual Core T2080 | 1.73 GHz | 533 MHz FSB | 943GML | GMA950 | 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 RAM |

It looks like the chipset in that motherboard (Intel 943GML) only supports 533Mhz FSB and up to 2GB of RAM. So unfortunately, I don't think those upgrades would help you any. Sorry!

http://www.intel.com/products/notebook/chipsets/943gml/943gml-overview.htm


EDIT: oops, forgot to answer the other question about overclocking.

Being that the chipset/motherboard only support 533FSB, I don't think there would really be any overclocking options for you. Sometimes, you can "pinmod" the CPU so that the motherboard sees is as a higher FSB chip but being that the motherboard doesn't support those higher FSB's, it would likely just not boot. Not to mention you are talking about soldering wires to your CPU, so it's not exactly for the faint of heart.

But either way, it unfortuantely looks like you are stuck at stock. However, being that the motherboard only supports up to 2GB of RAM, it elmininates the need of a 64bit OS. Therefore you could put the T2080 back in there for a little performance boost. (while the T5200 has more cache, only certain apps would show an increase in speed because of it. You would do much better to have the extra Mhz and only 1MB of cache in the T2080)

From 1.73 (1MB) down to 1.6 (2MB) he shouldn't have noticed a performance drop, rather he should have noticed a performance increase. I think he is letting the overall CPU speed sway him. The added cache should give him a performance boost where the loss of 0.13 MHz shouldn't even have been noticeable. You might wanna run some benchmarks just to prove that point. If he can't get the final number out of his head then he might as well put the old processor back in. Your motherboard is a 533FSB and you have no option to raise it. Not sure if you can do a volt/pad mod on it and maybe get it to work, but that might be too hokie for you. Again, run a benchmark software to compare one CPU to the other and I think you will find that the T5200 is an upgrade to the 2080.

Here is some factual data. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html

830 vs. 762 he is having a placebo affect in reverse. He is looking at the final CPU clock speed, he sees it is slower, therefore he believes he did a downgrade. What he didn't see was the cache upgrade, which makes A LOT of difference. If he had a 2080 running at 3.2 and a 5200 running at 1.6 he might have a leg to stand on, because the clock speed could help make up for the cache difference, but with the low clock speeds 0.13 difference would never be noticeable.

Sometimes it works, but the difficulty is that the multiplier is locked. If you're getting 1.33ghz on a 133 (533) bus with a ten multi and you toss that cpu in a board that only supports 100fsb (400), you'll be running at 10x100, for one ghz.
That of course assumes that it works at all, which isn't a given.

Hmmm... something I didnt' think of at first, The T2080 is Yonah core and the T5200 is Merom. The Merom's are different architecture (Core 2 vs. Core) and should yield about 15% better performance over the same clocks on a Yonah. So the difference Between a 1.73 Ghz Yonah and a 1.6Ghz Merom should still lean toward the 1.6Ghz Merom for higher performance.

Thanks!

Thanks for all the help. You guys are great. I did run some benchmarks, but they were inconclusive (some up, some down). But this thread at least should make him think about all the variables. He's interested in computers, but as a programmer (who's finding out that options become more limited as you age), I'm pushing him towards something else

So other than the memory addressing issue, you folks don't see any advantage of x64 over x32?

uman said:

Thanks for all the help. You guys are great. I did run some benchmarks, but they were inconclusive (some up, some down). But this thread at least should make him think about all the variables. He's interested in computers, but as a programmer (who's finding out that options become more limited as you age), I'm pushing him towards something else

So other than the memory addressing issue, you folks don't see any advantage of x64 over x32?

Click to expand...

No, with 2GB of RAM there just isn't the need for it and you won't see any increased performance because of it.

No, with 2GB of RAM there just isn't the need for it and you won't see any increase in performance because of it.

+1

Moreover, 64 bit drivers are still scattered, especially on older hardware which may or may not receive support. It is possible that that laptop never received any support for 64 bit, so it just might be a misery in upgrading.

T5200, artic silver, isopropyl alcohol, labor: $40

Getting schooled by overclockers gods: priceless.

Thanks, again!

I am a Overclocking n00b.



I hope that doesn't make you feel worse.

From what i've read 64bit software in a 64bit OS on a 64bit cpu will give 5-15% faster performance then the same software/os/cpu in 32bit mode.
Where on that scale you fall depends on the specifics

Well bob, I would like to agree with you and I think I probably do in a way. I have seen benches done on XP, Vista, and 7 in both 32 bit and 64 bit. Depending on the application some OSs fair better whether in 32 or 64 bit, some fair better in only 32 bit because of optimization of old tech, and some fair better in 64 bit because of optimization of current benchmarks for 64 bit, while letting 32 bit fall by the wayside.

Its really hard to say when it comes to a processor that has such a small difference in both cache and FSB especially using benchmarks that are designed for much faster chips.

uman, I'm thinking you should be able to do a 166 fsb pinmod on that T5200 myself. That processor is a merom core, which came in both 133 and 166 fsb versions. I have a laptop running a T7400 proc, which is B2 stepping Merom and it runs on a 166 fsb. I think it would be worth your while to Google around and see if you can locate a 166 fsb pinmod for Merom procs. If you can find one, that would make for a 2 GHz laptop, which probably would be a noticeable gain in performance.

muddocktor said:

uman, I'm thinking you should be able to do a 166 fsb pinmod on that T5200 myself. That processor is a merom core, which came in both 133 and 166 fsb versions. I have a laptop running a T7400 proc, which is B2 stepping Merom and it runs on a 166 fsb. I think it would be worth your while to Google around and see if you can locate a 166 fsb pinmod for Merom procs. If you can find one, that would make for a 2 GHz laptop, which probably would be a noticeable gain in performance.

Click to expand...

But if his MB chipset dosen't support 166FSB would it still work?

In all likely hood yes, its more like he is overclocking it. But he is manually doing it via the processor. The motherboard will still think its telling it to do 133, but in reality it will be 166.

If that works it might also be in his interest to try a T5300, it has a 13 Multi instead of a 12. He could get almost 2.2 out of it.... and that would be a worthwhile upgrade from 1.6 to 2.2

Yonah and Merom use the same pinout. You have a Merom.

This is the pinout for Yonah:

http://img81.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pinout0jl.jpg

The FSB is determined by the BSEL[0], BSEL[1] and BSEL[2] pins.



As you can see, 133MHz is set with L-L-H, while 166 is set with L-H-H. By jumping BSEL[0] to BSEL[1] with a small wire or something similar, it will cause BSEL[1] to go high setting it to L-H-H and giving you a 166MHz FSB.