| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
frusciante
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: Upgrading my 700mhz old amd duron |
|
|
hi
i got an old computer with this motherborad VEGA-VK7A - AMPTRON (http://www.motherboard.cz/mb/amptron/vk7a.htm) u can look it there.
Actually it use an AMd Duron 700 mhz processor
i want to know the best processor that can fit in my mother board.
i think a Duron 1,3 ghz 200mhz fsb socket A fits right? any other ?, a better one????
Thanks a lot for your answers |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CPUShack

Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 34259 Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
a Duron 1300 would work, but AMD also made Athlons 1200, 1300, and 1400 that used the 200MHz bus.
The 1400MHz ones were a bit finicky so I would try to find a Athon 1300 (T-bird core, 200MHz bus) _________________ New for 2025! The CPU Shack has a co-processor!
Visit The CPU Shack of microprocessor history and information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
swaaye

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 47 Location: WI, USA
|
Posted: Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you are willing to experiment with something that may not work, a Athlon XP-M might just do the trick. They have an unlocked multiplier that will get around FSB limits. You must have multiplier settings in the BIOS though otherwise you'll need to do wiremods. I ran a AXP-M in an old KT266A board, but that's as far back as I've gone with the chips.
You can get a Barton core Athlon XP this way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CPUShack

Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 34259 Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
frusciante
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 12
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CPUShack

Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Posts: 34259 Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
frusciante
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Really?
i think its ebacause they are new,
of course i dont mind if its a new or used chip.
A guy wanted to sell me a 1300 for 50 bucks, its the best i can find i think?
a 1400 would be nice , even used i dont care. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
frusciante
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i got another question, is the a way to make a thunderbird support sse??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
D.8080

Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 1474 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SSE are instructions "inside the processor", optimized codes for multimedia and other possible uses.
A processor must have them implemented into his core, programs can then take advantage of them to run more complex operations in less time (they make you save calculation time alike).
Amd Thunderbird do not have them, they have 3dnow! pro instructions and mmx; starting from Amd Athlon Xp models you have SSE too.
It's like having the bass boost on you hi-fi, you have it or not.
To make it simple...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
frusciante
Joined: 24 Oct 2006 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Finnally i bought an 1,4ghz 200 fsb athlon thunderbird from ebay, it will arrive very soon.
I was wondering if with that processor and 768 RAM it will run windows xp without lagging a lot
Im using windows me right now and it is useless for most new software around.
Also i know that a HD ntfs file system format is the best for windows xp, actually my HDD is FAt 32 and i also know that windows me dont support ntfs, so i was planning to install windows xp on a fat 32 system, so if windows xp lags a lot i can return to me or maybe windows 2000 sp4, now my question is, running windows xp on a NTFS system will improve the speed ?? maybe if i install it on fat 32 will make it laggy and if i change it to ntfs will improve the speed , theres a great difference between them?
thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacterio

Joined: 04 Dec 2005 Posts: 242 Location: Getafe, Espaņa
|
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
the speed are basically the same, the unique difference is that ntfs is more secure (and has less fails) than fat32 _________________ PSP Slim 3.71 M33-4  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|