I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but, the
replacement cpu has not arrived yet.

....Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its' factory
fitted 256mb pc2700.
....tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
....the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the the
Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.

....and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and
software is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton Ghosted
its' hd onto my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those out onto 6 x
dvd r's.

Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT
2.5ghz / 512bm L2 cache,

( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU
SL6HB, SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a
sensible price ! )

My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd image,
and XP discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this should
not cause problems ?

btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware
that MS would have noted :-)

regards, Richard

You are right in thinking that it shouldn't cause any problems.
All the OS is looking
for in a CPU is it fast and powerful enough to perform the required
tasks.


"RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but,
>the replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>
> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its' factory
> fitted 256mb pc2700.
> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the
> the Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>
> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and
> software is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton
> Ghosted its' hd onto my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those
> out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>
> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT
> 2.5ghz / 512bm L2 cache,
>
> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU
> SL6HB, SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a
> sensible price ! )
>
> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd image,
> and XP discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this should
> not cause problems ?
>
> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware
> that MS would have noted :-)
>
> regards, Richard
>
>
>

Thanks,

I've upgraded lots of cpu's to faster ones, ...quite why I was wondering
on what I was pondering on, ...now eludes me !

regards, Richard


"Rich Barry" <rbarry@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:48163353$0$7034$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> You are right in thinking that it shouldn't cause any problems.
> All the OS is looking
> for in a CPU is it fast and powerful enough to perform the required
> tasks.
>
>
> "RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but,
>>the replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>>
>> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
>> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its'
>> factory fitted 256mb pc2700.
>> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
>> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the
>> the Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>>
>> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and
>> software is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton
>> Ghosted its' hd onto my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those
>> out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>>
>> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT
>> 2.5ghz / 512bm L2 cache,
>>
>> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU
>> SL6HB, SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a
>> sensible price ! )
>>
>> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd
>> image, and XP discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this
>> should not cause problems ?
>>
>> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware
>> that MS would have noted :-)
>>
>> regards, Richard
>>
>>
>>
>
>

I just upgraded my folks PC from the same Celeron 2.6 with a P4 2.8, 512kb L2
cache,533MHz FSB/478 socket for only $59 + shipping.
It really is an improvement over the Celeron, for sure!
It took only 3 days, including the day I ordered it, to receiving it via priority
mail.(I chose the cheapest shipping to save them money)
If you change your mind about installing the 2.5 then you can find the 2.8 here:

http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=118

~Gary


"RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but, the
>replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>
> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its' factory fitted
> 256mb pc2700.
> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the the
> Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>
> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and software is
> behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton Ghosted its' hd onto my
> external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>
> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT 2.5ghz /
> 512bm L2 cache,
>
> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU SL6HB,
> SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a sensible price ! )
>
> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd image, and XP
> discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this should not cause
> problems ?
>
> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware that MS
> would have noted :-)
>
> regards, Richard
>
>
>

The motherboard in the Packard Bell iXtreme 6052,
http://www.giga-byte.co.uk/Products/...ProductID=1741
cpu support list - indicated that 2.6 Northwood 400mhz fsb, was the fastest
cpu it supports.
I don't think that a 2.8 / 533 will run on it.

I couldn't find a SL6PP or SL6SB, for example, anywhere for a sensible
price. i.e. it would have almost been cheaper building a more up to date
PC, looking at some of the ridiculous prices people are selling some of the
"older" cpu's

regards, Richard



"Gary Brandenburg" <Gary@whatever.com> wrote in message
news:Oy8TW0ZqIHA.5096@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>I just upgraded my folks PC from the same Celeron 2.6 with a P4 2.8, 512kb
>L2 cache,533MHz FSB/478 socket for only $59 + shipping.
> It really is an improvement over the Celeron, for sure!
> It took only 3 days, including the day I ordered it, to receiving it via
> priority mail.(I chose the cheapest shipping to save them money)
> If you change your mind about installing the 2.5 then you can find the 2.8
> here:
>
> http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=118
>
> ~Gary
>
>
> "RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but,
>>the replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>>
>> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
>> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its'
>> factory fitted 256mb pc2700.
>> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
>> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the
>> the Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>>
>> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and
>> software is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton
>> Ghosted its' hd onto my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those
>> out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>>
>> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT
>> 2.5ghz / 512bm L2 cache,
>>
>> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU
>> SL6HB, SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a
>> sensible price ! )
>>
>> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd
>> image, and XP discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this
>> should not cause problems ?
>>
>> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware
>> that MS would have noted :-)
>>
>> regards, Richard
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Oooh-You're right.
Just checked some of the prices on the older ones & they're higher than the 533FSB
CPUs!
This particular one is also a Northwood. It's a 2.6, 400MHz FSB for $69:

http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=115

The reason I know it's a Northwood is because it has the 805032 in the part #.(some
of them, on that site, don't even have the part #,though)
See-
http://www.cpu-world.com/Cores/Northwood.html

"Identification of microprocessors with Northwood core:
By part number: Part number contains 80532 (but not 80532K) and does not end with
"2M", "F", "FS" or "MS". For example: RH80532GC049512, BX80532PC1800D "

Either way-You're going to notice an improvement with your new P4,over the Celeron.

~Gary


"RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u3EtzKiqIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> The motherboard in the Packard Bell iXtreme 6052,
> http://www.giga-byte.co.uk/Products/...ProductID=1741
> cpu support list - indicated that 2.6 Northwood 400mhz fsb, was the fastest cpu it
> supports.
> I don't think that a 2.8 / 533 will run on it.
>
> I couldn't find a SL6PP or SL6SB, for example, anywhere for a sensible price. i.e.
> it would have almost been cheaper building a more up to date PC, looking at some of
> the ridiculous prices people are selling some of the "older" cpu's
>
> regards, Richard
>
>
>
> "Gary Brandenburg" <Gary@whatever.com> wrote in message
> news:Oy8TW0ZqIHA.5096@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>I just upgraded my folks PC from the same Celeron 2.6 with a P4 2.8, 512kb L2
>>cache,533MHz FSB/478 socket for only $59 + shipping.
>> It really is an improvement over the Celeron, for sure!
>> It took only 3 days, including the day I ordered it, to receiving it via priority
>> mail.(I chose the cheapest shipping to save them money)
>> If you change your mind about installing the 2.5 then you can find the 2.8 here:
>>
>> http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=118
>>
>> ~Gary
>>
>>
>> "RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but, the
>>>replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>>>
>>> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
>>> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its' factory fitted
>>> 256mb pc2700.
>>> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
>>> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to the the
>>> Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>>>
>>> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and software
>>> is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton Ghosted its' hd onto
>>> my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>>>
>>> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT 2.5ghz /
>>> 512bm L2 cache,
>>>
>>> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU SL6HB,
>>> SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a sensible price ! )
>>>
>>> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd image, and XP
>>> discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that this should not cause
>>> problems ?
>>>
>>> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to hardware that MS
>>> would have noted :-)
>>>
>>> regards, Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Tthanks again,

I quite often use the www.cpu-world.com site.
Regarding the girl at works' Packard Bell iXtreme 6052,
http://www.cpu-world.com/info/Intel/...Pentium_4.html was one of the
references used when searching for the top cpu for her board. If she'd
"gone for it," a couple of years ago, there would probably have been more of
them around, and for lower prices. I think we're in the period where
they're now so old, and a bit scarcer, prices have gone up a bit.

regards, Richard

You're very welcome Richard.


"RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eds9kfkqIHA.1228@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Tthanks again,
>
> I quite often use the www.cpu-world.com site.
> Regarding the girl at works' Packard Bell iXtreme 6052,
> http://www.cpu-world.com/info/Intel/...Pentium_4.html was one of the references
> used when searching for the top cpu for her board. If she'd "gone for it," a
> couple of years ago, there would probably have been more of them around, and for
> lower prices. I think we're in the period where they're now so old, and a bit
> scarcer, prices have gone up a bit.
>
> regards, Richard
>

As usual, ..."heaven" is a P4 cpu 512kb L2 cache instead the "failed" P4's,
(Celeron's ! 128kb L2),
.....it's so nice to be able to do more than one thing at once, without
everything grinding to an almost complete halt !

....can anyone remember the first Celeron's with ZERIO amount L2 cache ?,
....that was nothing short of criminal !

regards, Richard


"Gary Brandenburg" <Gary@whatever.com> wrote in message
news:%23QdOsBkqIHA.4672@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Oooh-You're right.
> Just checked some of the prices on the older ones & they're higher than
> the 533FSB CPUs!
> This particular one is also a Northwood. It's a 2.6, 400MHz FSB for $69:
>
> http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=115
>
> The reason I know it's a Northwood is because it has the 805032 in the
> part #.(some of them, on that site, don't even have the part #,though)
> See-
> http://www.cpu-world.com/Cores/Northwood.html
>
> "Identification of microprocessors with Northwood core:
> By part number: Part number contains 80532 (but not 80532K) and does not
> end with "2M", "F", "FS" or "MS". For example: RH80532GC049512,
> BX80532PC1800D "
>
> Either way-You're going to notice an improvement with your new P4,over the
> Celeron.
>
> ~Gary
>
>
> "RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:u3EtzKiqIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> The motherboard in the Packard Bell iXtreme 6052,
>> http://www.giga-byte.co.uk/Products/...ProductID=1741
>> cpu support list - indicated that 2.6 Northwood 400mhz fsb, was the
>> fastest cpu it supports.
>> I don't think that a 2.8 / 533 will run on it.
>>
>> I couldn't find a SL6PP or SL6SB, for example, anywhere for a sensible
>> price. i.e. it would have almost been cheaper building a more up to date
>> PC, looking at some of the ridiculous prices people are selling some of
>> the "older" cpu's
>>
>> regards, Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> "Gary Brandenburg" <Gary@whatever.com> wrote in message
>> news:Oy8TW0ZqIHA.5096@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>I just upgraded my folks PC from the same Celeron 2.6 with a P4 2.8,
>>>512kb L2 cache,533MHz FSB/478 socket for only $59 + shipping.
>>> It really is an improvement over the Celeron, for sure!
>>> It took only 3 days, including the day I ordered it, to receiving it via
>>> priority mail.(I chose the cheapest shipping to save them money)
>>> If you change your mind about installing the 2.5 then you can find the
>>> 2.8 here:
>>>
>>> http://www.starmicro.net/detail.aspx?ID=118
>>>
>>> ~Gary
>>>
>>>
>>> "RJK" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23UAujyTqIHA.2068@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>I know it would of course have been best to have upgraded cpu first but,
>>>>the replacement cpu has not arrived yet.
>>>>
>>>> ...Packard Bell iXtreme 6052 / XP Home ed. fully MS updated.
>>>> Have just added 256mb pc2700 as it was partially strangled by its'
>>>> factory fitted 256mb pc2700.
>>>> ...tidied it up ...lots !, pruned XP services and startup items etc,
>>>> ...the remaining partially "strangled" effect is of course thanks to
>>>> the the Celeron 2.6's / lowly 128kb L2 on-die cache.
>>>>
>>>> ...and seeing as I'd reached that heavenly point where all hardware and
>>>> software is behaving in a robust and well-behaved fashion, I Norton
>>>> Ghosted its' hd onto my external USB hd in 1gb chunks, and burnt those
>>>> out onto 6 x dvd r's.
>>>>
>>>> Now, when it arrives I will swap out the Celeron for a Pentium IV SL6GT
>>>> 2.5ghz / 512bm L2 cache,
>>>>
>>>> ( couldn't find a skt 478 2.6ghz BX80532PC2600D / RK80532PC064512 SL6GU
>>>> SL6HB, SL6PP, SL6QR, SL6SB / QMT0ES, QWB5, SL6GU, SL6PP, SL6SB for a
>>>> sensible price ! )
>>>>
>>>> My question is simply, if one were to restore the aforementioned hd
>>>> image, and XP discovers a different cpu, am I right in thinking that
>>>> this should not cause problems ?
>>>>
>>>> btw this machine has never yet had any "significant" changes to
>>>> hardware that MS would have noted :-)
>>>>
>>>> regards, Richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>