Compaq Presario - Upgrade Options
Richard Hopkins
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b71th8$abllm$1...@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de...
> Hi, a friend of mine has a Presario 5000T which has an Intel
> 810E chipset, Celeron 566-66MHz FSB cpu, four PCI slots
> and integrated video/audio.
Yum.
> After a half dozen calls I can't get a straight answer from Compaq
> as to whether this system can be upgraded to run at 133FSB,
HpQ won't be able to give you any answers about upgrading with third party
parts. The only way you'll get an answer to this question from them would be
to ask them if they offer any upgrade processors designed for this PC.
Seeing as they probably don't (IIRC the only systems Compaq did offer CPU
upgrades for were servers), you won't get a sensible word from them.
The 810E chipset does support 133MHz FSB, FWIW, although whether this
particular board does is a slightly different matter. It certainly *should*
do - have you been able to get a manufacturer's name or model number off it?
> Does anyone know if there's anything proprietary about this
> Presario case that would prevent a generic motherboard from
> working?
Shouldn't be. One possible departure from the norm could be the ATX plug. To
the best of my knowledge Compaq have used a conventional one for the last
few years at least. The other one could be the power/reset/led header. IIRC
Compaq use a monobloc one designed to fit the particular board design they
use. Thus, if the new board has its headers in a different orientation, you
may have to adjust or cut the header plugs apart as necessary.
As for the replacement board, IIRC both Abit and Asus made mATX 815EP
boards. I'm sure there were others...
--
Richard Hopkins
replace nospam with com in reply address
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
"I don't get a fair whack. I don't pursue vendettas or punch people on the
nose." - John Prescott MP, 1994
It
> looks pretty standard as far as I can tell. There's a shot of the back
> here: http://www.mindspring.com/~rigel11/Compaq.jpg
>
> Also, if I can use another brand of motherboard does anyone have
> any suggestions? I'm hoping to get at least 133MHz FSB with a
> P3 CuMine (or preferably P3-S Tualatin).
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Rick
>
>
Terry Judkins
http://www.aida32.hu/aida32.php and it should give you all the information
about the PC that is available.news:b72434$a7vbt$1...@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de...
> "Richard Hopkins" <ri...@dsl.pipex.nospam> wrote in message
news:3e948d76$0$29597$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
> > HpQ won't be able to give you any answers about upgrading with third
party
> > parts. The only way you'll get an answer to this question from them
would be
> > to ask them if they offer any upgrade processors designed for this PC.
> > Seeing as they probably don't (IIRC the only systems Compaq did offer
CPU
> > upgrades for were servers), you won't get a sensible word from them.
>
> board is stuck at 66MHz and won't run any faster, regardless of
> which cpu is installed. Then another guy said it would autoswitch
> between 66 and 100 but wouldn't run 133. HPQ offers a P3-800
> upgrade, but they couldn't tell me if it was 100 or 133! The system
> came with PC100 memory but both PC100 and PC133 are offered
> on their website for this model. Yet they still couldn't tell me if it
> would run at 133 with the faster memory. Truly amazing lack of info.
>
> > The 810E chipset does support 133MHz FSB, FWIW, although whether this
> > particular board does is a slightly different matter. It certainly
*should*
> > do - have you been able to get a manufacturer's name or model number off
it?
>
>
> 0001 30
> B M W
> Made in China
>
> KC0601917 BMW-2
>
> 0106
>
> 686C3 (this one's the system bios family)
>
> Silkscreened on the board is a chart for JP3, 4 & 5 to select between
> 66/100/133, the locations exist but jumper posts aren't installed.
> Would it be a safe bet that it will autoswitch, or could I force 133FSB
> by soldering the appropriate location(s)?
>
> > > Does anyone know if there's anything proprietary about this
> > > Presario case that would prevent a generic motherboard from
> > > working?
> >
> > Shouldn't be. One possible departure from the norm could be the ATX
plug. To
> > the best of my knowledge Compaq have used a conventional one for the
last
> > few years at least. The other one could be the power/reset/led header.
IIRC
> > Compaq use a monobloc one designed to fit the particular board design
they
> > use. Thus, if the new board has its headers in a different orientation,
you
> > may have to adjust or cut the header plugs apart as necessary.
>
> power connector is standard 20-pin, not the proprietary 24-pin,
> but I'd probably upgrade the PS as well because it's only 145W.
>
> > As for the replacement board, IIRC both Abit and Asus made mATX 815EP
> > boards. I'm sure there were others...
>
>
> Rick
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 4/1/2003
David Maynard
> "Richard Hopkins" <ri...@dsl.pipex.nospam> wrote in message news:3e948d76$0$29597$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
>
>>parts. The only way you'll get an answer to this question from them would be
>>to ask them if they offer any upgrade processors designed for this PC.
>>Seeing as they probably don't (IIRC the only systems Compaq did offer CPU
>>upgrades for were servers), you won't get a sensible word from them.
>
>
> board is stuck at 66MHz and won't run any faster, regardless of
> which cpu is installed. Then another guy said it would autoswitch
> between 66 and 100 but wouldn't run 133. HPQ offers a P3-800
> upgrade, but they couldn't tell me if it was 100 or 133! The system
> came with PC100 memory but both PC100 and PC133 are offered
> on their website for this model. Yet they still couldn't tell me if it
> would run at 133 with the faster memory. Truly amazing lack of info.
>
>
>>particular board does is a slightly different matter. It certainly *should*
>>do - have you been able to get a manufacturer's name or model number off it?
>
>
>
> 0001 30
> B M W
> Made in China
>
> KC0601917 BMW-2
>
> 0106
>
> 686C3 (this one's the system bios family)
>
> Silkscreened on the board is a chart for JP3, 4 & 5 to select between
> 66/100/133, the locations exist but jumper posts aren't installed.
> Would it be a safe bet that it will autoswitch, or could I force 133FSB
> by soldering the appropriate location(s)?
>
>
>>>Presario case that would prevent a generic motherboard from
>>>working?
>>
>>Shouldn't be. One possible departure from the norm could be the ATX plug. To
>>the best of my knowledge Compaq have used a conventional one for the last
>>few years at least. The other one could be the power/reset/led header. IIRC
>>Compaq use a monobloc one designed to fit the particular board design they
>>use. Thus, if the new board has its headers in a different orientation, you
>>may have to adjust or cut the header plugs apart as necessary.
>
>
> power connector is standard 20-pin, not the proprietary 24-pin,
> but I'd probably upgrade the PS as well because it's only 145W.
>
>
>>boards. I'm sure there were others...
>
>
>
> Rick
>
>
You could try here and see if they can discover anything about it.
Yeti
made by Compaq. Not very helpful, but i do like AIDA.
On Wed, 09 Apr 2003 22:26:57 GMT, Terry Judkins <suptju...@attbi.com>
wrote:
Frank
> Hi, a friend of mine has a Presario 5000T (Model 5BW-5BWM21)
> which has an Intel 810E chipset, Celeron 566-66MHz FSB cpu, four
> get a straight answer from Compaq as to whether this system can be
> board with another MicroATX.
>
> Does anyone know if there's anything proprietary about this Presario
> looks pretty standard as far as I can tell. There's a shot of the back
> here: http://www.mindspring.com/~rigel11/Compaq.jpg
>
> Also, if I can use another brand of motherboard does anyone have
> any suggestions? I'm hoping to get at least 133MHz FSB with a
> P3 CuMine (or preferably P3-S Tualatin).
Take a look at www.powerleap.com -- youmay find what you need there.
I'm running a CPQ 5736 -- PIII/550, with a 1.4 GHz Tualatin, it can
be clocked up to 1.6-1.7 GHz -- _if_ someone find how to set FSB
to 133.
Took me 10 minutes to convert, 3 minutes more to upgrade to
768 MB RAM .. even as HP/Compaq webpages said 384 MB as maximum.
Tom Scales
1980's or even earlier is entirely adequate to get you to work, but the car
companies don't offer them anymore.
They want you to buy new cars!
I don't know what you do for a living, but if you want to keep doing it,
you'd better hope people want to keep buying what you have to offer.
Tom
>
> Thanks to info from RichardH I think I found a direct
> replacement (Asus TUSL2-M). Now it's just a matter of
> finding one, which I'm discovering is not an easy task..
> There's not even one up for auction on eBay, and the retail
> channels are all dry as far as I can tell.
>
> You know whoever is in charge of Intel's product schedule
> should be shot. P3 Tualatin (even Coppermine) systems are
> plenty fast enough for most apps yet Intel seems intent on
> killing the P3 altogether.
>
> Rick
>
>
Richard Hopkins
> Thanks to info from RichardH I think I found a direct
> replacement (Asus TUSL2-M). Now it's just a matter of
> finding one, which I'm discovering is not an easy task..
That's the big problem. Getting hold of mATX boards through the retail
channel is always going to be difficult, as most of the
enthusiast/overclocker stores will naturally gravitate towards the full form
factor boards.
> You know whoever is in charge of Intel's product schedule
> should be shot.
Eh? How do you work that out? Seems to me like they made the only decision
they could. The business sense behind this policy is unarguable, so Intel's
board will be happy enough, and thus the folk in charge of the product
scheduling will be safe in their seats.
> P3 Tualatin (even Coppermine) systems are plenty fast enough
> for most apps yet Intel seems intent on killing the P3 altogether.
Of course they are. I can see where you're coming from but fail to see why
you're jumping up and down about it. You can't stop evolution in the
computer market, it drives repeat sales, and it runs even quicker in a
market where there's more than one manufacturer involved.
Intel have a new line of processors in the shape of the P4. Running two
product lines in tandem is both inefficient use of manufacturing resources
and confusing to the computer buying public, so the P!!! was always going to
be dropped. When the first Tualatin P!!!'s turned out to be quicker than the
first P4's, it was going to be dropped even more quickly.
The whole point of the computer business is to make as much money from as
many people as possible. That means constant product evolution encouraging
existing PC owners to upgrade. Sticking with the P!!! might have made you
happy, but it would have killed Intel's repeat custom and handed AMD
ever-increasing slices of the market as they brought out ever-faster CPU's.
Unfortunately the limits of the P!!! memory bus and pipeline meant that from
a technical standpoint, it *was* pretty much at the end of its development
cycle.
Incidentally, if you want to jump up and down at someone for 'killing' the
P!!! series, BTW, you might as well shout at AMD, as it was their
competition that pushed Intel so quickly down the P4 road in the first
place!
Richard Hopkins
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message...
> I understand the theory, but for every person I know who's
> upgraded to a P4 system I know at least a dozen who are
> making do with their P3 systems.
So? When they decide they don't want to "make do" anymore, they'll buy a
P4 - or whatever else is available at the time.
> I believe Intel would make more money servicing their
> existing P3 user base
What? You're totally wrong...
How exactly do you think they'd make money from their existing user base by
offering them more of the same? Tom's car analogy fits on more than one
level. Intel aren't in the business of "servicing" cars, they're in the
business of selling new ones.
If I go and buy a new car tomorrow, I'm not interested in buying the *same*
car I had last time, I want one that looks better, goes better, and has
better fuel economy. If I had the option to buy the same car I've currently
got, just with less mileage, no dents and some alloy wheels, or a completely
new design, which do you think I'd be more likely to buy?
It's the PC stores who handle the (relatively small percentage) of upgrade
work (i.e. "Servicing" existing owners), and if you put all their upgrade
revenue together, it would add up to a tiny fraction of what Intel make.
> than simply ignoring it, and pretending it doesn't exist.
They do know the P!!! user base exists, but as Tom says, know there's little
point in selling them more of the same. They'd much rather sell them a P4
based system than risk them buying an Athlon. Most PC owners upgrade on an
infrequent basis, and when they do, they chuck the whole thing away and
start again.
When they do that, they don't want to buy a PC that's pretty much the same
as the one they had last time, they want something altogether bigger, faster
and better. If Intel had just stuck with the Pentium!!! line, the market
would have been open for AMD to dominate the new-build business, which might
have made you feel all warm and fuzzy, but it would soon have decimated
Intel's revenues.
Whether you care to admit it or not, the technicalities of the Pentium!!!'s
memory bus design was rapidly becoming a brick wall around which Intel
simply couldn't work. This is why, for example, there's no advantage in
using DDR memory on the Pentium!!! Tualatins - there simply isn't a fat
enough pipe between the processor and the memory controller to gain an
advantage from the extra bandwidth. While the last P!!!'s may have been
faster than the first P4's, there was no headroom in the bus design left for
further development.
With increasingly hot competition from AMD, Intel were thus forced to
accelerate their new processor design to market. Once they'd done so, there
was no point whatsoever keeping the P!!! in the same segment, as it would
steal sales from its new brother. You might not like this situation, but you
can't argue with the technical and economic realities.
Tom Scales
Maybe Ford should just service the Model T fleet? It got you to work :)
Tom
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b73j6g$ao75j$1...@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de...
> "Tom Scales" <tom...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:zRbla.51122$D17....@fe08.atl2.webusenet.com...
> > Of course they are! That's how they make money. The average car from
the
> > 1980's or even earlier is entirely adequate to get you to work, but the
car
> > companies don't offer them anymore.
> >
> > They want you to buy new cars!
> >
> > I don't know what you do for a living, but if you want to keep doing it,
> > you'd better hope people want to keep buying what you have to offer.
>
> I understand the theory, but for every person I know who's
> upgraded to a P4 system I know at least a dozen who are
> making do with their P3 systems. I believe Intel would make
> more money servicing their existing P3 user base than simply
> ignoring it, and pretending it doesn't exist.
>
> Rick
>
>
>
Richard Hopkins
> If one looks at what people do with their computers, the
> vast majority do little more than word processing, internet
> and email.
...and gaming.
> Have you seen what used P3s are bringing on eBay? In many
> cases silly P3-800s are fetching more than brand new P4s.
> So it's obvious Intel would be making heaps of money by
> servicing this P3 user base,
How do you work that out? For every one of those P!!! 800's that goes on
Ebay, Intel will ship tens, maybe hundreds of P4's out to large system
integrators. The number of people who upgrade their PC's is minute when
compared with the number who just go out and buy a new one.
Why would a Pentium!!! 500 system owner, with an 4MB TNT or ATI Rage based
graphics card, SB16, 4.8GB hard disk and 32MB of PC100 SDRAM, see any value
in changing his CPU to a Pentium!!! 1400 when the time comes to upgrade?
He'd still have to put up with his old, slow hard disk, old, small, slow
memory, crappy old graphics card, dirty, failing 8x CD-ROM drive all in a
dirty, dusty old case with crappy old monitor, keyboard and mouse. Why would
he be interested in upgrading this POS when he could buy a shiny new one
with all the latest gadgets? ,
If he's buying a new PC, he doesn't give a shit whether the processor in it
is pin-compatible with his old computer or not. Intel know this, and would
much rather sell him a new motherboard and processor than just a processor.
They'd definitely rather sell him a new board and CPU than see him buy them
from AMD.
> even if it meant maintaining two product lines for another
> year or two.
Please explain, in technical terms, how you think Intel would have been able
to continue development of the Pentium!!! line for another "year or two",
bearing in mind the limitations of the bus, VRM and memory designs? If you
were expecting Pentium!!!'s in the 2GHz+ speed range, it wasn't going to
happen - simply due to technical limitations of the design.
Please explain, in economic terms, why you think it would make sense for
Intel to continue pouring money into developing the P!!! line when they are
already developing a new flagship desktop and server 32 bit processor
family?
Please explain in marketing terms why you think it would make sense for
Intel to keep two front-line CPU families going? If your marketing pitch for
the P!!! line was "Good enough for anything you want to do", how would you
then market the P4? They have the Celeron line for people after a low-cost
PC, so how would *you* sell the P4 if the P!!! was marketed as being "good
enough"?
If you can answer these questions I'd genuinely be interested to see them. I
can't believe that these issues could genuinely be this difficult to grasp.
> > Incidentally, if you want to jump up and down at someone for
> > 'killing' the P!!! series, BTW, you might as well shout at AMD,
>
> Again, I think it's clear to most people that the real money
> is not in the bleeding edge crowd.
If that is the case, please explain why the biggest gains in AMD's market
share have been at times when their products held a clear performance and
clock speed advantage over Intel's? The "real money" is in new PC builds,
not "servicing" (i.e. upgrading) existing ones, and people buying new PC's
want the latest and greatest they can get for their money, not something
that's more or less the same as what they've already got.
> It's with the majority of users who don't need blazing speed
> to run their IE and MS-Word.
As mentioned previously, when those people buy a new PC, they do so
infrequently and will buy something they hope will service their needs for
the next few years. The Pentium!!! line simply isn't going to do that now.
It's at the end of its development, and there's nothing that can be done to
change that.
Jeff B
> Also, if I can use another brand of motherboard does anyone have
> any suggestions? I'm hoping to get at least 133MHz FSB with a
> P3 CuMine (or preferably P3-S Tualatin).
>
> Rick
>
>
A P3 would be an extremely bad choice. Go for a P4, 2.53 Ghz or
2.4 with 18 multiplier.
Jeff
HH
HH
"Jeff B" <roll...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3E95D6D4...@attbi.com...
Terry
"The Neo-S370 is actually not required, as this Compaq model supports the
Celeron-II and Pentium-III (100 MHz FSB max) Coppermine FC-PGA CPUs
directly. So, up to a 1 GHz Celeron or P-III is possible. The forthcoming
Tualatin/370 upgrade from Powerleap may allow further upgrades using
Tualatin processors.The Neo-S370 is actually not required, as this Compaq
model supports the Celeron-II and Pentium-III (100 MHz FSB max) Coppermine
FC-PGA CPUs directly. So, up to a 1 GHz Celeron or P-III is possible. The
forthcoming Tualatin/370 upgrade from Powerleap may allow further upgrades
using Tualatin processors. "
"Rick" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:b73fus$agt9m$1...@ID-82690.news.dfncis.de...
> "Frank" <NoSp...@online.no> wrote in message
news:3E953544...@online.no...
> Thanks, but for what the Powerleap costs I'd rather replace
> the entire motherboard.
>
> Thanks to info from RichardH I think I found a direct
> replacement (Asus TUSL2-M). Now it's just a matter of
> finding one, which I'm discovering is not an easy task..
> There's not even one up for auction on eBay, and the retail
> channels are all dry as far as I can tell.
>
> You know whoever is in charge of Intel's product schedule
> should be shot. P3 Tualatin (even Coppermine) systems are
> plenty fast enough for most apps yet Intel seems intent on
> killing the P3 altogether.
>
> Rick
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.470 / Virus Database: 268 - Release Date: 4/8/2003