• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

List of 64 bit capable CPUs?

Kelemvor

Kelemvor

Lifer
Howdy,

I have an older PC I was going to turn into a server with Windows Home Server 2011. However, it's a 64-bit only OS.

The PC I have is running a Pentium 4 1.8Ghz but that's all I know about it. It's probably form 2003 or so. I'm not hopeful that it can run a 64-bit OS but figured I'd check before I start investigating a new PC.

I have another PC that is a P4 3.2 Ghz or so but not sure if that can do it either...

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
This is a pretty good overview for Intel chips. Looks like the later steppings of the P4F did indeed support 64 bit. Hopefully you are in luck.
 
I don't think your P4 1.8 is 64-bit capable.

For the 3.2 chip, I think some of the Prescott cores might be 64-bit capable.
 
Ben90 said:
This is a pretty good overview for Intel chips. Looks like the later steppings of the P4F did indeed support 64 bit. Hopefully you are in luck.
Click to expand...

If OP's estimate of "from 2003" is correct and that Wikipedia list is correct then his is, unfortunately, not a 64-bit CPU.

You could probably find a cheap P4 on ebay and drop it in, though. Not enough info on the 3.2GHz P4 to know.

edit: doesn't CPUz tell you whether or not the chip supports EM64T (or whatever they called it)?
 
A Pentium 4 PC from 2003 running that slow (1.8GHz) is definitely a Socket 478 Willamete.

According to Intel Processor Finder

http://processorfinder.intel.com

There was a single Socket 478 CPU released which supported 64-bit instructions

The Pentium 4 511 Socket 478 edition SL7PK.
 
It definitely isn't a Northwood.

You know how Intel started this "tick-tock" thing back around C2D? They've actually been at it a lot longer.

Tualatin was a tick.
Willamette was a tock.
Northwood was a tick.
Prescott was a tock AND a die shrink.

Prescott and Cedar Mill are pretty radically different than Willamette and Northwood. x86-64 support came to Netburst with Prescott. All Prescott models were capable of supporting it, but Intel chose not to enable it until after their initial release.

I was, however, unaware that there were models on Socket 478 that supported 64-bit instructions.
 
My data indicates no 64-bit-capable Pentium 4s at 1.8 GHz. If you can get the ID number I can check but I'm 99% sure it is 32-bit only.

SL7PK is Prescott.
 
Last edited:
So I ran CPUz on the other PC I have available (the P4 3.2) and it returned mmx, sse, em64t. So as long as it has that EM64T on there, I should be good right?
 
pantsaregood said:
It definitely isn't a Northwood.

You know how Intel started this "tick-tock" thing back around C2D? They've actually been at it a lot longer.

Tualatin was a tick.
Willamette was a tock.
Northwood was a tick.
Prescott was a tock AND a die shrink.

Prescott and Cedar Mill are pretty radically different than Willamette and Northwood. x86-64 support came to Netburst with Prescott. All Prescott models were capable of supporting it, but Intel chose not to enable it until after their initial release.

I was, however, unaware that there were models on Socket 478 that supported 64-bit instructions.
Click to expand...

Err, I don't really think that their release strategy means exactly what you think it means if you think you can shoe-horn all of the P4 variants in to it.
 
Kelemvor said:
So I ran CPUz on the other PC I have available (the P4 3.2) and it returned mmx, sse, em64t. So as long as it has that EM64T on there, I should be good right?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's one of Intel's various confusing names for x86-64 (not as bad as "IA-32e", whoever came up with that should be flogged). 🙂

And Ferzerp is correct, there was no real "tick-tock" strategy prior to Conroe. The Pentium 4 was in fact a confusing mess of overlapping product lines spanning many years, with only one relatively minor architectural change.
 
Kelemvor said:
So I ran CPUz on the other PC I have available (the P4 3.2) and it returned mmx, sse, em64t. So as long as it has that EM64T on there, I should be good right?
Click to expand...

Check your motherboard chipset as well and see if it will handle the Pentium D. Typicly any flavor of 945 will do it and it would be worth $20 or so to get one on ebay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top