So, I found a Q8400 quad-core 775 CPU. What to do with it?

[VirtualLarry]

Ok, I'm wrong. I guess it's just the way that I think of things.

Edit: Though, I admit, I have a really hard time considering Zen CPUs to be using any form of "FSB", even if you didn't mean Intel's AGTL+ FSB. I mean, the cores have several IF links, to cache, to memctrllr, to other cores. Which one is the "front"? IMHO, if there's no clear-cut delineation, as to which bus is the actual FRONT side bus, then the terminology doesn't apply. I would probably call it a "fabric", not a FSB.

 

[ViRGE]

Ok, I'm wrong. I guess it's just the way that I think of things.

Edit: Though, I admit, I have a really hard time considering Zen CPUs to be using any form of "FSB", even if you didn't mean Intel's AGTL+ FSB. I mean, the cores have several IF links, to cache, to memctrllr, to other cores. Which one is the "front"? IMHO, if there's no clear-cut delineation, as to which bus is the actual FRONT side bus, then the terminology doesn't apply. I would probably call it a "fabric", not a FSB.

Zen doesn't use a FSB. It has a memory controller integrated, so the only buses coming from the chip are PCIe and other peripheral buses. So yes, an internal fabric would be correct for Zen.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Now with ZEN AMD are back to the "outdated" FSB with ZEN's InfinityFabric

This is what I initially objected to. That someone was referring to the "plumbing" inside of Zen, as "FSB". Which I don't think is the right terminology.

 

[ViRGE]

This is what I initially objected to. That someone was referring to the "plumbing" inside of Zen, as "FSB". Which I don't think is the right terminology.

It's not. A FSB was traditionally external. Which wouldn't be the case here since even in an MCM setup (Threadripper) each chip has its own memory controller.

 

[whm1974]

I think the best thing the OP can do with this is to sell/give to someone who can use it for an upgrade. There are probably lots of Socket 775 systems still in use that this CPU would be a nice upgrade.

 

[gOJDO_n]

It doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, we are humans so we can learn and there is nothing wrong with it. So, lets clear up the things. Back in the days FSB or Front Side Bus was used as a term for a system bus connecting the CPU to all the system's I/O, while the BSB or Back Side Bus for an independent connection to the CPU cache. So FSB is not only a Pentium 4 thing, but a lot more. I compared Zen as System(SoC) to the Core2 Quad based system because they have the very same macro-architecture concept. Regardless of how we are going to name it, both Zen and C2Q are:
- not a monolithic design of a "true" x-core, but a "glued" one where the "glued" parts communicate over the slow(low bandwidth and high latency) and shared point-to-multi point bus(FSB or DF)
- all the I/O data transfers are performed over the slow and shared point-to-multi point bus(FSB or DF)
- the memory controller is located on the northbridge and all the RAM I/O is performed over the slow and shared point-to-multi point bus(FSB or DF)
- there are multiple last level caches which are separated and connected by the slow and shared point-to-multi point bus (FSB or DF)

 

[Chicken76]

I would do a cheap but usable build (4GB RAM, 64GB SSD, maybe low-end discrete GPU) around it and donate it to a poor kid.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I would do a cheap but usable build (4GB RAM, 64GB SSD, maybe low-end discrete GPU) around it and donate it to a poor kid.

That would probably be a decent idea... if I didn't already have nearly a dozen other newer rigs that I could also donate, that don't cost me anything additional out-of-pocket.

 

[FIghtsy]

Get a board from Ebay like these for as cheap as you can (from a reputable seller):

Mobo from Lenovo ThinkCenter M58/P (Intel Q45+ICH10DO) a.k.a. MTQ45MK or L-IQ45 "Panda"

Mobo from HP 3000 Pro business PC (Intel G45+ICH10R) part # 587302-001 a.k.a. "Pine Row"

I have both and confirmed 8000 and 9000 series 45nm quad core up to 95W are supported (might need to update the BIOS)

IIRC, the Lenovo board may need thermal monitoring sense cable in order to get rid-off the POST warning when not connected, which can be had for an extra $5 or $6. I don't think the BIOS has option to disable the temp sensor cable check. I have a couple spare cables if you want PM me.

I know this is an old post. but I'm at a loss here. I have one of the HP pro 3000 SFF computers. It currently has a Pentium E2140 and runs ok. I'm trying to get a q9550 to run in it as it states that it is compatible. However, when I boot up the pc it stays running with no error signals but there is no video with or without a gpu being used. I've updated and reset BIOS to v1.14 and cleared CMOS, reseat CPU and heat sink several times, no bent or broken pins but no luck with anything. I put the e2140 back in and it runs like a clock again. Any thoughts?

 

[Fardringle]

I know this is an old post. but I'm at a loss here. I have one of the HP pro 3000 SFF computers. It currently has a Pentium E2140 and runs ok. I'm trying to get a q9550 to run in it as it states that it is compatible. However, when I boot up the pc it stays running with no error signals but there is no video with or without a gpu being used. I've updated and reset BIOS to v1.14 and cleared CMOS, reseat CPU and heat sink several times, no bent or broken pins but no luck with anything. I put the e2140 back in and it runs like a clock again. Any thoughts?

While the Q9550 is listed as being compatible with the HP Pro 3000 SFF, the E2140 is not, so I question whether you actually have an HP Pro 3000, or if it's a different model that does not support the Q9550...
https://support.hp.com/au-en/document/c01926428#AbT4

Also, the newest available BIOS for the Pro 3000 is 1.10 Rev. A, which again leads me to believe you have a different computer model...
https://support.hp.com/us-en/driver...ll-form-factor-pc/4047657/swItemId/vc-85159-1

The Q9550 could be a bad/failed chip as well.

 

[FIghtsy]

https://imgur.com/a/5MMsc

While the Q9550 is listed as being compatible with the HP Pro 3000 SFF, the E2140 is not, so I question whether you actually have an HP Pro 3000, or if it's a different model that does not support the Q9550...
https://support.hp.com/au-en/document/c01926428#AbT4

Also, the newest available BIOS for the Pro 3000 is 1.10 Rev. A, which again leads me to believe you have a different computer model...
https://support.hp.com/us-en/driver...ll-form-factor-pc/4047657/swItemId/vc-85159-1

The Q9550 could be a bad/failed chip as well.

The 9550 is good. its running the PC I'm typing this from It came with v 1.14 which is current bios for win xp 64bit updated to 1.10A for windows 7 64bit then reverted back to the 1.14.reset cmos each time. mobo IDs as a 587302-001/ MSI 3664h Pine Row. SKU in bios is vk190av which lists as a micro tower form factor but showing the same board used in the sff models also. heres link to some pics of what I got

 

[LightningZ71]

Assuming that you have a 3000 SFF, The only thing that I can see stopping that upgrade is if you happen to have one of the few that can't handle a 95w processor. At a previous job, we had a bunch of 3000 sff machines, and at one point, there was a project to upgrade a bunch of them from the Conroe Pentium chips to quads to breath some new life into them. About a quarter of them just wouldn't work right with the 9450 processors that we were trying to run (I think they were C1 stepping), but would work all day, every day with the Core 2 Duo E8600s we finally settled on for them. They would just refuse to work with any of the 95 watt Core 2s. This was NOT what the specs said, and according to HP, the 95W processors were supposed to work in them.

 

[tcsenter]

https://imgur.com/a/5MMsc

The 9550 is good. its running the PC I'm typing this from It came with v 1.14 which is current bios for win xp 64bit updated to 1.10A for windows 7 64bit then reverted back to the 1.14.reset cmos each time. mobo IDs as a 587302-001/ MSI 3664h Pine Row. SKU in bios is vk190av which lists as a micro tower form factor but showing the same board used in the sff models also. heres link to some pics of what I got

1.14 is the latest and supports Windows 7 (32 or 64), according to the release notes. It's probably an error or oversight that it is only offered when you select XP as the OS. Not unprecedented, I've seen similar errors many times (particularly with HP's site), I always check the downloads for different OS versions for this reason.

Sounds like one of the ROM modules may not be getting updated. Or possibly, you have the BIOS recovery jumpers misconfigured? Is there an interface for the flash utility that provides some options, or is the update completely automated? Try the BIOS ROM and utility I used (which also happens to have SLIC 2.1 embedded for Windows 7 OEM activation):


You'll need to use a real DOS environment (boot from disk). At the command prompt, enter "FLASH1.BAT" (sans quotation marks). This will probably wipe out the asset tag, chassis serial, or SKU of the mobo, BTW, which affects nothing functional unless you are still using this in a corporate/business environment (these systems should long be out of warranty).

When complete, shut down the machine and clear/reset CMOS. Boot machine, when prompted with warning about CMOS checksum, enter BIOS SETUP and load Optimal Defaults, Save then Exit. Then upon subsequent boot, you can enter BIOS and load any custom values you want.


Edit: Or try the 1.13 BIOS which is also available when selecting XP as the OS, under "previous version".

 

[NTMBK]

I know this is an old post. but I'm at a loss here. I have one of the HP pro 3000 SFF computers. It currently has a Pentium E2140 and runs ok. I'm trying to get a q9550 to run in it as it states that it is compatible. However, when I boot up the pc it stays running with no error signals but there is no video with or without a gpu being used. I've updated and reset BIOS to v1.14 and cleared CMOS, reseat CPU and heat sink several times, no bent or broken pins but no luck with anything. I put the e2140 back in and it runs like a clock again. Any thoughts?

Perhaps the power supply has become degraded with age? It might still be fine for the lower power dual core, but pushed over the edge by the quad.

 

[Eug]

I wouldn’t do anything with it unless I already had the parts. No sense in spending $200 to build a Core 2 Quad machine.

 

[FIghtsy]

Ok, Just wanted to thank everyone for their help and advice. I've tried every bios thru the DOS environment as tcsenter had suggested, even a 1.09 version that some machines shipped with, no change on any thing. It'll still run the P dual just fine on any version but not the C2Q. The 300W power supply is fairly new, a couple hours a day over 3 months. I use it for bench testing only. I did try the pro 3000 on a brand new 500W psu, a lot overkill I know but just to be sure.

I think I'm going to go with LightingZ71 on this, where the board for some reason wont support the higher wattage cpu. Reading a lot of forums where this was a fairly common occurrence when there are 10 plus machines being upgraded and only 8 would function after the fact.

Its still a functional pc with the Pentium just not really practical for anything other than a low grade web browser. Can't say I was hurt on the deal though, the pro 3000 came with 4 other computers one being a 6th gen i7 laptop and a big box of parts and accessories for $25 at an estate auction.

 

[tcsenter]

Bummer. You can get E8600 or E7600 (45nm dual core) for fairly cheap that would be huge improvement over E2140. They are very competitive if not faster (due to higher clocks) than quad cores of this era in most apps (that don't benefit much from more than two threads).

 

[FIghtsy]

Bummer. You can get E8600 or E7600 (45nm dual core) for fairly cheap that would be huge improvement over E2140. They are very competitive if not faster (due to higher clocks) than quad cores of this era in most apps (that don't benefit much from more than two threads).

True. if I come across one possably. I know they are dirt cheap on ebay/amazon. Just for giggles I dropped in a old pentium D 3.4ghz that i had laying around, it does same thing as the quads. so kinda points more and more to the wattage issue.

 

[tcsenter]

Also could try one of the 65W "S" quad parts: e.g. Q9505S, Q9400S, Q8400S. I successfully tested Q9400S on the Pine Row board, too.

 

[Eug]

Yeah. Big problem with a lot of the old SFF boards. The key is to get a known compatible CPU which often means one with the same TDP.

For my SFF AMD Acer of around that era, the 95 Watt chips would work fine but the 125 W ones didn't.

I guess that makes sense though, since they're SFF after all.