Replacing mobo without reinstalling W2000

[Ray K]

I'm planning to replace my present Asus A7V400-MX mobo with an Asus
M3A76-CM. Processor will be AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000; memory a pair of
Kingston KVR800D2/1gr totaling 2GB. The question is, Is there any chance
that W2000 will just boot up normally and recognize all the present
installed applications and hardware without my having to first make lots
of preparations?

I've read the stuff here,
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=772307, and here,
http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?threadid=83657. But the stuff
jumps from OS to OS, with so many choices that it's overwhelming and
confusing. (I don't really need Howard Johnson's 28 flavors to confuse
me.) I have not come across a step-by-step procedure just for W2K Pro.

The present mobo has two IDE connectors. I use one for my two hard
drives, and the other for my CD and DVD burners.

The new mobo has just one IDE connector, which I'll connect to the hard
drives. I'm replacing the IDE CD burner with a SATA DVD burner (Sony
Optiarc Black AD7241S-0B). This leaves me with the problem of connecting
the present IDE DVD burner to a SATA connector on the mobo via some kind
of adapter/converter. Any recommendation for an adapter?

The computer is not used for demanding applications, like games, so I
don't need the fastest processor, memory or things like over-clocking.

The most time-consuming task is burning an occasional DVD. Actually, the
burning is fast; it's the intermediate file-conversion process that
takes a long time (20-25 minutes).

My most frequent task is editing music files and converting them to
mp3s. I often make regular music CDs. Of course some of the
anti-virus/spyware/adaware scans seem to take forever presently.

The rest of the system is an internal Turtle Beach Santa Cruz sound
card, two printers and a scanner (a mix of USB and Lpt connections). No
router, wireless devices or home networks.

Thanks for your feedback.

Ray

 

[Rarius]

I'm planning to replace my present Asus A7V400-MX mobo with an Asus
M3A76-CM. Processor will be AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000; memory a pair of
Kingston KVR800D2/1gr totaling 2GB. The question is, Is there any chance
that W2000 will just boot up normally and recognize all the present
installed applications and hardware without my having to first make lots
of preparations?

You MIGHT be able to migrate, depending on the drivers needed for the
two boards. I would suggest the following:

1) backup everything... email, files, settings etc!
2) uninstall ALL drivers you can (don't reboot if you can help it, if
you do have to, don't allow windows to reinstall drivers).
3) turn off the PC
4) replace mobo etc
5) boot up PC
6) install new drivers

One BIG GOTCHA which might bite you... You mention that the new
processor will be an Athlon64 X2. You don't mention what the old
processor is, but if it is a single core, then you will NOT be able to
upgrade.

Win2K (and XP/Vista/Win7) uses a different HAL (Hardware Abstraction
Layer) to access the CPU, depending on the number of cores. If your
current CPU is single core then you will have the single core HAL
installed. The new CPU is multi core and needs the multicore HAL. It
will run, but only on one core!

The only way to change the HAL is a full install of W2K... a repair
install WILL NOT change the HAL! Don't beleive the websites who say you
can... you can't!

Rarius

 

[Ray K]

Philo and Rarius,

Thanks for bring up the single/dual core issue, something I wasn't smart
enough to be aware of.

The present mobo and CPU are from 2004, so I doubt the processor is dual
core.

I have several options:

1. Stick with the dual core Anthon 42 x2 6000CPU and accept the slower
performance from running on only 1 core. Does this mean that performance
will be only half on CPU-intensive applications compared to using both
cores?

2. Stick with the dual core CPU and do a fresh install of W2K on a
reformatted c: drive, so I gain full advantage of both cores. Of course,
all software has to be reinstalled. For other reasons, I had to do a
full reinstall about a month ago, so it's really not the end of the world.

3. Select a single-core CPU, so I don't have to reinstall W2K to get
full performance. Now that I'm more savvy, I see that AMD makes an
Anthon LE-1660 2.8GHz socket AM2 CPU. And at newegg, it's $43.99 vs
$67.99 for the dual-core unit I had been considering. This seem to be a
better all-around solution: Full performance, lower price and no need to
reinstall the software.

Question 1: What do you think about option 3, even if it might be a bit
slower than option 2?

Memory considerations: My present system has 490,992KB of RAM. The new
one will be 2GB. I am willing to go to 4GB, but 32-bit W2K can address
only up to 3GB.

The mobo has four DIMM sockets: a pair designated as Channel A and a
pair as Channel B. The manual says:

"You may install 512MB, 1GB and 2GB unbuffered ICC/non-ECC DDR2 DIMMs
into the DIMM sockets.

"You may install varying memory sizes in Channel A and Channel B. The
system maps the total size of the lower-sized channel for dual-channel
configuration. Any excess memory from the higher-sized channel is them
mapped for single-channel operation."

Question 2: Does the dual-channel configuration come into play only if
I'm using a dual-core CPU?

The footnote to the table of qualified vendors adds:

"Supports one pair of modules inserted into both the yellow slots as one
pair of dual-channel memory configuration"

Question 3: Does it make sense to install 1GB + 2GB, both in either
Channel A or B?

Question 4: What about staying with my planned 2GB, but installing it as
a single DIMM vs two 1GB DIMMs?

I'm aware of the precautions of using the same CAS Latency if using more
than one DIMM, and using the same vendor for all DIMMs.

Again, many thanks for your helpful information.

Ray

 

[Rarius]

Philo and Rarius,

Thanks for bring up the single/dual core issue, something I wasn't smart
enough to be aware of.

The present mobo and CPU are from 2004, so I doubt the processor is dual
core.

It is VERY unlikely to be dual core...

3. Select a single-core CPU, so I don't have to reinstall W2K to get
full performance. Now that I'm more savvy, I see that AMD makes an
Anthon LE-1660 2.8GHz socket AM2 CPU. And at newegg, it's $43.99 vs
$67.99 for the dual-core unit I had been considering. This seem to be a
better all-around solution: Full performance, lower price and no need to
reinstall the software.

Question 1: What do you think about option 3, even if it might be a bit
slower than option 2?

I don't know your budget for this upgrade, but personally I don't
upgrade unless there is a very large increase in speed. This would
mitigate against getting another single core CPU. It probably isn't
going to be that much faster than what you have.

As you don't play intensive games or do video re-encoding, I doubt a
quadcore would give you anything over a dual core. You might look at the
Intel Core2Duo chips on something like a P35 based mobo... just another
option.

Memory considerations: My present system has 490,992KB of RAM. The new
one will be 2GB. I am willing to go to 4GB, but 32-bit W2K can address
only up to 3GB.

For your usage 2GB should be fine. RAM is cheap at the moment though so
it may be worth grabbing the 4GB while you can. Although 32bit OSs can
only access 3.25GB on average, having 2x2GB in dual channel may be
beneficial.

Question 2: Does the dual-channel configuration come into play only if
I'm using a dual-core CPU?

No. The memory channels and the number of coores are totally independant.

Question 3: Does it make sense to install 1GB + 2GB, both in either
Channel A or B?

No. Although that mobo will support quite a lot of configurations, it
will run best if both channel A sockets are populated the same and
channel B likewise...

Personally I would populate channel A with 2x2GB.

Question 4: What about staying with my planned 2GB, but installing it as
a single DIMM vs two 1GB DIMMs?

If you install 1x2GB you loose any benefit of the dual channel
architecture. 2x1GB is better than 1x2GB... of course 2x2GB is better
still and not much more expensive.

Rarius

 

[Ray K]

I don't know your budget for this upgrade, but personally I don't
upgrade unless there is a very large increase in speed. This would
mitigate against getting another single core CPU. It probably isn't
going to be that much faster than what you have.

As you don't play intensive games or do video re-encoding, I doubt a
quadcore would give you anything over a dual core. You might look at the
Intel Core2Duo chips on something like a P35 based mobo... just another
option.

Thanks, again, for your responses. Regarding your comment for a P35
/Intel Core2Duo combo: The Asus board I'm considering already
accommodates dual core chips. The real issue is trying to avoid a new
install of W2K to take advantage of the second core. If I understand the
thread so far, going with the P35/Intel combo (or any other
mobo/dual-core combo) would still require to reinstalling W2K. So I
don't understand the suggestion for the P35/Intel combo.

Ray

 

[Ray K]

Here's what Microsoft has to say:

http://support.microsoft.com/?id=824125

Makes the replacement sound straightforward.

The first few sentences after More Information provide an interesting
insight into the Microsoft mentality regarding the need to get a new OS
license following a mobo replacement.

 

[Ray K]

This has worked several times for me:
http://www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/Article11.html

Thanks, Airman. It's looking more and more like I will go with a dual
core CPU and bite the bullet and do a fresh install of W2K to take
advantage of the second core.

Ray

 

[philo]

Thanks, again, for your responses. Regarding your comment for a P35
/Intel Core2Duo combo: The Asus board I'm considering already
accommodates dual core chips. The real issue is trying to avoid a new
install of W2K to take advantage of the second core. If I understand the
thread so far, going with the P35/Intel combo (or any other
mobo/dual-core combo) would still require to reinstalling W2K. So I
don't understand the suggestion for the P35/Intel combo.

Ray

Although you will probably end up needing to perform a repair install
or a fresh install...and your dual core CPU should be recognized...

If by chance your system does boot with the new board...
the installation may see it as a single core CPU.

If that's the case, the cpu driver can be updated in the control panel...
just as if you were updating the drivers for any other H/W

Basically you just need to change it to a "multi-core" CPU or some
similar appropriate driver.

I did it with some old servers that I added a cpu to and confirm it works

 

[Ray K]

Although you will probably end up needing to perform a repair install
or a fresh install...and your dual core CPU should be recognized...

If by chance your system does boot with the new board...
the installation may see it as a single core CPU.

How do I determine the number of cores W2K recognizes?

If that's the case, the cpu driver can be updated in the control panel...
just as if you were updating the drivers for any other H/W

Basically you just need to change it to a "multi-core" CPU or some
similar appropriate driver.

Sounds straightforward. Thanks.

 

[John Doe]

philo wrote:

How do I determine the number of cores W2K recognizes?

In Windows XP, that probably would be in Computer Management, the
number of entries in Processors.

Computer Management -- Device Manager -- Processors

 

[Ray K]

In Windows XP, that probably would be in Computer Management, the
number of entries in Processors.

Computer Management -- Device Manager -- Processors

I have W2K, but can get to Device Manager. At present, Processor doesn't
distinguish between cores, probably because I only have a single core.

Thanks,

Ray