swapping motherboard and processor

[Beck]

My mums computer is only 500htz processor and I think it needs a bit of a
kick.
I have here a pc without a hard drive which has I think is a 900 processor.
I cannot check as I have no hard drive to check to specs.
Anyhow what I am thinking of is taking her hard drive out of her pc, and
putting it in my spare computer. The memory is the same as we have swapped
sticks before. So my only concern is windows 98. Eventually I will buy XP
to put on there, but in the meantime it will be windows 98.
Is the OS going to throw a fit of anger if I change the motherboard and
processor?
Is there likely to be any problem?

 

[Dave C.]

My mums computer is only 500htz processor and I think it needs a bit of a
kick.
I have here a pc without a hard drive which has I think is a 900
processor. I cannot check as I have no hard drive to check to specs.
Anyhow what I am thinking of is taking her hard drive out of her pc, and
putting it in my spare computer. The memory is the same as we have
swapped sticks before. So my only concern is windows 98. Eventually I
will buy XP to put on there, but in the meantime it will be windows 98.
Is the OS going to throw a fit of anger if I change the motherboard and
processor?
Is there likely to be any problem?

You won't have any problems that can't be worked out fairly easily.
However, it's not worth the effort to try. To go from 500 to 900 will give
you no performance increase at all. In fact, without reinstalling the OS,
you will probably end up with a -slower- computer that is unstable. There
are ways to fix that, but . . . at best, you will end up right back where
you are NOW. (with a slow, stable computer) Generally, if you can't triple
your current processor speed, there is no good reason to upgrade JUST for a
faster processor. You might think that a ~1000 MHz processor would be twice
as fast, but not really. The CPU is just one component in your system.
Alone, it can not speed up your entire system as much as the clock speeds
would seem to indicate. At best, doubling your CPU speed (assuming all else
remains unchanged) might up overall system performance by about 20%, but
you'll only NOTICE it if you run benchmarks, so what's the point? -Dave

 

[-Avery Anderson-]

Dave's right, you won't get a big performance boost. I'd swap drives
anyway, then format it, and re-install 98 on the 900. Max out the memory,
and then you'd be in good shape to install XP when the time comes. Time
spent now, will save it then.

Avery

 

[Beck]

Dave's right, you won't get a big performance boost. I'd swap drives
anyway, then format it, and re-install 98 on the 900. Max out the memory,
and then you'd be in good shape to install XP when the time comes. Time
spent now, will save it then.

I have not seen Dave's post, but thankyou for the suggestion.

 

[DaveW]

If you change the motherboard in a Windows based computer, then you MUST
reformat the harddrive and do a clean install of the OS. Otherwise you can
look forward to ongoing nasty Registry errors and data corruption.

 

[David Maynard]

If you change the motherboard in a Windows based computer, then you MUST
reformat the harddrive and do a clean install of the OS. Otherwise you can
look forward to ongoing nasty Registry errors and data corruption.

A repeat of the perpetual hogwash from Dave W.

 

[Dave C.]

A repeat of the perpetual hogwash from Dave W.

How did I know someone was going to flame Dave W. for offering good advice?
I must be psychic or something. -Dave

 

[IsaacKuo]

You don't need a hard drive to check the specs. You just
need to put some RAM in it and connect up the video to a
monitor. When you turn on the computer, it should display
the processor speed on the screen.

However, it's not worth the effort to try. To go from 500
to 900 will give you no performance increase at all.

This is bunk. The jump from 500mhz to 900mhz is easily
worth the effort. The faster startup of applications is
worth it. The decreased sluggishness when displaying flash
or java applets is worth it. Heck, the increased speed in
jpeg display is worth it. The ability to play back .avi
smoothly is worth it. The ability to play .mp3's while
doing other things is worth it. The ability to actually
keep up with a DVD burner is worth it.

Will the typical Joe Average notice the difference between
a 500mhz processor and a 900mhz processor? YES! Even if
all he does is browse the internet with a single window
non-tabbed web browser, the performance difference will
be significant (thanks to CPU taxing flash and java and
javascript).

In fact, without reinstalling the OS, you will probably
end up with a -slower- computer that is unstable.

Huh? With Windows 98? How?

Even with something like Gentoo Linux, where you can compile
the OS and all of your applications to be optimized specifically
for a particular processor, there won't be a difference.
There isn't any difference between binaries optimized for
a 500mhz P3 and for a 900mhz P3.

My advice--first, confirm the processor speed difference.
If it really is going from 500 to 900mhz, do the swap--or
better yet, buy a new hard drive and get two computers out
of the bargain. Personally, I'd do a clean install on the
900mhz computer, and just transfer over data files. But
then, I personally don't spend any money for my operating
systems (if Windows came preinstalled, fine--otherwise, I
put Linux on it).

If you want to keep things perfectly legal, your Win98 license
probably only applies to the original computer. Thus, you
should leave the old drive in the old 500mhz computer. You
can then buy a new hard drive for the 900mhz computer and
install a new OS on that (buy WinXP and/or install Linux or
some other OS).

Isaac Kuo

 

[IsaacKuo]

If you change the motherboard in a Windows based computer, then you MUST
reformat the harddrive and do a clean install of the OS. Otherwise you can
look forward to ongoing nasty Registry errors and data corruption.

With Windows 98? I've moved my original Windows 98 hard drive
from various upgrades from PII 266 all the way up to P4 Celeron
2.5ghz, with various motherboard upgrades/replacements along
the way. I've never had any issues with Registry errors or
data corruption as a result. (This particular drive, an old
8gig Seagate, has fortuitously never failed or died yet.)

The only issues I've had with Windows 98 and swapping processor
or motherboard was a particular known Win98 bug with processor
speeds above 2ghz, and searching around the mobo manufacturer's
web site for Win98 drivers.

I've even ghosted that Win98 isntall to smaller drives to install
onto a old 100mhz Pentium machines. No issues there either--just
the requisite reboot frenzy as Win98 detects new hardware.

Isaac Kuo

 

[BarryNL]

How did I know someone was going to flame Dave W. for offering good advice?
I must be psychic or something. -Dave

Well, DaveW is basically right although a repair install will work -
just rarely in an entirely problem free way.

The best way to set up a windows computer is to have the hard drive
partitioned into at least two segments. One for Windows and the other
for all your data, then when you have to reinstall Windows you don't
have to lose all your data at the same time.

 

[Mac Cool]

IsaacKuo:

This is bunk. The jump from 500mhz to 900mhz is easily
worth the effort.

I agree. A good example of why advice from usenet has to be taken with a
grain of salt. I understand the OP wasn't changing architecture but it
would still be worth it, especially since it was FREE!

 

[David Maynard]

How did I know someone was going to flame Dave W. for offering good advice?
I must be psychic or something. -Dave

Define "good advice."

A fresh install is 'dummy safe', all right, but it's just plain false to
say one "MUST" do it and that you'll have "ongoing nasty Registry errors
and data corruption" if you don't.

 

[David Maynard]

Well, DaveW is basically right although a repair install will work -
just rarely in an entirely problem free way.

I've never had one fail, or have problems, yet.

 

[Dave C.]

Define "good advice."

A fresh install is 'dummy safe', all right, but it's just plain false to
say one "MUST" do it and that you'll have "ongoing nasty Registry errors
and data corruption" if you don't.

So if you told someone to play russian roulette, and someone else advised
the OP not to, would you then claim that playing russian roulette is a good
idea because you've never lost a game of it? Me, I say formatting the hard
drive after a mainboard swap is a darned good idea. But then there are
people who play russian roulette and live to post about it. I understand
that. I've done it myself. I just wouldn't advise anybody else to try
t. -Dave

 

[David Maynard]

So if you told someone to play russian roulette, and someone else advised
the OP not to, would you then claim that playing russian roulette is a good
idea because you've never lost a game of it?

With Russian Roulette the odds do not improve over dumb luck even if you
know what you're doing, and if you did you wouldn't be playing the game.

On the other hand, changing motherboards, without destroying the existing
Windows installation, is not even terribly difficult (usually), if you know
what you're doing.

Me, I say formatting the hard
drive after a mainboard swap is a darned good idea.

Depending on the circumstances it might be a 'good idea' but just being a
'good idea' wasn't the issue at hand. The issue was whether one "MUST" and
I have yet to hear of anyone die from it.

But then there are
people who play russian roulette and live to post about it. I understand
that. I've done it myself. I just wouldn't advise anybody else to try

No offense, but saying you've played Russian Roulette and then recommending
what constitutes a 'good idea' is an incompatible combination.