Upgrading CPU in 5920G

I'm wondering if the C2D T9600 2.8Ghz chip would work in this laptop, since it is socket P
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819111006&cm_re=T9600-_-19-111-006-_-Product
Or would it not work, 'cause it's 45nm?

 

Apparently the t9500 and t9300 work fine, and apparently the x9000 works too on the 5920g.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=34443

With that in mind, I am also stumped why a t9600 would not work since it is exactly the same as the t9500 and t9300 just higher clock speed and fsb. But I have not heard reports it works.

I would hope a qx9300 works too, http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=36727, but no one is saying anything above a t9500 and possibly a x9000 does.

socket P, which is what the 5920g uses, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_P, supports plenty of quad core CPUS. The only think I can think of is the motherboard wont recognise other processors, but has anyone tried?

From what I've been told highest is t9500 thought no one is confirming if they have tried a t9600 or quad core processors with latest bios. Why a quad would not be supported is beyond me.
All the voltages are the same btw.

I am in the same boat as you want to upgrade my 5920g, but I'm not too keen about going to a t9300. Its not that much faster, and Dual cores are becoming pretty bad these days. You really need a quad core these days to continue computing well.

 

That higher FSB is precisely why it doesn't work. Socket P is used for two separate chipsets - the 965 series which supports a maximum of 800 MHz FSB, and the 45 series which supports 1066 MHz FSBs and quad-cores.

If you try to put a quad-core or 1066 MHz FSB dual-core in a 965 chipset machine, it will not work. No questions asked.

And what on earth is this?

I know people who are still computing quite capably on SINGLE cores, my friend.

 

Really? Well you can add me to that list then.

I still use a Barton 2500+ Athlon xp overlclocked to about 2.4ghz as my primary pc. The abit nf7-s v2 is one of the best mobos I have ever used, and I still have a msi k7t266a pro2-ru with a 1500+ Athlon running. I also have a p4 3.4 machine at uncles place which is to this day a great machine. I also recently gave away my cusl2-c p3 EB edition over clocked to 1ghz. Man that was sweet machine for its day.

The best machine In my home is an athlon x2 6000+ with 4GB of ram and a mid range radeon, but in my room I keep my trusty Barton.

I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say. I'm definitely not one of those who just thinks only the latest and greatest hardware is good and everything else is lame. In fact I appreciate well built hardware regardless of its specs.

What I was getting it is developers usually have top notch pcs and coding with people having 2 or more cores in mind. Nobody cares about 2 year old hardware these days let alone 8+. You try ask for support about some 3+ year old hardware you are usually faced with egos of other people telling you to stop using that old POS hardware.

I was just trying to point out that multi core CPUS are getting more and more called upon these days. Even Dual cores are becoming too satured to consider them future proof comfortable. You can actually feel difference in software between dual core and quad core these days.

Also Look at games like bad company 2. No matter how good your dual core cpu, its just not enough as this game is saturating even quad cores. Heck I'd say this game currently needs 5+ cores to run comfortable. Similar for metro 2033.

So I was just making more of an observation about the trend of what software is asking these days, not making criticisms...

 

Fair enough. But given that notebooks can't really upgrade from dual- to quad-cores except in very rare and fortuitous circumstances, it's not a conversation worth having.
Either start off with a quad-core, or learn to "live" with dual.