Upgrade processor on Acer aspire 8930G what will fit?

Hi

I have an acer aspire 8930G with a T6400 2ghz processor. I know the 8930G has many configs but I am not sure if the motherboards are the same for each laptop, can someone confirm?

I am looking for either a quad core processor or a really good core 2 duo one.

I used to build computers for a living but have not been on the scene for 5+ years so do not know which is currently best.

I have seen this on ebay and just wondered if anyone knew if it would work?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Intel-Core-2-...in_0?hash=item27ab13c1c4&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

Or does anyone know what the max processor I can fit to it is? I know they are simple to fit but I dont want to buy one that will not work and then Id have to send it back etc.

Cheers

 

I have found that my chipset is PM45 and processor is a socket P.

So do I just need to find a processor that is socket P and will fit a PM45? Or more criteria than that? Ive never upgraded a laptop before so not sure how it works really.

Ive now put 10 different processors on my watch list on ebay so I need to decide which one will be good. The one I have at the moment is decent enough but I have found that I am getting sometimes 80% of cpu used for just installing things or even just for firefox...

I will be using my laptop for website design, photo and video editing. I got the laptop quite cheap so it is cheaper for me to do it this way to upgrade it rather than buying a more expensive model.

 

Well, according to THIS source, that X1900 should work fine!

 

I saw that thread but then other people were saying it could overheat, is that sort of pushing it a bit by adding that processor and would I need anything that fast really?

Has anyone upgraded it before to one of the other cpu's? Or has anyone else got one of the higher specs of this model and if so what is the processor? I think I will get a quad core one but I am unsure if a quad core will work really. I have already bought a 500GB hard drive making 820gb total so the processor will be the only other upgrade I would want.

 

If i were u , i'd get a P9700 , T9900. X9100 might not be supported by ur bios and would casue heat problems so if were u , u shouldn't take the risk. However P9700 will run much cooler than ur T6400 so it would be a good upgrade. T9900 is also a good choice but if i were u, i'd stay away from X9100.

 

What are you using your notebook for? If you are just doing day-to-day stuff, you won't notice much performance benefit, but if you are doing mathematical calculations or 3D rendering, you will definitely get a boost. I believe there are 8930G's with quad cores in it, and even the cheap Q9000 would be a better deal than the most expensive dual core (but definitely search the Acer forum to see if it will work).

If quads don't work and you need processing power and can afford it, go with the T9900. P and T series really aren't different on battery since users typically never stress their CPUs on 100% load throughout the time they are on battery, so the power consumption is not noticeably different.

 

LOL T9900= owned by Q9000. If i had know that quad were supported, i would have recommended Q9000. Q9100 would also be good....

 

Yes, but the Q9100 is a lot more expensive than the Q9000.

 

Hi guys

Thanks for the advice. I use it for video making, web design and also photo shop. I also like to playgames.

I have decided to send the laptop with T6400 in it back and get one for £80 more with INTEL CORE 2 QUAD Q9000 2.0GHZ 6MB 1066MHZ MOBILE instead. The processor speed is the same but it has 6mb cache instead of two and its quad core instead of duo plus the faster bus speed.

Is it really that much of a difference that I would notice it? The INTEL CORE 2 QUAD Q9000 2.0GHZ 6MB 1066MHZ MOBILE on its own is £200 to buy too.

So Ill now how a 8930G with INTEL CORE 2 QUAD Q9000 2.0GHZ 6MB 1066MHZ MOBILE and 1000GB, 4gb ram and 1gb dedicated graphics as apposed to t6400 820gb hdd, 512mb graphics etc. Both have blu ray.

Thanks for the advice.

I may upgrade to the q91000 in the future but at the moment ill stick with the q9000.

Is it worth me using a 64 bit OS instead of 32 bit ?

 

Yes it is..But alot of apps arent written for 64bit so the choice is yours.64bit can use 4gbs+ ram, 32 can only use 3.25gbs.

 

For video making, photoshop, web design and some games, quad core will really make a difference. Definitely go 64-bit since all your hardware should be new enough to have 64-bit drivers. You can run 32-bit software no problem.

 

Can run 32 bit software on 64bit os? Sorry im confused lol

I usually use adobe master collection CS4, Ulead video studio 12 or 13 not sure which, microsoft office, sims 3, gta 4, few other games and a few other general apps like winamp, winzip, etc etc.

So it is worth me getting this machine rather than sticking with the 6400? I always thought about speed, but it seems it is more than that even the speed of processor is the same but cache and fsb is better. Or is it worth me getting a T9800 2.93Ghz 6M instead? Is that a 32bit cpu or 64?

Ive got totally lost as I used to only used amd processors back in the day when I built computers lol

 

Pretty much all 32-bit software can run in 64-bit OS (compatibility mode if there is no direct 64-bit analogue). The Q9000 better and cheaper than the T9800. All current Intel and AMD CPUs are 64-bit.

 

oh so even this t6400 core 2 duo is 64 bit? Wonder why it didnt come with vista 64 ?

 

It is 64-bit capable, that means you can use a 64-bit OS. The OS and CPU aren't related since the ODM chooses which version to give you. 4,000th post!

 

So do you think it is worth me installing vista 64 bit? Been told its much better than the 32 bit version. Would my cd code work on it?

 

Yes, your 32-bit key would work for the same version in 64-bit. If you install it, you will have to do a clean install, so back up your stuff (or partition your hard drive for data and OS/programs. I'm using 64-bit now and I wouldn't go back to 32-bit.

 

on my 8930g my hard drive is broken into two paritions, one for windows and one for data. I know you can make the windows partition smaller, is that what most people do?

Also my laptop has a hidden partition (cannot access it anywhere!) for disk to disk recovery, if I change the size or partitions will the recovery thing fail to work? I am thinking maybe the recovery would look for C:\ being a certain size?

I have ordered another 500gb hard drive to go into the 2nd slot on my 8930g too.

It sounds like I should have been using 64 bit for months or possibly longer than that. I am annoyed that my laptop comes with 64 bit processor yet I am given a 32 bit os when by the sounds of it the 64 bit version is much better?

Can anyone explain how and why the 64 bit version of vista home premium is better than 32 bit? Does it have more features or is it just more stable and faster?

 

From a user standpoint, the major reason to go to a 64-bit OS is the ability to address more than about 4 gigabytes of memory (in total). Features and stability between 64-bit and 32-bit Vista should be about the same. The downside to 64-bit Vista is that some older 32-bit programs won't work well except in 32-bit compatibility mode, and will use more RAM than in a comparable 32-bit installation (of course, since you usually wouldn't bother with a 64-bit OS unless you were getting a lot of RAM, it usually ends up being a bit of a wash for that last part). In an older OS like XP, there used to be a lot of driver issues, as many vendors simply didn't bother to write 64-bit drivers, but that problem has mostly gone away with Vista.

So, in general, if you want to use more than about 3-4G of RAM, you need to use a 64-bit OS. If you only have 2-3G of RAM, there isn't as much point unless you need to run 64-bit software.

 

I only have 3GB of memory and 64-bit is still useful. Vista was designed with 64-bit platform in mind anyways. I feel it's reliable and safer, since drivers need to be digitally signed (though that can be a double edged sword for older hardware).