Upgraded to a Penryn, but the computer ran slower than it was with the T2330......

I've got a new T9100 6MB from ebay earlier on and was looking at upgrading the aging T2330 in my Lenovo N200. I've updated to the latest BIOS that support 45nm processors and it seemed like some other users here at nbr did a similar processor swap with success as well.

I swap the new processor in and the notebook fired up, all is well. Things were working properly and at where they were supposed to be, which is all good, except for the fact that the CPU exhaust fan started spinning at high speed constantly (talk about the ADHD fans in the N200s) because the ACPI system can no longer detect CPU temperature, but it's ok if performance improve. But I was going to be really suprised when I ran PCMark 05 to see how much improvement I've made through the upgrade a while later.

Originally I was able to a CPU score of 4002 in the CPU section of PCMark 05, but after the swap, it was reduced to 2900. Performance in WPrime and Windows Experience Index also confirmed the fact that the new processor (2.4GHz/6MB L2/800MHz FSB) is slower than the old T2330 (1.6GHz/1MB L2/533MHz FSB).

So far, I have no answer why one of the latest state of the art processor with more cache, faster core frequency, faster FSB and with meaner execution units would be beaten so soundly by the lowly T2330, may be someone care to shed some light on this issue?

 

In Device Manager what does it report CPU as? If not T9300 uninstall/delete drivers and restart. Important I want to know Device Manager nothing else not CPU-Z or anything else.

 

Two "Geniune Intel(R) CPU @2.4GHz" was shown there. I have tried reinstalling the windows from scratch but it didn't seem to help. I don't think its thermal issues as well as the CPU heatsink was not too warm even after running 24 hours of Folding@home client which brought it to full load at both core.

 

Seems to be ES version.

 

It's an ES unit but that still can't account for the performance discrepancy though. Attached is the processor in question.

 

Do a clean install.. could be a software issue..

also track your cpu's performance with cpuz, rmclock, etc.

 

Tried clean installing but with it didn't help. Stat from CPU-Z seemed to be fine to me, with the core flucturating based on load, the dynamic acceleration feature is also working (sometimes the processor would go beyond 2.4GHz in single thread apps).

 

Yes it most assuredly can. ES processors may or may not have bugs in them, and usually said bugs cannot be fixed.

I had a post about this awhile back in a thread that was offering ES chips for sale. I talked to a friend who mine who works directly for Intel Corp, and he said it's a BAD idea to be using ES chips, since you don't know what could be wrong with them.

They're not simply pre-production, same as what will soon come off the line. They're the development chips. They're used to learn if there's problems.

 

When u want to buy a ES cpu, be sure to buy those with correct names. Those with "Geniune Intel(R) CPU @" are still early samples.

 

Hi

Which Stepping is the processor?

Also can you post a screenshot of the RMclock profile page?

 

Sorry to tell you, but I believe you picked up a bad ES... :/

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=407

 

Just found out why the processor is under performing, the thermal sensor used in Penryn seemed to be incompatible with the N200, as a result, the temp reading thru ACPI is always right off the scale, but once I disabled the thermal throttling for the processor, things seemed to be going fine with the CPU score in PCMark 05 jumped up to 6105. Now need to figure out how to lower the fan noise base on CPU load instead of temperature....

 

Hi.
I also have an N200 and I am thinking about doing the same upgrade you did.

Did you make any progress with your fan problem?

 

I almost wrote why this wouldn't be working for the X9100 when I realized you had a T9100. Note you won't find a T9100 to buy anywhere except perhaps eBay - it's not a standard Intel processor. Considering the T9300 and T9500 specs, the 2.4/6/800 makes sense, but Intel doesn't sell it. My guess would be it never made it past engineering samples.

At any rate, I wouldn't upgrade to the T9100 as it's a ghostly processor at best and doesn't seem to be so in a good way.

 

You could try undervolting. :3
EDIT: Huh, interesting. Apparently the Q4FU (T8300 w/6MB) wasn't the only ES that didn't make it to production. CPU-World lists a QZOF running at 2.2 GHz with the higher cache amount.

 

Anyways, what I have done was swapping the T9100 with a X7900 instead, after figuring out that the thermal sensor compatability issues would be prevalent in all penryns as I also seen similar issues with T61/R61 users.