XP doesn't recognize second core in new X2 Dual core, Please read, Need advice. - Page 2

[BarJabba]

I had an AMD 1.2ghz. I upgraded to 2.1ghz. Everything worked for a few weeks then everything went into meltdown.

I've gone through 5 AMD computers in 4 years and yet my other processors just "keep on, going on" . It seems AMD are not good for heavy duty programs like video editing, programming or gaming. They seem to be okay for Spider Solitaire or just ordinary programs that don't require extra cpu outage.

Good luck with yours.

Heh, sorry about your meltdowns. I have been with AMD since about 2000 and I just love it. I had Intel and even worked there. A lot of negative on that Intel stuff.

I have some of the most processing intensive software on my system, so, a statement of AMD that it cannot handle things such as video and audio processing is just not true. If you have some legacy chips from AMD beginnings, then yes, you might not get to multi task or even use some of the higher end applications. You can't upgrade your applications to 2009 era and not upgrade you CPU's too. Also, motherboards are also a factor. If you are using the same MB and the AMD chips are compatable with it, then it just might be the board. I've seen boards mess up CPU's and I've seen people not look carefully as to what CPU's are supported by that MB.

Just a thought. Now back to the issue of this tread...

[Jupiter 2]

I reckon that maybe winXP doesn't have the proper threading apartments to calculate the cpu output. Maybe Vista would be more appropriate for you since, after all, its a mother of a board for late noughties.

[BarJabba]

I reckon that maybe winXP doesn't have the proper threading apartments to calculate the cpu output. Maybe Vista would be more appropriate for you since, after all, its a mother of a board for late noughties.

Huh? :confused: :?: I am sure XP itself doesn't have that problem, if indeed it is one. My mobo is fine to utilize dual core AMD's.

VISTA!! EEeeww! No way in hades will I let that garbage on here. I am not about to completely wipe my disk for an issue that most likely can be solved by HP if they wanted to. I

am looking to get a XP pro Upgrade OEM CD. I would benefit by getting an answer to this delema and getting upgraded at the same time.

Also, I have my Windows 7 RC ISO and ready to test this OS. I will prbably run a VHD to be able to get it to detect my cores. If it does utilize both cores, then it is definanlty HP's image of the OS and their fix. I know that Win 7 is really Vista (Upgraded?). If it is not better and more stable than Vista, then I just may stick as long as I can with XP Pro and Ubuntu.

I am actually talking to an upper level HP support person and I should get the answer shortly. However, I am not holding my breath.

MS is also in contact by email and I sent this person some stuff to get him up to date. Evidently, he wasn't given all those screenshots and backgraound info.

Make it a great day! :cool:

BarJabba

[Jupiter 2]

The second core is more of a booster than anything else. It was designed for high end gamers and video editing. Anything else is a waste of money and time.

[A1 data nz]

The second core is more of a booster than anything else. It was designed for high end gamers and video editing. Anything else is a waste of money and time.

The second core is there to be utilized by programs that you want to run, so you do not have the os taking away from it's power in order to run essential background services and processes which are run seamlessly on the first cpu!

As the coding develops further on 64 and 32x2 platforms, single cores will become obsolete! The future of programing will involve more complex processes utilizing anywhere between two and three processors at once, this is called mutlithreaded code. It will speed up computing by another leap.

So the guts of the matter is that you will have to go dual (at least) or be left behind by the software!

[craigjh]

Before reinstalling the O/S, I would try downloading a Linux live distro that you can run from the CD/DVD and see if detects and uses the 2nd core. That should help isolate the problem.

[Neon Zeon]

I've been Very Dissapointed before when stores have shipped me single core cpu's instead of dual core. Make certain the name includes the "X2" as in Athlon 64 X2, as opposed to Athlon 64. Pull the chip and read name stamped there and compare it to the packaging.

If it indeed an "X2" it will be recognized by any mobo capable of running it, period. Otherwise it is a single core or it's broken. Get an RMA from where you purchased it. Good Luck.

Two weeks ago I recieved an Athlon 64 3800+, when I had ordered an Athlon 64 X2 3800+. When I contacted the store they informed me that they were out of stock. I chose to keep the single core because we needed that PC back in place.

[Josh Connerty]

On the occasions I have replaced a CPU I haven't been warned of any hardware changes either.Then again it has always registered the cores.

Have you not thought about getting a new ASUS MOBO for £40 and formatting your HDD and doing a fresh install. At least then you know the motherboard is going to recognise it no problems.

My only other input will be that maybe you have damaged the CPU in some way, I have heard of overclockers burining out one of their cores so it may be that their is something faulty with the CPU.

Try a friend who might have a 939 Dual CPU and give that a whirl.

[Josh Connerty]

I've been Very Dissapointed before when stores have shipped me single core cpu's instead of dual core. Make certain the name includes the "X2" as in Athlon 64 X2, as opposed to Athlon 64. Pull the chip and read name stamped there and compare it to the packaging.

If it indeed an "X2" it will be recognized by any mobo capable of running it, period. Otherwise it is a single core or it's broken. Get an RMA from where you purchased it. Good Luck.

Two weeks ago I recieved an Athlon 64 3800+, when I had ordered an Athlon 64 X2 3800+. When I contacted the store they informed me that they were out of stock. I chose to keep the single core because we needed that PC back in place.

Thats cheeky of them, I think it wasn't an accident :P

[Josh Connerty]

Heh, sorry about your meltdowns. I have been with AMD since about 2000 and I just love it. I had Intel and even worked there. A lot of negative on that Intel stuff.

I have some of the most processing intensive software on my system, so, a statement of AMD that it cannot handle things such as video and audio processing is just not true. If you have some legacy chips from AMD beginnings, then yes, you might not get to multi task or even use some of the higher end applications. You can't upgrade your applications to 2009 era and not upgrade you CPU's too. Also, motherboards are also a factor. If you are using the same MB and the AMD chips are compatable with it, then it just might be the board. I've seen boards mess up CPU's and I've seen people not look carefully as to what CPU's are supported by that MB.

Just a thought. Now back to the issue of this tread...

It is not so much AMD but the chip itself. For instance the athlon AM2+ 3.oGHz is a great chip, my brother plays WOW with the lates patch 24/7/365 and it seems to handle it fine.

Although I am very much an Intel person myself. I actually have a P4 x2 and seems to run fine.

Thats a point, my BIOS recognises that it is a Pentium 4 Dual Core but my OS (XP PRO) doesn't seem to take much notice but still utilises both cores.

Try downloading PC Wizard 2008, it's made by the CPUID guys. If you start it then minimise it it will show in the top right hand corner the core usuage percentage. If this is not recognising the second core then it is definetly not working

[BarJabba]

So, what are you saying? I got it just for that and other developmental things.

"Anything else is a waste of money and time"

LOL... what happened, did you have a bad day? I don't agree, seeing I got it for free. Hmmm. I don't know why you are saying that? My board doesn't allow me to go any higher than a 4800+. I am not about to go beyond my upgrade plans.

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

The second core is there to be utilized by programs that you want to run, so you do not have the os taking away from it's power in order to run essential background services and processes which are run seamlessly on the first cpu!

As the coding develops further on 64 and 32x2 platforms, single cores will become obsolete! The future of programing will involve more complex processes utilizing anywhere between two and three processors at once, this is called mutlithreaded code. It will speed up computing by another leap.

So the guts of the matter is that you will have to go dual (at least) or be left behind by the software!

I thought I mentioned way earlier on that that was what I am. I am tying to do this kind of stuff. I have not done multithreading and I want to get into multi processing as well eventually.

I also find the new graphics card I bought and the "Call of Duty" games I got very interesting and fun. But, I do not play in a consistent way. I don't excusively play like the typical "gamer" does.

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

Before reinstalling the O/S, I would try downloading a Linux live distro that you can run from the CD/DVD and see if detects and uses the 2nd core. That should help isolate the problem.

Thank you, I di have the Ubuntu live CD. Thing is, I use assistive technogy (in this case Magnify.exe) and I do not know this OS and can't get around as easy ... yet! Maybe, I should ask where would I look in Ubuntu for the information that show "utilization" and recognizing them. Like a Task Manager that has a performance tab. Or, any other graph the shows each core and CPU usage level. Maybe also, what equivalent testing application can be used in Ubuntu.

BarJabba

I have some news for all in my message to all in the thread.

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

I've been Very Dissapointed before when stores have shipped me single core cpu's instead of dual core. Make certain the name includes the "X2" as in Athlon 64 X2, as opposed to Athlon 64. Pull the chip and read name stamped there and compare it to the packaging.

If it indeed an "X2" it will be recognized by any mobo capable of running it, period. Otherwise it is a single core or it's broken. Get an RMA from where you purchased it. Good Luck.

Two weeks ago I recieved an Athlon 64 3800+, when I had ordered an Athlon 64 X2 3800+. When I contacted the store they informed me that they were out of stock. I chose to keep the single core because we needed that PC back in place.

Sorry to hear that you got dupped by a store. You are correct on what you say, but there are places on the web that have the Id help you need. www.cpu-world.com I think the name is.

I, of course, know how to make sure of what I am getting. The CPU that I have was given to me by a system builder friend. I don't have any concerns about its useability and authenticity. He had tested both core and it did work.

Please read my last message to all the thread. I have an update.

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

It is not so much AMD but the chip itself. For instance the athlon AM2+ 3.oGHz is a great chip, my brother plays WOW with the lates patch 24/7/365 and it seems to handle it fine.

Although I am very much an Intel person myself. I actually have a P4 x2 and seems to run fine.

Thats a point, my BIOS recognises that it is a Pentium 4 Dual Core but my OS (XP PRO) doesn't seem to take much notice but still utilises both cores.

Try downloading PC Wizard 2008, it's made by the CPUID guys. If you start it then minimise it it will show in the top right hand corner the core usuage percentage. If this is not recognising the second core then it is definetly not working

I have PC Wizard. I actually like that one. I wish I could send screenshots to show the things I am seeing.

I kinda wonder why there is advice that seems to say, "it's not a real X2", "it's broke", "it os still being utilized", and others that would say I ;ost money. Kinda like you all are saying give up.

I don't think that is appropriate in my case. I will be getting a new mobo/cpu.ram and maybe case next year. About his time next year. I have development studies and getting better at .NET. Maybe if I am strong enough to get recertified in MSCD areas, I will maybe be able to re-enter into the Programming field again.

Thank you for chimming in,

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

Update:

I have been in a one on one with HP support (elevated level). This only made me more angry with them. Firstly, the so called tech was devoid of any real technical knowledge. He knew what my experience with computers was before conversing on the phone. Either he didn't believe me or was just testing to see if he can give the same line that he would to a novice user. When I laughed a little and saud "Ahhhw... I don't know about that", he immediately put me on hold. I had explained that it was HP's problem and they should do the right thing according to its OEM licencing. I also said it would be an easy fix if they sent me an install CD and let me do a repair. If there were propietary issues, they could offer an utility that would fix this specific problem. It is common enough to produce such an utility. He gave the out of warrenty brush of and did what others did when in the middle of a fix. HP is good at responding, but, void on actual solutions. If it is not on their website, they just brush off the customer. I never bought Big Name OEM before this machine. I won't do that again. I will stick to the local Mom and Pop type of shops for build and upgrade for me.

I am also communicating with MS. To my surprise, they took in the issue. So, I 'll have to see how that turns out. I hold no real hope there either.

I just bought an MS Windows XP Pro Upgrade and it should be here this week. I am going to upgrade to pro and see if it will rebuild the HAL and utilize both cores. I would be elated if in Task Manage I would see the two CPU graphs I should see.

If I can get some instruction on Ubuntu, I could see if it can see and use both cores. I will look around, as I have some time before my CD comes.

Thank you for all the imput from all of you. This forum is great. I will report back to let you know one way or the other.

BarJabba

[Josh Connerty]

So with PC Wizard when you minimiz it and you get the graphs does it show just core 1? or does it show 2?

[Neon Zeon]

BarJabba,

I've just re-read the entire thread, I believe it is a hardware problem. It either works or it dosen't. If the cpu is dual core and the motherboard supports it, then XP will see them, as will CPUZ or other utilities.

Please list for us information on motherboard manufacturer and model. Does the bios properly indentify the cpu at boot, what designation does it display during POST? I'm wondering if a bios update might be in order.

I hope you have patience and a sense of humor regarding some of the posts to this thread. Comment s such as "winXP doesn't have the proper threading apartments to calculate the cpu output" and "second core is more of a booster than anything else" are straight out of the ether.

I applaud your efforts to upgrade your machine. Dual core cpu's are not a gimmick. They work and work well even with software not specificaly written for two cores. By all means getting the most cpu your mobo can support is a cost effective way of moving forward.

By 2012 you'll likely see mainstream PC's with eight to twelve cores, they're already in server machines now, made by AMD and Intel both.

Please post spec's / Good Luck

Neon Zeon

[Josh Connerty]

BarJabba,

I've just re-read the entire thread, I believe it is a hardware problem. It either works or it dosen't. If the cpu is dual core and the motherboard supports it, then XP will see them, as will CPUZ or other utilities.

Please list for us information on motherboard manufacturer and model. Does the bios properly indentify the cpu at boot, what designation does it display during POST? I'm wondering if a bios update might be in order.

I hope you have patience and a sense of humor regarding some of the posts to this thread. Comment s such as "winXP doesn't have the proper threading apartments to calculate the cpu output" and "second core is more of a booster than anything else" are straight out of the ether.

I applaud your efforts to upgrade your machine. Dual core cpu's are not a gimmick. They work and work well even with software not specificaly written for two cores. By all means getting the most cpu your mobo can support is a cost effective way of moving forward.

By 2012 you'll likely see mainstream PC's with eight to twelve cores, they're already in server machines now, made by AMD and Intel both.

Please post spec's / Good Luck

Neon Zeon

I have an eight core computer :P (2 quad core xeons)

[BarJabba]

So with PC Wizard when you minimiz it and you get the graphs does it show just core 1? or does it show 2?

In PC Wizard>Processors It lists "Core 1" and it was about at 7% and it also lists "Core 2" and it is at 0%. In the tray, only a static Icon appears. Nothing indicating any cores. Maybe there is a option that need to be selected to see a graph in the tray? However, I think it, like a number of programs, is seeing the cores, but can't utilize it.

I really like the info that PC Wizard collects and displays. I am glad to have it.

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

BarJabba,

I've just re-read the entire thread, I believe it is a hardware problem. It either works or it dosen't. If the cpu is dual core and the motherboard supports it, then XP will see them, as will CPUZ or other utilities.

Please list for us information on motherboard manufacturer and model. Does the bios properly indentify the cpu at boot, what designation does it display during POST? I'm wondering if a bios update might be in order.

I hope you have patience and a sense of humor regarding some of the posts to this thread. Comment s such as "winXP doesn't have the proper threading apartments to calculate the cpu output" and "second core is more of a booster than anything else" are straight out of the ether.

I applaud your efforts to upgrade your machine. Dual core cpu's are not a gimmick. They work and work well even with software not specificaly written for two cores. By all means getting the most cpu your mobo can support is a cost effective way of moving forward.

By 2012 you'll likely see mainstream PC's with eight to twelve cores, they're already in server machines now, made by AMD and Intel both.

Please post spec's / Good Luck

Neon Zeon

Dani web decided to erase all I had said. This is very annoying.

I do have a mobo and BIOS that supports and reports the dual core. I have come down after more than two weeks of research and the like. The common fix was doing a "repair" using the Install CD, which HP/Compaq do not give their customers.

I am happy with the computer save one thing. Why would this big OEM sell a computer that has a 64 bit CPU without giving the ability to actually use it? They could have said in thier ad that I would only get 32 bit out of it. :( Then, I could have gone a little custom and asked for a dual boot or let me put my own OS. I would have paid a little extra for the right OS. I am on disability and can only get so much computer at the time. I probably would have just upped the CPU right then as well. I am not going to Big OEM and returning back to local shops for my upgrades and builds.

I now can save a little every month to get a whole new mobo/ram/CPU.

Here is the link to my mobo. It is at HP, so, go ahead and take agander about.
http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c00647121&cc=us&lc=en&dlc=en&product=1841849#N368

My Model is: Compaq Presario SR1820NX. Mobo: ASUSTek A8N-LA(Nagami). I have maxed out the RAM at 4 GB. I know XP 32 bit does utilize but only 3.5 of it.

I have looked at mobo's this year and I am really impressed with the Tyan 4X4's (that's 4 CPU's with 4 Cores each), and with the option to buy a daughter board to expand to another 4 CPU's. And then there the guy on eBay (chinese fellow) who has an ASUS 4 CPU Opterions and SLI for sale. It was a real bargin too.

I don't know why a person who develops wouldn't have at least a dual core. There's a lot of things I have not done in application development that I need to catch up on. My illness has delayed me about 5 years, so, I have my work cut out for me. :|

I am getting info on Ubuntu too see where to look for the core info. I bet dollars to doughnuts that I would get the truth there.

Thank you so much people. I will get a resolution one way or the other. Thank goodness I did not have to pay for the CPU. I would have felt gypt if the 2nd core was physically unusable. I am ok though, until next year when I go for more upgrades. :icon_wink:

BarJabba

[BarJabba]

I forgot to show you this. It is from the HP source above and it is the upgrade to my BIOS. I did upgrade because of the underlined part. As you can see there has not been any more updates since 2006. That rather bites.

"Released: 2006-10-02
Version: 3.11
Compatibility: Microsoft Windows XP
System requirements: You must be logged on as an administrator to install this update.
Description: A8N-LA Motherboard BIOS update resolves broadband connectivity issues caused by MAC address conflicts.
Enhancements: Resolves broadband connectivity issues caused by MAC address conflicts.
Resolves system boot issues.
Resolves compatibility issues with USB devices.
Resolves issue where Dual Core processors are identified incorrectly in diagnostic properties.

Operating System:
Microsoft Windows XP Home
Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition
Microsoft Windows XP Professional

http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareDownloadIndex?softwareitem=pv-43507-1&lc=en&dlc=en&cc=us&lang=en&os=228&product=1841849

I wasn't having identification problems, it was utilization. I did think at the time they could have meant the whole of the issue.

I hope by giving all I have done and my research up until now, I might get some fresh ideas. I don't think I can go too much farther than upgrading my XP Home to Pro for now. I may go to Windows 7 when it becomes available and only if it fairs well in testing.

BarJabba

[Neon Zeon]

Do you see two cores / graphs in Taskmanager?

If you want to go 64-bit you need a 64-bit OS, i.e. XP 64-bit, 64-bit Vista 64-bit or Win 7 64-bit. Linux has 64-bit OS's also.

[BarJabba]

Please re-read the earlier parts of the thread. The answer is, I have already been to all of that. It shows only one graph for one of the cores. Sorry, if I seem snippy. It's just that we are way beyond that initial stuff. I appretiate you chimming in and all. I am waiting for the XP Pro Upgrade CD to come in the mail. Unless there is something else non destructive that I can do in the meantime, please let me know.

I have done a number of things that did not bare any results. I have changed the enviroment variable, I am considering uninstalling the two references in DM>Processors and then rebotting to see if XP will pick up the drivers again and then maybe rebuild or fix the HAL to utilize the second core.

I am thinking that since it did apply the right drivers, it probable does need a whole new install.

Thanks,

[Josh Connerty]

My advice would be to go to http://ubuntu.com/ and downloading teither the 64bit or 32bit version of the ubuntu desktop. This is a 750M+ file that you can virtually mount and install inside windows.

This will diagnose wether it is the OS or the MOBO. I am split between three things. Either the CPU is faulty or not what you ordered, the motherboard needs flashing or replacing and the final thing is that you need to reformat your hard drive.

I am pretty sure it is one of the three above or a mixture of the three above.

I would advise looking for a local OEM store that could give you a board that would fit the CPU you have purchased. I don't know about you but http://novatech.co.uk/ (english store) will replace things that don't fit in with your system.

Have you not got a friend who has a similar build PC that you can play about with? I mean switching parts etc. between the two and seeing if it is a hardware issue or software or what not.

It isn't likely but maybe your PSU is becoming a little tired. I bought a 550W PSU from noavtech and I kept getting a blue screen error because of a faulty PSU it is quite common. I am currently using a 20 pin 250W PSU for a 24 pin LGA775 board and it works better, waiting for a replacement PSU to be delivered free of charge.

You need to do some debuging. At the moment you haven't narrowed it down to a group of causes. Please take into account that 20 heads are better than one. Their is obviously somone who has had the same or similar issue.

I am going to be perfectly honest, I think it would be worth returning to CPU and upgrading to a LGA775 board/AM2 board. You are extremely behind the time with a 2006 mother (or older I believe) and it's not supprising you are having an issue. A reason why you are probably having this is because you have a HP MOBO that you are trying to add hardware to.

I will take a loom on the novatech website and give you a rough idea of how much a new MOBO and CPU will cost you. Can I ask does your MOBO have the 4 pin connection on it?

[Josh Connerty]

For £114 you can get a AM2 motherboar (I no you like you MD's) with a Athlon x2 black edition 2.70GHz and 2GB DDRII 800MHz RAM.

£114 is roughly $183, this motherboard will allow you to add a SATA hard drive or four actually. And two PATA devices (older HDD and Optical Drive connector mostly likely what you currently have).

This motherboard also supports 4GB DDRII RAM (800MHz MAX) and has a PCIE slot for your graphics cards. It also has onboard graphics and onboard audio.

Instead of me explaining it all to you I will post ya the links. If you are in the US then they won't really mean much to you as you would have to pay customs expenses and it wouldn't be worth it. This is just so as you know the rough prices to getting a more up to date system that will allow you to upgrade it as and when you get the money.

MOBO: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?MSI-K9NNF2
CPU: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?AMD-X2775
RAM: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a937x1y0z1p0s0n0m0

You really must head the advice and take the step to either the LGA775's or the AM2/+.

[BarJabba]

For £114 you can get a AM2 motherboar (I no you like you MD's) with a Athlon x2 black edition 2.70GHz and 2GB DDRII 800MHz RAM.

£114 is roughly $183, this motherboard will allow you to add a SATA hard drive or four actually. And two PATA devices (older HDD and Optical Drive connector mostly likely what you currently have).

This motherboard also supports 4GB DDRII RAM (800MHz MAX) and has a PCIE slot for your graphics cards. It also has onboard graphics and onboard audio.

Instead of me explaining it all to you I will post ya the links. If you are in the US then they won't really mean much to you as you would have to pay customs expenses and it wouldn't be worth it. This is just so as you know the rough prices to getting a more up to date system that will allow you to upgrade it as and when you get the money.

MOBO: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?MSI-K9NNF2
CPU: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?AMD-X2775
RAM: http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a937x1y0z1p0s0n0m0

You really must head the advice and take the step to either the LGA775's or the AM2/+.

No Intel... thank you!

Yes, I bought this computer on a deal in June of 2006. The board can have a dual core CPU in it. I stayed just under what I was allowed. I cannot purchase a new mobo now. I have already commited to a time frame for the upgrades I want. This time next year will be the time to get a combo as I mentioned before. I am quite happy for the time being. The CPU was the last upgrade for awhile. I have gotten a few other things little by little. I have an USB 1 TB drive, USB 4 port hub(has hi-speed and its own adapter), CyberPower battery back up, PSU 550 W, and Acronis True Image Home 2009 & Disk Suite 10. I then got a great deal on inks and Windows XP Pro upgrade.

I am not discounting any hardware issues that you speak of. I think it is more likely that this board is unflashable. HP most likely has a lock, from what I understand. ASUS may or may not have an update to the BIOS for this board. It is not listed on their site...odd I know.

I know all about running a 32 bit/64 bit OS's. I complained to the HP "tech" support guy. I said why would they put a 64 bit CPU w/o a 64 bit operating system? Heck, they don't even let you know or let you decide to do a custom build with the proper OS's. Like I said before, HP is good at responding but void in any real solutions or help. The guy tried to tell ne some foolish lie that I scoffed at. He put me on hold, only to return to give me the old dump routine. I told about my experince in calls centers and knew what he was doing. I thanked him for wasting my time and making it hard for me to consider anymore HP purchases. Hung up him.

I have Ubuntu Live CD. As I think I said here, it saved my butt on another issue I was having. I am going to boot it again and see if I can find where the equivalent sources of information it has. Like Task Manager, Device Manager, whatever...I should gleen the truth there. I am also trying to get this Windows 7 ISO to burn in so I can give it its own partition. That itself would tell me also the truth.

I did not purchase the CPU as I said earlier. It was given to me by a trusted System Builder freind who assured me that it tested great and that it worked. If it doesn't work, what? A refund? LOL :D

I am NOT :P going to format my hard drive. Not at this time anyway. I am sure that if it comes to that, I will just wait until next year. I would have to do way to much to prepare everything. Migration needs to be done thoughtfully. Besides, I have great hopes that the upgrade of the OS will do the trick. All the research of this problem points to this type of fix. A MS support tech that I am talking to (thank goodness for my MCSD cert) said there was another option that can be done with the upgrade version. But, I would probably have to reinstall "some" of my applications. I have heard of a way to "unlock" the upgrade version and I know MS, what that is.

I appreciate you all ... wish me luck with Ubuntu. I need some info on how to reach the information that would tell me about my CPU's.

Bless all!

[Josh Connerty]

Okay right, I will have a look about that for you.

As for the 64bit CPU I have one in my current system, it runs both x64 & x86 without any problems however I run a 32bit OS.

[Jupiter 2]

After 12 pages my eyes are blurry. You are running Win XP on a processor designed for Win Vista.
XP will never recognise the second core because it is a 64 bit processor.