Upgrading CPU on a Dell Inspiron 600M

This currently has a 1.4GHz with a 400MHz FSB, and 1MB cache. I have the
latest BIOS: A17

Can anyone recommend the best upgrade CPU for this notebook?

Thanks,

David

2 ghz was the fastest M processor for the 600m. The 400 fsb chips are still
expensive, I personally would take the money and invest it in a new core2duo
laptop.

"David" <anonymous> wrote in message
news:S-2dnUfBzMbCivPVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@bright.net...
> This currently has a 1.4GHz with a 400MHz FSB, and 1MB cache. I have the
> latest BIOS: A17
>
> Can anyone recommend the best upgrade CPU for this notebook?
>
> Thanks,
>
> David

Do you happen to know if the 2MB cache is much of an advantage over the 1MB
that I have now? I see that the 1.6GHz thru 1.8GHz (w 400FSB) processors are
pretty cheap on eBay. Some can be had for as little as $10 to $40. But if
the additional 1MB of cache and 300MHz amounts to little in the way of
performance, then perhaps it is better to save my money and leave it the way
it is......I just can afford a new core2duo laptop right now...

David


"BigJim" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message:

>2 ghz was the fastest M processor for the 600m. The 400 fsb chips are still
>expensive, I personally would take the money and invest it in a new
>core2duo laptop.
>
> "David" <anonymous> wrote in message
> news:S-2dnUfBzMbCivPVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@bright.net...
>> This currently has a 1.4GHz with a 400MHz FSB, and 1MB cache. I have the
>> latest BIOS: A17
>>
>> Can anyone recommend the best upgrade CPU for this notebook?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> David
>

i would suspect that the difference in performance will disapoint.
for comparison sale, you can check the specific processor benchmarks here:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
of course, in order for the proceossor to work it would have to be suported
by the motherbaord and the bios. unless you have even andectodal
information about compatibilty (some claim from someone sucessfully doing
it) then you are just taking our chances that it might work.
if you want a inexpensive performance upgrade you might consider upgrading
memory if under 1gb or getting a faster hard disk for under $100. a hard
disk upgrade will go a long way to boost the performance of an older laptop.

"David" <anonymous> wrote in message
news:6dKdnZ250Z4A5PPVnZ2dnUVZ_jWdnZ2d@bright.net.. .
> Do you happen to know if the 2MB cache is much of an advantage over the
> 1MB that I have now? I see that the 1.6GHz thru 1.8GHz (w 400FSB)
> processors are pretty cheap on eBay. Some can be had for as little as $10
> to $40. But if the additional 1MB of cache and 300MHz amounts to little in
> the way of performance, then perhaps it is better to save my money and
> leave it the way it is......I just can afford a new core2duo laptop right
> now...
>
> David
>
>
> "BigJim" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message:
>
>>2 ghz was the fastest M processor for the 600m. The 400 fsb chips are
>>still expensive, I personally would take the money and invest it in a new
>>core2duo laptop.
>>
>> "David" <anonymous> wrote in message
>> news:S-2dnUfBzMbCivPVnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@bright.net...
>>> This currently has a 1.4GHz with a 400MHz FSB, and 1MB cache. I have the
>>> latest BIOS: A17
>>>
>>> Can anyone recommend the best upgrade CPU for this notebook?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> David
>>
>

Thanks for the benchmarks! Yep, there is a significant difference. But is it
worth $10-$40 for the upgrade? I'm willing to gamble on that. But I'm not
sure what you mean about "taking chances that it might work." The 600M has
been sold with a range of different cpu's. Aside from the BIOS (and I have
the latest) - are the motherboards different in each flavor of the 600M? I'm
just not sure what "might not work" other than a defective cpu. Are there
jumpers or something that makes each 600M with a different cpu unique? As
for the disk drive, ata100 is the limiting factor is it not? And I believe
it already has that. As for memory it already has 768MB (running on XP). So
hopefully, you can see why I chose the cpu as a good upgrade candidate.

But if I am wrong in my assumptions here, please let me know...

David

"Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message:

>i would suspect that the difference in performance will disapoint.
> for comparison sale, you can check the specific processor benchmarks here:
> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
> of course, in order for the proceossor to work it would have to be
> suported by the motherbaord and the bios. unless you have even andectodal
> information about compatibilty (some claim from someone sucessfully doing
> it) then you are just taking our chances that it might work.
> if you want a inexpensive performance upgrade you might consider upgrading
> memory if under 1gb or getting a faster hard disk for under $100. a hard
> disk upgrade will go a long way to boost the performance of an older
> laptop.