does changing processor require reinstalling windows?

If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
(mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or would
there be complications?

Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
windows.

"peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:RKqaj.9105$1X.3916@trndny07...
> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or
> would there be complications?
>
> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
> windows.
>
Should not change a thing as far as XP is concerned.

peter wrote:
> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or would
> there be complications?
>
> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate,

Possibly, it's a roll of the dice. When my wife's DVD burner died
Microsoft needed me to reactivate...before I'd replaced it!

> perhaps warnings
> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
> windows.

No, as long as the motherboard is set properly windows will take the RAM
and CPU it's given.

Ari


--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

On Dec 20, 2:47 pm, "RIAA" <po...@ur****.org> wrote:
> "peter" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>
> news:RKqaj.9105$1X.3916@trndny07...> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
> > (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or
> > would there be complications?
>
> > Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
> > messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
> > windows.
>
> Should not change a thing as far as XP is concerned.


As far as im aware if you built your os onto a dual core architecture
your os only knows this architecture, in a test you can assign a
single core drive to a dual core chip resulting in a dual core cpu
acting as a single core.... when rebooting most certainly kills your
os and making it unusable, so my advise would be replace the chip,
boot into xp's install and format there.

It's a bad test but just shows you the reality of things.

The last think you want is a situation where you boot and cant load
your os then you get a new primary drive install xp then slave your
old drive as a secondary store facility.
Dual booting is not a good idea when replacing your cpu as 1 os is
looking for a dual core and the other os is looking for a quad.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:38:57 GMT, peter wrote:

> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or would
> there be complications?
>
> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
> windows.

In May I changed CPU to dual-core, mobo and RAM. Put in a new HD and got XP
set up.
Put in the old HD as master with the new one as slave, installed the
drivers on to the old HD and it's been OK since.

So, old HD with old XP installation - apart from drivers, no problem.
--
Peter.
You don't understand Newton's Third Law of Motion?
It's not rocket science, you know.

You can safely change the CPU without reloading Windows. It's if you change
the motherboard that a reformatting and reinstall of the OS is needed.

--
--DaveW
"peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:RKqaj.9105$1X.3916@trndny07...
> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or
> would there be complications?
>
> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
> windows.
>

"DaveW" <radiation@nuclear.org> wrote:

> You can safely change the CPU without reloading Windows. It's if
> you change the motherboard that a reformatting and reinstall of
> the OS is needed.

Are you sure?

Frank McCoy wrote:
> In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
>> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or would
>> there be complications?
>>
>> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
>> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
>> windows.
>>
> Went from AMD Athalon 1600 to 2400 ... No problem.
> Tried "upgrading" the same motherboard from 2400 to 3200+, and Windows
> wouldn't boot.
> It took a complete reinstall of Windows to run.
> Who knows what evil lurks ...?
>

Key difference is CPU vs motherboard...

--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

Frank McCoy wrote:
> In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt spodosaurus <spodosaurus@_yahoo_.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Frank McCoy wrote:
>>> In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "peter" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If I build a pc with a core 2 intel E4300, then later change it to Q6600
>>>> (mobo stays the same), would windows XP or vista boot up just fine or would
>>>> there be complications?
>>>>
>>>> Complications meaning, perhaps need to re-activate, perhaps warnings
>>>> messages during boot, or perhaps won't boot at all and require re-install
>>>> windows.
>>>>
>>> Went from AMD Athalon 1600 to 2400 ... No problem.
>>> Tried "upgrading" the same motherboard from 2400 to 3200+, and Windows
>>> wouldn't boot.
>>> It took a complete reinstall of Windows to run.
>>> Who knows what evil lurks ...?
>>>
>> Key difference is CPU vs motherboard...
>
> This was the *same* motherboard both times. ;-{

Ah, ok! In this case it's likely that the motherboard doesn't support
the next higher bus speed of the 3200+ CPU (333Mhz compared to 266MHz
for the 2400+). However, that should not have affected windows. Do you
mean it wouldn't POST, or that it was able to successfully POST but
unable to load windows?

> First upgrade worked without reinstalling.
> Second one did not.
>
> Perhaps because the second upgrade required changing the FSB speed?
> (Two jumpers on the motherboard)
>


--
spammage trappage: remove the underscores to reply
Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow transplant. Please
volunteer to be a marrow donor and literally save someone's life:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/

In message <fkfvm2$vj8$1@otis.netspace.net.au> spodosaurus
<spodosaurus@_yahoo_.com> wrote:

>Key difference is CPU vs motherboard...

Not really even motherboard, but rather, chipset.