Help Upgrading presario c500 series notebook - Page 7

 

 

Well, my opinion is that HP (like other vendors) is not interested in providing exact specifications to allow users to upgrade their machine, as they wouldn't need to buy a brand-new one anymore, hehe. Another explanation: the factory ran out 441695, so they just mounted what they got at hand, and didn't report it in the specs.

 

 

That's really cool ! So I'll wait for some news before buying something. It is exactly right that a SSD could erase the need for more than 2 or 3 GB of RAM, as swapping would be a lot quicker. The only drawback is that a GB on a SSD costs the same than a dozen of GB on a classic hard drive ...
 

 

Up !

Hello all,

I finally got my hands on this board, 441695-001, and all I can say is oh my god.

The board is equipped with North Bridge chipset... *Drumroll*

i945GM.

I am about to perform a late night surgery on my work machine, even allowing for the possibility that it won't survive, to determine how I can put this to use. For a recap:

i945GM theoretically opens the door to the 2 GB+ range of RAM. It also should support slightly more powerful graphics (faster graphics core clock). There are no gains in types of CPU support over the i943GML (both support 64-bit and dual-core), though BOTH are superior to the i940GML.

I will post further once I have completed my tests. In case it's not evident from my post here, I am VERY excited.

Regards,
OShadowFoxO

And hello again,

Motherboard 441695-001 appears to be the promised land. A run down of all three boards (from least to most capable):

441696-001:
Equipped with North Bridge chip i940GML. Limited to Socket M 32-bit single-core processors (Yonah), 533 MHz bus, and 2 GB of DDR2 RAM. Intel GMA 950 graphics: core speed 166 MHz.
Quirks: Systems may boot with more than 2 GB installed, but Windows does not appear to utilize anything over 2 GB. Also, lack of dual-core support is based on information in other posts stating they do not work with the board. Best known working CPU: Core Solo T1350 (1.86 GHz)

445605-001: Equipped with North Bridge chip i943GML. Supports Socket M 32- AND 64-bit single- and dual-core CPUs (Yonah and Merom, Core 2 Duo included), 667 MHz bus, and 2 GB of DDR2 RAM. Intel GMA 950 graphics: core speed 200 MHz.
Quirks: System will NOT post with more than 2 GB installed. Possible that varied speeds of RAM may work, but no testing done past on-hand DIMMS. BIOS CPU support officially goes as high as Core 2 Duo T5500, but T5600 DOES work (may report only as Core 2 CPU, but both cores function normally). Higher chips also may function (maximum would be C2D T7600/7600G). Best known working (tested) CPU: Core 2 Duo T5600 (1.83 GHz)

441695-001: Equipped with North Bridge chip i945GM. All the same support as i943GML with the addition of RAM support up to at least 4 GB of DDR2 RAM. Intel GMA 950 graphics: core speed 250 MHz.
Quirks: None found at the present time. CPU support again includes up to at least Core 2 Duo T5600. Again, higher may be possible.

After reassembling my system (have the whole thing from strip down to power on down to under an hour), I powered it up and began testing. She powered on flawlessly with 2 GB, 3 GB, and 4 GB (currently limited to 3 usable since I'm running Win7 32-bit). Anyone who has board 441695-001 SHOULD be able to do the same. The board is running BIOS F.26.

This represents the definitive information as far as I can tell. About the only thing I could do further would be to try and get up to a T7600 in it, and I don't have the will or money to go hunting just now.

All my system needs is an SSD and a supported internal wireless N card (stupid BIOS white list) and it'd be set for a few more years. Heh

Looks like you're golden, Qapmoc. Let us know how any upgrades you attempt turn out!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

PS Edit - Almost forgot for anyone who cares: My WEI ratings went from 4.7, 4.7, 3.3, 3.1, 5.3 to 4.7, 4.7, 3.6, 3.2, 5.3.

One final note,

After doing some digging to determine whether or not we might be able to push the envelope a bit further even, it seems that there is one snag.

Apparantly, due to limitations in the 945 chipset, a full 4 GB of RAM cannot be utilized even under a 64-bit OS. The system will only be able to make full use of 3.25 GB. This is disappointing, to be sure, but honestly... Considering that the 940 and 943 impose limitations of only 2 GB, the 945's limitation of 3.25 GB doesn't seem quite so bad (assuming it's correct, which I will determine once I can afford a copy of Windows 7 Pro 64-bit to install on my C500).

It is possible that the video RAM will be taken from the "unused" portion of the memory, but then again it may not. The maximum, then, that we can hope to achieve would be between 3 and 3.25 GB. Again, a major improvement over the 2 GB barrier of the other two boards. Still a good investment if you ask me.

As some corroboration of this information, I can point to my boss's Dell Precision M65, which is running a C2D T7600. This chip is also Socket M, and the system reports 3.25 GB of RAM (with a video card with dedicated RAM, not shared). His OS is Windows XP Professional x64, and the same OS successfully utilizes 12 GB of RAM in one of our workstations. Putting two and two together, my guess is that the M65 sports an i945GM as well and that the limitation is genuine.

On the upshot, though, that seems to indicate that the i945 will definitely support higher than a T5600. I will be testing that with my T7200 (which will become available again for me after next weekend). I'll edit this post (to keep from spamming the board too much) with a success or failure and then that'll be it unless other people pick up the conversation again.

Anyway, make of all that what you will, let it curtail your upgrades if you like. To me, this is just another piece of the C500 puzzle to be learned. Heheh

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

Edit - 9/23/11 - I can now confirm that board 441695-001 will support at least up to Core 2 Duo T7200 (2.0 GHz, 667 MHz bus, 4 MB L2). Odds are good it will support both the T7400 and T7600 as well (2.16 and 2.33 GHz, respectively). Odds are also good that board 445605-001 will ALSO support them, but would only be limited to 2 GB of RAM.

I can also, unfortunately, confirm the RAM issue. I am running the 64-bit Windows 8 Developer Preview on it on a spare drive and it reports "4.00 GB (2.99 GB useable)", which is 3.25 GB less 256 MB for video. The board does report a full 4096 MB in the BIOS, but there is an apparant limitation somewhere in the system. Still, overall, for my money that's worth it. 50% more RAM than either of the other two boards and more than adequate for use these days, even if it's edging into the lower end. A full 4 GB upgrade will provide you 256 more MB (roughly) than a straight 3 GB upgrade (2.99 GB usable from 4 GB vs. 2.75 GB usable from 3 GB).

I am still trying to nail down where BIOS f.26 comes from (no references on HP's website that I can see), but that's borderline irrelevant.

So there you have it boys and girls. All the information I can gather on these machines for the time being. Use it or ignore it as much as you choose. Post any upgrades or thoughts you may have, it's always interesting to see what others come up with.
Edited by OShadowFoxO - 9/23/11 at 6:07pm

OShadowFoxO,

 

First of all I want to thank you for these late night experiments. After reading what this 441695-001 board was really made of I immediately ordered the following new parts for my laptop :

- 2 sticks of 2 GB of RAM (Corsair DDR2-667 - PC5300) instead of 2x 512 MB

- a new hard drive (Samsung MP4 - 500 Go 7200t - 16 MB cache) instead of a 80 GB 5400t

 

I flashed the BIOS to the latest version available on the HP website (F.24) and installed these parts in my machine.

As you said, the BIOS reports 4096 MB. My current T2060 is based on a Yonah core that unfortunately doesn't support the Intel EM64T instruction set, so I installed the following 32-bit OSes :

- Windows Seven Pro SP1 (that I will use twice a year)

- Ubuntu 11.04

 

As expected, none of them can use the entire amount of RAM, they are limited to 3,25 GB minus video RAM = 3 GB. BUT there is a way to go past 3 GB while keeping a 32-bit OS : the PAE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension). It is supposed to handle up to 64 GB of RAM and to work out of the box on Ubuntu, but it didn't. So I manually installed the linux-generic-pae kernel, rebooted, and ... still 3 GB. Nothing else worked as well.
According to your last message and your trials with Windows 8 64-bit, it becomes clear that even if your OS features PAE or 64-bit ISA there is a hardware limitation in the i945GM series that prevents addressing the memory on more than 32 bits.
 

However, this is still a very, very cool upgrade : fast booting, no more swapping. The newer Linux kernel seems to bring a lot more power when executing JavaScript or Flash, actually a good managing of the hardware is much more efficient than a CPU switching ;) Still, I think I'll try a T7200 if I find a cheap one. Prices (incl. shipping) in here seem to be around €40 for a T7200, €60/70 for a T7400 and ... €100+ for a T7600, this is too much for such an old processor.

 

Best,
Qapmoc

P.S.: I forgot - my WEI ratings : 4.0, 4.6, 3.4, 3.1, 5.9

You good people have made this thread very interesting - I learned a lot from your posts in motherboard, BIOS, manufacturers craziness, pushing the envelop on notebook models - Thread stickied!



cheers ...

Hello Qapmoc and QHN.

First of all, thanks for the sticky QHN! Glad the information has been seen as useful and now people can find it easily.

And now down to business:
Excellent deal, Qapmoc. And while it is sort of disappointing not to get the full 4 GB, I'm glad I'm not the only one who has found the issue. It means I'm not doing something wrong! Heheh On THAT subject: the closest thing I have found to an explanation (and I'm paraphrasing big time here) is that the 945GM supports 64-bit CPUs and 64-bit functions but is still a 32-bit chipset at its core and its support for higher than 2 GB of RAM is accomplished by providing 2x certain functions. As it's not TRUELY 64-bit, it limits the actual amount of RAM that can be accessed to 3.25 GB. As I said, that's the only thing I could find and I'm not positive it's correct, so take it with a grain of salt. Still, it seems PLAUSIBLE at least, given the vintage of the chip involved.

As for CPU's: If you're just looking for 64-bit extensions and you're not concerned overtly about VT-x, you can find T5200, T5300, T5400, T5500, and T5600 (which does have VT-x) for about half the prices of T7x00 series chips. I can't recall, it's somewhere in the thread, but I think I paid about $50-60 for my T5600. For the record, the T5200 is basically a 64-bit, 2 MB L2 cache version of what you already have. T5300 is slightly faster. T5400 and higher step up to the 667 MHz bus speed. Many of those lower T5x00 series chips seem to be under $40 here.

You could also go for a Core Duo if you really wanted to upgrade. Still only 32-bit, but you'd get more L2 Cache and there are several that run on the 667 MHz bus with higher clocks than the T2060.

For the record: Currently, my T7200 runs a little hot for my taste. Some of it could just be "burn in" time for the Arctic Silver 5 and the temp will drop. However, if you're worried about temps at all, the T5600 and lower might be a better bet.

As for the chips: I find a lot of them listed on Amazon, believe it or not. I'm currently looking at a final upgrade for my DV9700 there once my next paycheck hits. All my other sites are American based and I'm not sure if they deal internationally or not. I can provide links to the one I got my T5600 from though if it's not against board policy. They don't seem to have any Socket M chips in stock at the moment though, so Amazon is probably a better bet. Just make sure you're buying from people with decent and large quantites of ratings and you should be good.

And finally: You (and everyone else who's benefitted) are quite welcome. I do all this for fun, because I want to know what I can do. I also enjoy taking older hardware and making it live as long as I can. The C500 has proven to be a tank and solid machine for me, from its 512 MB Celeron M430 beginning to its current form, and I felt I owed it the chance to live as long as it can. Heh

And this all reminds me, I need to update my sig!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O
Edited by OShadowFoxO - 9/24/11 at 11:01am

I tried to summarize what we know on the different C500 boards in a table. I think it will be more convenient to read for other people that want to upgrade this nice machine.

Don't hesitate to tell me if there are mistakes.

 

Motherboard ID	441696-001	445605-001	441695-001
Northbridge	i940GML	i943GML	i945GM
GPU clock	166 MHz	200 MHz	250 MHz
Supported FSB	533 MHz	533 MHz 667 MHz	533 MHz 667 MHz
RAM type supported	DDR2-533 (PC 4200)	DDR2-533 (PC 4200) DDR2-667 (PC 5300)	DDR2-533 (PC 4200) DDR2-667 (PC 5300)
Max. RAM supported (specs)	2 GB (2x1 or 1x2)	2 GB (2x1 or 1x2)	4 GB (2x2)
Max. RAM available in OS (tested)	2 GB	2 GB	3.25 GB
Compliant CPUs (specs)	Yonah : Celeron M4xx Core Solo	Yonah : Celeron M4xx Pentium Dual-Core (socket M) Core Solo/Duo   Merom : Celeron M5xx (socket M) Core 2 Duo (socket M)	Yonah : Celeron M4xx Pentium Dual-Core (socket M) Core Solo/Duo   Merom : Celeron M5xx (socket M) Core 2 Duo (socket M)
Best known working CPU (tested)	Core Solo T1350	Core 2 Duo T7600	Core 2 Duo T7200 (likely T7600)

 

 

[EDIT] Updated with O Shadow Fox O & Matty75 observations. Thanks !

 

Edited by qapmoc - 9/24/11 at 12:43pm

Hi Qapmoc,

That's a gorgeous table. There are some minor issues though.

441696-001 likely will not support Celeron M 5xx series chips. Those are Merom based CPUs and are 64-bit. Celeron M 4xx series chips (Yonah-based) work, however. On a related note, you may want to edit it to include Celeron M 5xx series chips under the Merom headings.

Also, just occured to me: You might want to include a "Supported FSB" line... 441696-001: 533 MHz only. 445605-001, 441695-001: 533 AND 667 MHz.

Other than that it looks beautiful and is far more concise and clear than my blathering paragraphs. Heheh

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

PS - I want to take a moment here to point out to anyone reading that this is a good point on BIOS files and CPU support: Just because the BIOS installed adds support for a CPU does NOT mean that your system will support it. Board 441696 is a PERFECT example of this: Same BIOS as the other boards, with official support for C2D T5500, but it WILL NOT run a dual-core CPU AT ALL based on mine and other people's experiences in this board and elsewhere. Just a note there on something I've noted but not said yet!

PPS - I would also like to note from my digging around that these three boards will ALSO apparantly work in three other HP/Compaq models, bringing the total to four compatible machines. These are:
Compaq Presario C300, Compaq Presario C500, HP G3000, and HP G5000 (NOT Pavilion, at least not that I saw in the lists I've seen).
Some of those models MAY be International models (Europe, Russia, Asia, etc), some may be North American.
This, of course, means that in theory ALL the information contained in this thread can be applied to FOUR models of laptop and not just the C500 alone.
Edited by OShadowFoxO - 9/24/11 at 11:43am

Hi Qapmoc,

 

I can confirm that  Mobo 445605-001 works fine with a  Core 2 Duo T7600 after a bios update.

Regards,

 

Matty75

 Mobo 445605-001

Regards,

 

Matty75

Hi Matty75,

That's excellent information. And the fact that it's tested on 445605-001 means it should work with 441695-001 just fine as well.

Thanks for the additional information, and enjoy your upgrade!

Oh, and in the interest of being thoroughly active and posting today: I spent hours combing over HP's FTP site last night and this morning. I CANNOT find ANY reference at all to an official BIOS F.26 release for these systems at all (the BIOS installed in my system is apparantly F.26). The highest I see is BIOS F.25, which is SP37633 for anyone who may need something to search for.

As always and ever, please use caution when flashing your BIOS. If for some reason it is not the correct one, you could potentially permanently ruin your motherboard. HP does provide for some methods on SOME models of recovering from a bad burn, but this is not a guarantee. Wherever possible, please use the highest possible update for YOUR SYSTEM (unless, of course, you're like me and have a system made of SEVERAL systems, heheh).

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

 

 

Yup I was unsure about this Celeron stuff. Now it should be OK. Thanks.
 

I also noticed that. C300 is the same model with slightly different specs (it seems to have been marketted earlier). HP G3000 and G5000 are the same laptops with a HP sticker on them ! It would be useful for the owners of these laptops to get access to these informations, however I doubt that it is possible to change the name of this topic.

 

Thank you Matty75, you should have the fastest C500 ever

 

 

 

 

Hi Qapmoc,

Last observation, and I apologize for not noting this earlier:

There ARE Socket P Celeron M 5xx series chips. You might want to add a note on the Celeron M 5xx series noting that only Socket M versions will work in these systems.

Otherwise, again, great table! Maybe, if QHN agrees, we can figure out some way to get the relevant information posted prominently. But, until any such change is made, the Sticky status will work nicely.

I also posted in a relatively recently updated C300 thread noting the similarities and telling people who may find that thread to come check this one out for any info they may need. Maybe we can spread the word and all these affected models can see more life!

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

Edit - BAM you are fast! heheh That's an awesome collection of information. Poking around the site some more and I wish there was a repository of info like this for the DV9700 (DV9000 series, and DV6000 I BELIEVE as well). I have already maxed mine with the exception of the processor and have some information on it. Unfortunately I don't have the money to test it all out like I did with the C500 because there are literally a dozen or more boards overall that would work in it. Heheheh Another topic for another thread some time, though. Thanks again for the table!

Mano, why don't manufacturers come up with the same simple yet informative table like above?

cheers ...

QHN,

Probably because it would allow adventurous people to upgrade their old hardware rather than spending more money on a new machine and the lucrative extended warranty that goes with them. Why tell people, either in the initial literature or in updates, that their old hardware will perform with better hardware for x (low) amount when you can tell them they NEED new hardware for the better functions for y (high) amount? Heheh

I was under the impression that my DV9700 would only work with up to 4 GB of RAM (everywhere said 4 GB was the max), but I decided to take a chance and now I'm running 8 GB without a fuss. Saved me from needing to upgrade as otherwise the DV9700 is more than enough for me. The only thing I have left to do is upgrade my T7250 (Merom) to a T9300 (Penryn). That will be another test. Maybe I'll start a DV9700 upgrade thread! Heheh

Regards,
O Shadow Fox O

Very true about bleeding consumers there Looking forward to see your tweaks on the DV9700

cheers ...

Hi all,

 

I'm really happy with my new setup, it runs smoothly. I have a question: is there a way to get a FireWire port on a C500, given that it has no PCMCIA card slot ?

 

Best,

qapmoc

Would this work?

http://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-USB-FireWire-Adapter-TC-NT2/dp/B000NZI48W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317067783&sr=8-1

cheers ...