Motherboard replaced - now goes slower

markr · 2003-08-14, 00:22

I'm hoping one of the knowledgable people out there can suggest what might be happening here... My work computer died :( , the tech replaced the motherboard :) , and all seems well, except that cpu/memory-intensive stuff is twice as slow as before! For example, a spreadsheet that takes 30s to recalculate on an identical machine (and I'm sure used to on mine too) now takes 80s. :( :(

It's an IBM netvista, and it passed an hour+ of stress testing after the repair. Benchmarks now:
[code:1]Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.80GHz
CPU speed: 1794.24 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 8 KB
L2 cache size: 256 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 128 bytes
TLBS: 64
Prime95 version 23.6, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 384K FFT length: 41.849 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 56.659 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 63.584 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 76.179 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 93.465 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 113.062 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 125.346 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 168.452 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 205.384 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 249.792 ms.
Best time for 2048K FFT length: 279.894 ms.[/code:1]
I used to get:
[code:1]Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.80GHz
CPU speed: 1794.30 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 8 KB
L2 cache size: 256 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 128 bytes
TLBS: 64
Prime95 version 23.4, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 384K FFT length: 24.255 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 28.092 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 32.181 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 39.632 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 47.920 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 57.755 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 64.241 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 85.308 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 106.709 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 129.283 ms.
Best time for 2048K FFT length: 147.354 ms.[/code:1]
So the benchmarks are about double what they were. Even worse, the iteration times it actually manages are about 3x the old benchmarks! Right now it's getting about 0.1s double-checking M9302717. :(

Apologies for the long post, but this is baffling. Ideas please?

apocalypse · 2003-08-14, 00:34

Well, without any further information, I'd guess the old motherboard supported DDR (Double Data Rate) RAM, and the current one does not.

markr · 2003-08-14, 01:20

Thanks, apocalypse, but I'm pretty sure the only hardware changed was the board. I even swapped ram (single 256Mb stick) & video card with an adjacent machine without effect. The other pc stayed normal, mine stayed slow. Yeah, I know, I was clutching at straws with the video card, but I'm stumped. I can put a pc together, but I'm no hardware guru.

trif · 2003-08-14, 01:43

Did someone turn the cache off in the BIOS or something?

I don't know if they have any real BIOS options, but I'd go over the BIOS settings with a fine toothed comb.

markr · 2003-08-14, 02:00

Good idea, trif. Unfortunately these have almost no settings accessible in the bios setup - nothing for the inquisitive user to break, I guess. The "advanced" menu has just four options: PCI parity, plug & play OS, legacy free, legacy fan control. I can't find *anything* for memory or cpu. Unless there's something hidden somehow...

I'm wondering if the tech damaged the cpu or something else when he reinstalled it?

outlnder · 2003-08-14, 02:01

What was the old motherboard and what chipset does it have??

The Netvista looks like it has onboard video, make sure this is turned OFF.

Also, as Trif said, see if you can tweak the Bios settings a little.

If you don't know much about them, state what can be changed and we will try and give some advice.

markr · 2003-08-14, 02:16

These seem to not have onboard video - at least, no video socket in the on-board group of sockets. The bios setup has an option for pci or agp, and one for aperture size.

Device manager mentions Intel 845 chipset.

sdbardwick · 2003-08-14, 03:33

From left field...did the CPU cooling fan die (or get damaged) or not get plugged back in after the motherboard swap?

(I can't throw stones...lost an old slot 1 celeron that way :( )

markr · 2003-08-14, 03:59

Thanks for all the responses, folks! Naturally I have placed a call with our helpdesk, but your collective response is far quicker!

I just checked - the cpu fan is spinning. (These computers are designed for easy opening & fast replacement of parts!) But you've started me thinking - what if the tech didn't reinstall the heatsink properly? At least it seems the cpu is still working at its proper speed.

Xyzzy · 2003-08-14, 04:06

http://www.teamprimerib.com/exe/wcpu30f.exe

If you look in one of the menus it has a realtime frequency counter... Maybe this will help?

trif · 2003-08-14, 10:57

Yeah, you definitely could be getting throttling if the chip is overheating.

2003-08-14, 00:22	#1
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 3×191 Posts	Motherboard replaced - now goes slower I'm hoping one of the knowledgable people out there can suggest what might be happening here... My work computer died :( , the tech replaced the motherboard :) , and all seems well, except that cpu/memory-intensive stuff is twice as slow as before! For example, a spreadsheet that takes 30s to recalculate on an identical machine (and I'm sure used to on mine too) now takes 80s. :( :( It's an IBM netvista, and it passed an hour+ of stress testing after the repair. Benchmarks now: [code:1]Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.80GHz CPU speed: 1794.24 MHz CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2 L1 cache size: 8 KB L2 cache size: 256 KB L1 cache line size: 64 bytes L2 cache line size: 128 bytes TLBS: 64 Prime95 version 23.6, RdtscTiming=1 Best time for 384K FFT length: 41.849 ms. Best time for 448K FFT length: 56.659 ms. Best time for 512K FFT length: 63.584 ms. Best time for 640K FFT length: 76.179 ms. Best time for 768K FFT length: 93.465 ms. Best time for 896K FFT length: 113.062 ms. Best time for 1024K FFT length: 125.346 ms. Best time for 1280K FFT length: 168.452 ms. Best time for 1536K FFT length: 205.384 ms. Best time for 1792K FFT length: 249.792 ms. Best time for 2048K FFT length: 279.894 ms.[/code:1] I used to get: [code:1]Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.80GHz CPU speed: 1794.30 MHz CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2 L1 cache size: 8 KB L2 cache size: 256 KB L1 cache line size: 64 bytes L2 cache line size: 128 bytes TLBS: 64 Prime95 version 23.4, RdtscTiming=1 Best time for 384K FFT length: 24.255 ms. Best time for 448K FFT length: 28.092 ms. Best time for 512K FFT length: 32.181 ms. Best time for 640K FFT length: 39.632 ms. Best time for 768K FFT length: 47.920 ms. Best time for 896K FFT length: 57.755 ms. Best time for 1024K FFT length: 64.241 ms. Best time for 1280K FFT length: 85.308 ms. Best time for 1536K FFT length: 106.709 ms. Best time for 1792K FFT length: 129.283 ms. Best time for 2048K FFT length: 147.354 ms.[/code:1] So the benchmarks are about double what they were. Even worse, the iteration times it actually manages are about 3x the old benchmarks! Right now it's getting about 0.1s double-checking M9302717. :( Apologies for the long post, but this is baffling. Ideas please?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Polynomials with constant terms replaced defining the same field	carpetpool	Miscellaneous Math	2	2017-02-25 00:50
GPU placement on motherboard	TheMawn	GPU Computing	7	2013-08-17 04:43
Motherboard for AMD FX8350	fivemack	Hardware	5	2012-10-23 20:56
Help choosing motherboard please.	Flatlander	GPU Computing	4	2011-01-26 08:15
Is version 25 a lot slower?	Jud McCranie	Information & Answers	3	2008-11-12 15:21

2003-08-14, 00:34	#2
apocalypse Feb 2003 2×3×29 Posts	Well, without any further information, I'd guess the old motherboard supported DDR (Double Data Rate) RAM, and the current one does not.

2003-08-14, 01:20	#3
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 23D₁₆ Posts	Thanks, apocalypse, but I'm pretty sure the only hardware changed was the board. I even swapped ram (single 256Mb stick) & video card with an adjacent machine without effect. The other pc stayed normal, mine stayed slow. Yeah, I know, I was clutching at straws with the video card, but I'm stumped. I can put a pc together, but I'm no hardware guru.

2003-08-14, 01:43	#4
trif Aug 2002 2·101 Posts	Did someone turn the cache off in the BIOS or something? I don't know if they have any real BIOS options, but I'd go over the BIOS settings with a fine toothed comb.

2003-08-14, 02:00	#5
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 3·191 Posts	Good idea, trif. Unfortunately these have almost no settings accessible in the bios setup - nothing for the inquisitive user to break, I guess. The "advanced" menu has just four options: PCI parity, plug & play OS, legacy free, legacy fan control. I can't find anything for memory or cpu. Unless there's something hidden somehow... I'm wondering if the tech damaged the cpu or something else when he reinstalled it?

2003-08-14, 02:01	#6
outlnder Aug 2002 2·3·53 Posts	What was the old motherboard and what chipset does it have?? The Netvista looks like it has onboard video, make sure this is turned OFF. Also, as Trif said, see if you can tweak the Bios settings a little. If you don't know much about them, state what can be changed and we will try and give some advice.

2003-08-14, 02:16	#7
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 3·191 Posts	These seem to not have onboard video - at least, no video socket in the on-board group of sockets. The bios setup has an option for pci or agp, and one for aperture size. Device manager mentions Intel 845 chipset.

2003-08-14, 03:33	#8
sdbardwick Aug 2002 North San Diego County 2²×3×67 Posts	From left field...did the CPU cooling fan die (or get damaged) or not get plugged back in after the motherboard swap? (I can't throw stones...lost an old slot 1 celeron that way :( )

2003-08-14, 03:59	#9
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 3×191 Posts	Thanks for all the responses, folks! Naturally I have placed a call with our helpdesk, but your collective response is far quicker! I just checked - the cpu fan is spinning. (These computers are designed for easy opening & fast replacement of parts!) But you've started me thinking - what if the tech didn't reinstall the heatsink properly? At least it seems the cpu is still working at its proper speed.

2003-08-14, 04:06	#10
Xyzzy Aug 2002 5·29·59 Posts	http://www.teamprimerib.com/exe/wcpu30f.exe If you look in one of the menus it has a realtime frequency counter... Maybe this will help?

2003-08-14, 10:57	#11
trif Aug 2002 2×101 Posts	Yeah, you definitely could be getting throttling if the chip is overheating.