Pentium D 630 is at around 50 deg C and very slow processing PC

[Sukumar Madhab]

I have an old set up (XP-SP3, assembled on early 2006) with Pentium D series 630 processor, Intel D101GGC board, Corsair 1GB Ram. I am maintaining the internals very clean (out from dust) with medium airflow (two front intake, one side intake, two rear exhaust) 80 mm fans. My PSU +12V rail is of 19 Amps. Initially the system was very good and responsive with number of applications loaded but now a days the system is very slow, I have uninstalled a lot of programs though. Speed fan (v 4.4) showing temperature of CPU is within 50 deg in moderate load. Paying music also increasing CPU load to 60-70%, music getting slow and loosing notes & beats, similar for movies, videos etc. (like losing frame rates). Could anybody please suggest anything if it is due to any hardware issue.

 

[Sensei Gamer]

Have you changed thermal pastes since you got the computer? Thermal pastes won't last forever and will require a change at least once in 2 years. What is the CPU cooler? If you have a stock Intel cooler then you could change the cooler to a new one.

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

I have changed very recently the paste. The CPU cooler is the stock one which came along with the processor. It is quite bigger & heavier than the latest Haswell processor (4th Generation Pentium G3240) stock cooler, I have cleaned the cooler also (all the fins) very well. In earlier days also the temperature profile remained in this region. I have ordered Arctic Silver @5 paste, after getting the same I will apply and observe for any improvement. Yesterday I have tested the CPU with the stress test (CPU-Z), during the test with 100% processor loading the temperature of the processor was below 47 deg C for all the time but stock cooler fan RPM was at full speed (observed by speed fan).

 

[GhislainG]

Have you changed thermal pastes since you got the computer? Thermal pastes won't last forever and will require a change at least once in 2 years. What is the CPU cooler? If you have a stock Intel cooler then you could change the cooler to a new one.

That doesn't make sense; there are tens of millions of old corporate PCs and servers that never had their thermal paste replaced and they still run fine. I replace it only if I upgrade the CPU or the cooler; I've never done it as normal maintenance.

 

[GhislainG]

I have an old set up (XP-SP3, assembled on early 2006) with Pentium D series 630 processor, Intel D101GGC board, Corsair 1GB Ram. I am maintaining the internals very clean (out from dust) with medium airflow (two front intake, one side intake, two rear exhaust) 80 mm fans. My PSU +12V rail is of 19 Amps. Initially the system was very good and responsive with number of applications loaded but now a days the system is very slow, I have uninstalled a lot of programs though. Speed fan (v 4.4) showing temperature of CPU is within 50 deg in moderate load. Paying music also increasing CPU load to 60-70%, music getting slow and loosing notes & beats, similar for movies, videos etc. (like losing frame rates). Could anybody please suggest anything if it is due to any hardware issue.

There's nothing abnormal with the temperature of your CPU. Is it really slower at running the exact same benchmark you ran back in 2006? Probably not, but now you have access to systems that are so much faster. Are you still using programs from 2006 or did you upgrade to versions that include more features and require a more powerful system?

 

[Sensei Gamer]

Have you changed thermal pastes since you got the computer? Thermal pastes won't last forever and will require a change at least once in 2 years. What is the CPU cooler? If you have a stock Intel cooler then you could change the cooler to a new one.

That doesn't make sense; there are tens of millions of old corporate PCs and servers that never had their thermal paste replaced and they still run fine. I replace it only if I upgrade the CPU or the cooler; I've never done it as normal maintenance.

I know I had a pentium 4 PC and I haven't changed the Thermal paste till now. It still remained at optimal temperatures. But one of my other old PC's using the AMD Athlon needed changing thermal paste because of it's temps getting worse. I just wanted to make sure that the thermal paste isn't the issue, If it isn't the issue, then maybe the cooler is the issue. Stock coolers are very basic and will certainly be hotter than aftermarket coolers. The other thing that I might suggest to you is Clean install the OS

 

[GhislainG]

That CPU always ran somewhat hot; the OP probably didn't check how hot it ran back in 2006. Being a single core processor, it can't be expected to be fast and efficient when multi-tasking. We get used to faster PCs; my old E8400 was fast when I built it, but it now feels sluggish because I have newer and faster systems.

 

[bambiboom]

I have an old set up (XP-SP3, assembled on early 2006) with Pentium D series 630 processor, Intel D101GGC board, Corsair 1GB Ram. I am maintaining the internals very clean (out from dust) with medium airflow (two front intake, one side intake, two rear exhaust) 80 mm fans. My PSU +12V rail is of 19 Amps. Initially the system was very good and responsive with number of applications loaded but now a days the system is very slow, I have uninstalled a lot of programs though. Speed fan (v 4.4) showing temperature of CPU is within 50 deg in moderate load. Paying music also increasing CPU load to 60-70%, music getting slow and loosing notes & beats, similar for movies, videos etc. (like losing frame rates). Could anybody please suggest anything if it is due to any hardware issue.

Sukumar Madhab

As others have mentioned, the 50C is not an extremely high temperature, but the processing power of the Pentium D 630 would not be brilliant by current standards- but it was modern- I think the first multiple core processor. The Pentium D is actually a pair of Pentium 4's on one chip.

However, it can be a bit better as the Intel D101GGC motherboard can use a Pentium D 950 which is 2 cores at 3.4GHz. There was no Pentium D 630 so it's possible this is either a Pentium 4 630 3GHz which is the first 64-bit, and hyperthreading Pentium or a Pentium D 830- 2 cores at 3GHz.

If it's P4 630, these are still useful. I have still a Pentium 4 630 system, a 2004 Dell Dimension 8400 and I find it still quite useful, using 4GB RAM and a Quadro FX580 (512MB) running Window 7 Professional 64-bit with AutoCad 2007, Adobe CS3, and Office 2003, and certainly streaming movies and YouTube properly.

If it's a Pentium D 830, there is one system on Passmark with that CPU and the Intel D101GGC motherboard:

Rating = 274 / CPU=650 / 2D = 229 (Radeon X1550) / 3D = 41 / Mem = 322 (1GB) / Disk = 360 (Seagate ST340014A)

Graphics perormance in this example is very poor.

You might update the BIOS (important), reload the OS and the minimum programmes, add the maximum RAM, and set the power options to "performance" to see if it improves enough for your uses. You didn't mention a graphics card and it essential to have something of a reasonable performance.

Or, you might spend $10 and try the Pentium D 950. On Passmark the top CPU score on the Intel D101GGC board is 827 (2GB RAM / Radeon HD 5450 / WDC800JD). On that CPU / M/B combination the top 2D score = 298 (GeForce 8400GS and the top 3D = 703 (Radeon HD 3870), top Memory = 377 (2GB), and top Disk = 766 (OCZ Vertex 3).

So, the situation can be improved and I think with the Pentium D 950, updated BIOS, the full 2Gb of RAM, a better graphics card, and a faster disk may make a noticeable difference. I've been given older systems and I find they can be quite responsive to upgrades. It would have been fortunate if the the motherboard could accommodate the Core 2 as those are dramatically better.

After a point, it is better- more cost effective- to change the system and there are thousands of Dell Optiplexes- Optiplexi? such as the 780 and 960- with E8400's and very good Core2 Duos and Quads at a modest cost.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

HP z420 (2015) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 six-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz > 32GB DDR3 ECC 1866 RAM > Quadro K4200 (4GB) > Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) > Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> Logitech z2300 > Linksys AE3000 USB WiFi > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440) > Windows 7 Professional 64 >
[ Passmark Rating = 5064 > CPU= 13989 / 2D= 819 / 3D= 4596 / Mem= 2772 / Disk= 4555] [Cinebench R15 > CPU = 1014 OpenGL= 126.59 FPS] 7.8.15

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

Yes, I have already ordered another 1GB PC3200 to increase the RAM to 2 GB. Afterwards I am planning to clean install OS and will check for the system fastness. As I am preparing another new gaming PC with latest hardwires, would not invest much in the old system. The old said system will be used for my Child's educational purpose. So is there any other checks for improving the performance.

 

[digitaldoc]

The Pentium D's were the first dual core CPU's. They were hampered as the two cores could not communicate directly- an innovation that the Athlon X2 processor introduced. I used one for years, and with the higher clock speed, it was quite responsive.

http://www.intel.com/support/motherboards/desktop/d101ggc/sb/CS-025906.htm

The Pentium 630 is a single core CPU, and was designated as Pentium 4. If you could find a Pentium D for cheap, it would be an interesting upgrade and get some more performance.

I would suggest at a minimum to reload the OS and do a clean install. That should help the performance quite a bit.

 

[RobCrezz]

Nothing to add except that the Pentium D was a crap CPU. The Core and Core 2 CPUs that replaced it were a LOT better.

 

[digitaldoc]

All relative. At the time, the Pentium D was a big move up from those Pentium 4's. No argument that the C2D was a better chip, but folks are changing them out for more current architectures. I have an old C2D on an older notebook (Pentium T2410), and the thing runs too hot, and quite slowly these days.

 

[bambiboom]

Yes, I have already ordered another 1GB PC3200 to increase the RAM to 2 GB. Afterwards I am planning to clean install OS and will check for the system fastness. As I am preparing another new gaming PC with latest hardwires, would not invest much in the old system. The old said system will be used for my Child's educational purpose. So is there any other checks for improving the performance.

Sukumar Madhab,

Yes, the 2Gb RAM will help. Also:

1. Update theBIOS. This is a small .EXE programme that you may download at:
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/11738/BIOS-Update-GC11010N-86A-
Then, you install it as any programme.

2. As mentioned, reinstall the operating system. I don't know what the operating system may be- Windows XP or ?, but whatever OS, make sure that the OS is updated - the SP1 (service packs) before installing programmes. After reinstalling the operating system, run the Defragmentation before installing programmes.

3. I've forgotten the XP Power Options, but check Control Panel > Power options and see if there is a setting called "Performance". This will run the processor at full speed all the time.

4. Also update the graphics driver for whatever graphics card you have.

5. Regularly, run the "Defragmentation" to keep the files in one piece

6. Run regularly the Disk Cleanup utility and get rid of unwanted files. Right click on Drive C: > click on " Properties" and click on "Disk Cleanup" and OK to remove useless files.

7. Make sure that the Hard Drive has more than 15% of the capacity free. Right click on Drive C: > click on " Properties" and you will see a pie chard of the amount used and the amount free.

These procedures and changes have no cost and may add up to a noticeable improvement.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[RobCrezz]

All relative. At the time, the Pentium D was a big move up from those Pentium 4's. No argument that the C2D was a better chip, but folks are changing them out for more current architectures. I have an old C2D on an older notebook (Pentium T2410), and the thing runs too hot, and quite slowly these days.

True, I just remember trying these and the Core 2 duos being a much more significant improvement when released due to using a much improved architecture, rather than the old Netburst of the P4 and P D, which was a low point for Intel IMO.

 

[bambiboom]

Nothing to add except that the Pentium D was a crap CPU. The Core and Core 2 CPUs that replaced it were a LOT better.

True, I just remember trying these and the Core 2 duos being a much more significant improvement when released due to using a much improved architecture, rather than the old Netburst of the P4 and P D, which was a low point for Intel IMO.

RobCrezz,

It's easy to disparage the Intel Pentium D as "crap" today, but it was a necessary transition to multiple core CPU's- a complicated business. It was also effective. On Passmark , there are 10,620 Pentium systems tested and the highest CPU rating, which is a weighted score reflective of cycles per second, the highest Pentium 4 score (3.2GHz) is 494 while a Pentium D 950 (3.4GHz) scores 714. It's not double a P4, but nearly and that's significant.

The idea of parallel computing from that time opened an incredible era of advances and today's supercomputers use thousand of GPU's with millions of CUDA cores in general based on that idea.

My first computer was an Apple II running at 1.038MHz (and the system with all theadd-in 640K memory, drives and monitor cost $8,600), then an IBM 486 at 50Mhz ($2,800), then PIII at 750Mhz ($2,400), then P4 at 3Ghz ($1,800). At the time, each new system was miraculous - and cheaper- and the previous one - seemed like- well, not as interesting,..

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 

[digitaldoc]

All relative. At the time, the Pentium D was a big move up from those Pentium 4's. No argument that the C2D was a better chip, but folks are changing them out for more current architectures. I have an old C2D on an older notebook (Pentium T2410), and the thing runs too hot, and quite slowly these days.

True, I just remember trying these and the Core 2 duos being a much more significant improvement when released due to using a much improved architecture, rather than the old Netburst of the P4 and P D, which was a low point for Intel IMO.

I remember the P4, and what a waste of silicon, and agree it was their low point. It helped folks to look at AMD's Athlon 64 chips, and see the competition. Pentium D turned things around IMHO, and the idea of a dual core chip at the time was quite progress forward.

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

I have also ordered one Pentium D945 (3.4GHz). Could I install Windows 7 home premium/professional 32 bit or 64 bit system with this new hardware updates? Or the old XP SP2 will be better for playing AOE(Ages of Empires 1 & 2), ZEUS strategic games.

 

[digitaldoc]

The system should be able to run Win 7. For 2 GB of RAM, 32 bit is fine, for 4 GB, then you should go to a 64 bit OS.

Win 7 is also more secure as it still gets updates.

 

[RobCrezz]

All relative. At the time, the Pentium D was a big move up from those Pentium 4's. No argument that the C2D was a better chip, but folks are changing them out for more current architectures. I have an old C2D on an older notebook (Pentium T2410), and the thing runs too hot, and quite slowly these days.

True, I just remember trying these and the Core 2 duos being a much more significant improvement when released due to using a much improved architecture, rather than the old Netburst of the P4 and P D, which was a low point for Intel IMO.

I remember the P4, and what a waste of silicon, and agree it was their low point. It helped folks to look at AMD's Athlon 64 chips, and see the competition. Pentium D turned things around IMHO, and the idea of a dual core chip at the time was quite progress forward.

I think the Athlon 64 x2 came out the same year and that was significantly better. The pentium D still had to use the external FSB for the cores to communicate whereas AMD put it on the chip.

The pentium D did get there first, but I still don't rate it as game changing.

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

Ok, thanks for the help. I have already installed the 2nd RAM of 1 GB, now the full 2 GB RAM is loaded. Also the internal cables again readjusted for better cooling. Now I am waiting for the processor Pentium D945. Once I receive it I will install it using the Silver Arctic@5 thermal paste (already I bought) with little bit modification of the processor heat sink (I will join two heat sinks using the thermal paste, nut & screws and over that I will install the stock cooler fan). Hope the affective heat radiation will be more with this arrangement and will get a lesser temperature.

 

[GhislainG]

Please explain how you can join 2 heat sinks; you certainly can't stack them and install a fan on the top one as that would be grossly ineffective.

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

Actually this modification came in my mind today only, so it is in probable implementation stage. Actually I have purchased another 1150 socket processor for creating one mid range gaming rig and for that I have already purchased Cooler Master TX3 cooler, so the stock heat sink is extra to me now and it has the same dimension with my old processor's (Pentium 630) heat sink.
Firstly I have to join two heat sinks thermally by putting the thermal paste in between them, then a suitable nut-screw arrangement will be done to hold both heat sinks (as a single unit). The stock fan After assembling the joined heat sink will be fitted on the CPU with thermal paste.

 

[GhislainG]

A drawing is required because I just can't visualize what you're trying to do. If you mean that you'll install the socket 775 cooler without a fan on the CPU, then install the socket 1150 cooler with the included fan on top of the socket 775 cooler, then I can tell you that it won't work because the socket 775 cooler won't receive enough air to cool it properly and heat transfer between the top and bottom coolers will be minimal.

 

[Sukumar Madhab]

What you understood is almost matching with mine, only small change is that I will install the old stock fan (high power, 0.42 Amp against the new 1150 cooler fan of 0.28 Amp). Also what you told regarding the sufficient air flow to the lower heat sink that also to be checked. If it creates the issue then one high pr. fan to be installed, but the same to be checked for the actual possibility.

 

[GhislainG]

If it worked, it would have been used by overclock a long time ago. Give it a try and let us know...