AMD 4200+ Dual core on Foxconn Motherboard - no SMP.

toddgarza · Post by **toddgarza** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 5:46 am

A bit off topic, but I thought I would throw it out:

AMD 4200 Dual Core running on a Foxconn NF4K8MC-ERS
motherboard.

I've tried both Windows XP (32) and Windows XP 64 and when the install completes, it doesn't look like the OS is recognizing the second processor. There is only one processor listed in "Hardware | Device Manager", Task Manager only shows one Cpu Usage History window in the Performance task and there's no option to set the affinity. The Foxconn website (though a bit thin on details) indicates support for dual core processors. I've downloaded and flashed the latest bios.

Any ideas?

toddgarza · Post by **toddgarza** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:14 am

Sorry, let me clarify - Windows XP doesn't seem to be recognizing the second CORE as a separate processor. I'm assuming it should, right?

addyngan · Post by **addyngan** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 6:21 am

Download the driver from here:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Tec ... 18,00.html

Hope you love your dual core

toddgarza · Post by **toddgarza** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:26 am

Download the driver from here:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Tec ... 18,00.html

Hope you love your dual core

Thanks

I downloaded the driver and installed it. Still no luck. Anything else required besides running the setup.exe and restarting the box? I checked "Control Panel | Add/Remove Programs" and it indicates that the AMD 64 driver is installed.

I noticed your tagline indicates you're running the AMD Athlon64 x2 4400+. Are you seeing two cpu's in your Task Manager? Does installing the Athlon 64 Processor driver cause Windows XP 64 to recognize the core as a second cpu?

addyngan · Post by **addyngan** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:05 am

Yes installing the driver gave me the second processor shown in the task manager. But i am running XP Pro, not the 64-bit version.

hvengel · Post by **hvengel** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 11:22 am

Are you sure that your BIOS supports dual core? I know that on my mother board I would have to upgrade my BIOS to get this to work.

toddgarza · Post by **toddgarza** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 12:27 pm

Thanks for all the help.

Are you sure that your BIOS supports dual core? I know that on my mother board I would have to upgrade my BIOS to get this to work.

Yes I talked to a tech on friday at Foxconn and he indicated that it was supported with the new bios (Didn't run into this problem until late last night). I updated the bios yesterday and it does recognize the CPU as a Dual Core processor.

There is a bios setting in the setup for "MPS Version" I have it set to version 1.4. Is this for SMP?

Yes installing the driver gave me the second processor shown in the task manager. But i am running XP Pro, not the 64-bit version.

Yes I've tried both XP Pro (32) and Xp Pro 64. The driver I installed is "AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual Core Processor Driver for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 Version (exe) 1.2.2.2" for XP Pro (32). I also tried the 64 bit driver in Xp Pro 64.

What is strange is that the processor driver signature under Device Manager has a date of 10/26/04 and a version number of 1.2.2.0. That date has me worried. The version description above indicates 1.2.2.2. The readme file has a version number of 1.2.2.0 but with a date of 3/9/05.

I'll call Foxconn on Monday.

toddgarza · Post by **toddgarza** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 7:15 pm

One more update: I switched back to Windows XP Pro (32) from the 64 bit version. (I restored the drive via Drive Image). I forgot to check the "Computer" node in the Device Manager devices tree. The computer indicates it's an "Acpi Multiprocessor PC" so I guess it is running the multiprocessor HAL. What's confusing is that there's no indication of multiple CPU's in the system.

On my Dual MP 1900+ system there are two processors listed in the device manager and Task Manager allows me to set the CPU affinity for a process in the process list. On the new system these features don't show up. Addyngan, can you are someone else verify if they have this functionality? This still doesn't feel like a dual core build.

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:43 pm

Safety Pup tip of the day:

windows 64 is nearest to pile of poop out there. Id take alpha 95 over it.

that worked better for me actually.

cant wait for Vista.. woo.... zzzz....