I am in the process of building mine. I have all the hardware, tools, and bondo (I think) I would need. I just have to sit myself down and make the proper mounts for my Mazda3 and the screen. In case you are wondering in terms of hardware I plan on using a Core 2 Duo and under-clocking it to about 1.5 ghz, using a micro-aTX Asus board and custom mounting it in the glove-box. I just wish I had 1/2 the skills of turboCad on creating mounts :)
Originally Posted by RedGTiVR6
Strohj: Sorry, that was kinda an assumption.
Durwood: Interesting concept. The socket adapters remind me of the days when you ZIFF sockets were rare, and you needed an adapter to shove a better chip on your 4x86 system. Anyay, I would look at what your options are. I am not sure if your current motherboard would support the mobile P4 and you would have to do a little bit of research on that part (sometimes the socket adapter company will tell you what supports it's adapter). If it does, it may help in terms of power and consumption, but I really hate the P4 line of processors. I would strongly recommend getting the mobile Core processors and a motherboard that supports it (there are actual motherboards that follow the regular aTX standard and use the mobile Core 2 chips). But this upgrade would cost a big chunk of change I don't know if you have it or not.
the processor is only part of the equation... the chipset of the motherboard is also a big factor I think in the overall power consumption... intel paired the pentium m's with several different chipsets that along with there wireless card made the "centrino" designation... the latest I think is the 915....
the 479 chips are the most expensive of the pentium m's... don't know if there better than the 478's... I haven't found anything to indicate that really
Kudos to turbocad as usual you are correct.
I think most of us are looking at core vs. Cel/PM as a value/performance issue right now.
I think that most people that are running XP w a Cel/PM hardware like me are pretty satisfied with the performance of it and are contemplating whether an upgrade is necessary or is it gonna make that much of a difference.
I gather from reading this post that the value is not really there yet, I dont think that for a lean XP install with very few programs to multi-task the advantage is not there yet.
When I'm ready to upgrade to Vista, and when solid state HDD become readily available I think I must have a go at one of the new processors, but for now, with a setup like mine (PM 1.4ghz, XP, 256 RAM, 40 GBHDD) I dont think its gonna make much of a difference.
Why? Because I think that our biggest issues with our current setup is not the CPU but the startup that is caused by slow hard drives spinning frantically.
So, in conclusion, when someone has a "corporate edition" of Vista, and when I can get a flash 40-60 GB Samsung HDD for $150 or less then Ill upgrade my entire system and get the fastest baddest CPU in the planet.
But for now, it makes no sense for me to do partial upgrades.