# GL960/GM965 Detection (GPU-Z 0.7.2)?



## dylricho (Jul 26, 2013)

Hi guys,

I've been extensively trying to figure out if my laptop has a GL960 or GM965 chipset, based on what sources I've used and what theories I've concluded for myself (especially considering the hardware in my machine).

I have actually been trying for the best part of almost 2 years in a vain hope that I can find supporting information that will allow me to upgrade my computer to 4 GB of RAM and a Core 2 Duo T9300.

As a bit of background, I'm aware that GL960s are not supposed to accept Core 2 Duos, but many people have them working fine with SpeedStep enabled, 800 MHz bus speed models reported as working and RAM reported as running at 667 MHz (GL960 apparently only supports DDR2-533).

I just so happen to be one of these people. My laptop's current setup defies everything about the GL960 chipset (at least what Intel and ASUS state). In my setup, I have a Core 2 Duo T5900 (800 MHz FSB, SpeedStep working) with 3 GB of DDR2-800 RAM (4 GB produces blue screens after trying to enter Windows but it's recognized by the BIOS properly). I've also had a Penryn Celeron 925 work in my laptop as a test to see if Penryns would work.

The RAM is downclocked to 667 MHz as I'm aware of the GM965 limitation. Here's the thing though - I'm constantly told that I have a GL960 chipset (including ASUS's specification), and yet nothing that I've stated above, matches.

Various programs also state a GL960 @ 400 MHz present; the programs being AIDA64, CPU-Z, Geekbench and Speccy. Here though, GPU-Z reports a GM965 @ 500 MHz.

I don't know if I should take GPU-Z's report as being an anomaly, or if it's the only one that is giving me the true chipset of the laptop.

How reliable is the "GL960 or GM965" detection with the latest version of the program (0.7.2)?

Thank you,
Dylan.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

Can anyone help?


----------



## Maban (Jul 31, 2013)

What does GPU-Z say for the Device ID box?


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

Maban said:


> What does GPU-Z say for the Device ID box?



Hi Maban,

Here is the complete report for my system.

It says 8086-2A02, but so does my girlfriend's Lenovo R61 which I opened up yesterday to insert my Celeron 925 and while doing so, I found the LE82GM965 chip (SLA5T), so that's definitely a GM965, and I understand 2A02 is the GL960 ID? 

Regards,
Dylan.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Jul 31, 2013)

dylricho said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I've been extensively trying to figure out if my laptop has a GL960 or GM965 chipset, based on what sources I've used and what theories I've concluded for myself (especially considering the hardware in my machine).
> 
> ...



I would imagine that if the manufacturer states GL960 then that's what it is and GPU-Z is displaying the wrong info.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

NdMk2o1o said:


> I would imagine that if the manufacturer states GL960 then that's what it is and GPU-Z is displaying the wrong info.



But nothing adds up; ASUS is even contradicting itself with the spec.

*GL960*
- Intel Celeron processors only
- Up to 533 MHz FSB
- 2 GB DDR2-533 (PC2-4200) RAM maximum
- No SpeedStep (since Core 2 Duos aren't supported)

*My Machine*
- Intel Core 2 Duo T5900 successfully working
- Intel Celeron 925 (Penryn) was successful when I had it
- The above processors have an 800 MHz FSB (as well as some others in the ASUS specification)
- I currently have 3 GB DDR2-800 (PC2-6400) RAM, underclocked to 667 MHz (that's what the GM965 does)
- SpeedStep is working fine with my Core 2 Duo

Dylan.


----------



## Frick (Jul 31, 2013)

I assume you've read through this thread (or at least part of it).

http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...97-gl960-chipset-processor-upgradability.html

It seems the CPU generally is upgradable on that chipset, but this is said about the memory (post 18):



> Update: Picked up a 4 gig SODIMM kit. At least some if not all C709NR's are in fact limited to 3 gigs or less memory (2 gigs if you want functioning dual-channel!). One 2 gig chip in either slot will work okay, and a 2 gig and a 1 gig should work fine, however as soon as you try addressing something just above 3 gigs, you get screen corruption, data corruption, or a lockup. I'm assuming *THIS* is what differentiates the GL960 from the 965GMs, failure to address >3 gigs of memory without rather serious stability problems. The only other possibility, swap the cpu and see if it's stable at 'Real C2D' speeds would require someone to desolder the cpu and either drop a replacement or socket the motherboard, neither of which would be cheap, or prudent, and likely wouldn't help in this particular instance anyhow.



And looking around it seems that always happens when you go beyond 3GB.

So I would just assume you it is the 960 chipset.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

Frick said:


> I assume you've read through this thread (or at least part of it).
> 
> http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...97-gl960-chipset-processor-upgradability.html
> 
> ...



Yeah, I've read through the threads there. And so it seems that Intel is lying about their own chips. This is what makes me believe that GL960 chips are made from existing GM965 chips. That way, C2Ds can work properly, and they'd only have to alter the RAM limit and GMA X3100 frequencies, effectively making it even worse than it already is. 

Trust me to get a sucky laptop.


----------



## Frick (Jul 31, 2013)

dylricho said:


> Yeah, I've read through the threads there. And so it seems that Intel is lying about their own chips. This is what makes me believe that GL960 chips are made from existing GM965 chips. That way, C2Ds can work properly, and they'd only have to alter the RAM limit and GMA X3100 frequencies, effectively making it even worse than it already is.
> 
> Trust me to get a sucky laptop.



I wouldn't say lying, there probably are chips that are weaker than yours (also some specs comes from the laptop manufacturers), and what you are describing is called binning.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

Frick said:


> I wouldn't say lying, there probably are chips that are weaker than yours (also some specs comes from the laptop manufacturers), and what you are describing is called binning.



I see, thank you.

I'm planning on getting a T9300 soon, hoping that it will work. I guess the 3 gigs of RAM will have to suffice until I can afford a new laptop.


----------



## dylricho (Jul 31, 2013)

Just curious guys,

Is there any difference between a revision 3 and revision C for the chipset/northbridge?

Since 'C' is the third letter of the alphabet, I assume them to be the same thing?

Dylan.


----------



## dylricho (Sep 6, 2013)

Bump.


----------



## maximilion (Dec 4, 2013)

HI guys , 

I have the very same problem. Own acer aspire 5720Z , and according the Aida Buss edition software I have GL960 chipset. 
My CPU is Core 2 Duo T7500 2.2 Ghz , 4MB cache , 800 FSB. (upgraded from C2Duo T2370)
Now looking for some good deal of C2Duo T9300 or T9500 (max supported).
I was trying quite hard to run the laptop with 4 gigs of memory , but with no luck. Apparently it's hardware limitation and any tweaks with bios won't help. Now running with 3 gigs (667 mhz) memory. 800 mhz is showed recognized as as it is , but working frequency is lowed down .... crap 
I have my laptop for about 6 years , and don't want to throw it away , it's really amazing machine and very durable. 

Hope to help someone with this post.

Regards , 
Iliya


----------



## dylricho (Jan 18, 2014)

maximilion said:


> HI guys ,
> 
> I have the very same problem. Own acer aspire 5720Z , and according the Aida Buss edition software I have GL960 chipset.
> My CPU is Core 2 Duo T7500 2.2 Ghz , 4MB cache , 800 FSB. (upgraded from C2Duo T2370)
> ...



Hi there!

Depending on whether your BIOS has the Penryn microcode (either 10676 or 0676), you can go ahead with the T9300 or T9500. However, out of the two, I would go for the T9300, as you're getting a much better performance-to-value ratio. You'd be paying 45% more for 10% performance, if you went with the T9500 - not worth it!

I have attached a screenshot of a blue screen that occurs if 4 GB RAM (2 x 2 GB) is installed in my ASUS X58L-AP020A. Is this what you get?

4088 MB is detected by the BIOS, as seen in my second attachment (captured when I had my old Celeron M 575 installed), but Windows fails to start (the blue screens show up just before the Windows 7 logo animation).

I have no clue what's going on. Recently, I also found out that programs like Piriform Speccy and AIDA64 both report two graphic chips for my laptop - 8086 2A02 (GL960) and 8086 2A03 (GM965), but then they also state GL960 under the motherboard chipset area, even though I clearly have a Penryn Core 2 Duo at full speed with SpeedStep enabled, and 3 GB DDR2-800 RAM working! What gives?!

Dylan


----------



## maximilion (Jan 18, 2014)

dylricho said:


> Hi there!
> 
> Depending on whether your BIOS has the Penryn microcode (either 10676 or 0676), you can go ahead with the T9300 or T9500. However, out of the two, I would go for the T9300, as you're getting a much better performance-to-value ratio. You'd be paying 45% more for 10% performance, if you went with the T9500 - not worth it!
> 
> ...



I'm running latest BIOS version , so I guess there is microcode for Penryn support. The price tag between T9300 and T9500 is not that absurdly big because the purchase will be second hand anyway.I'll be Ok with both of them . In Bios environment I can see the 4 GB of memory detected , but as soon as I try to start any task the blue screen comes up. With the T7500 the SpeedStep is working nice , but I can't get my 800 MHZ memory modules to work at this rate. They get reduced to 667 MHZ and this is because of the chipset limitation.

Regards , 
Iliya


----------



## dylricho (Jan 18, 2014)

maximilion said:


> I'm running latest BIOS version , so I guess there is microcode for Penryn support. The price tag between T9300 and T9500 is not that absurdly big because the purchase will be second hand anyway.I'll be Ok with both of them . In Bios environment I can see the 4 GB of memory detected , but as soon as I try to start any task the blue screen comes up. With the T7500 the SpeedStep is working nice , but I can't get my 800 MHZ memory modules to work at this rate. They get reduced to 667 MHZ and this is because of the chipset limitation.
> 
> Regards ,
> Iliya



Even second-hand (how I got my T9300), the prices are very different. I got my T9300 for £35, whereas the cheapest T9500 started at £52. All you gain is 100 MHz per core. (If you're wondering, I upgraded from a T5900).

It's good to see SpeedStep working and yeah, RAM in the GM965 chipset is reduced to 667 MHz because of a limitation with the hardware. The GL960 chipset only supports DDR2-533, so I'm not sure how to take it.

I would suggest running Piriform Speccy to see what results you get. Here is what I got earlier today. 

Dylan


----------



## maximilion (Feb 12, 2014)

I have just got Core 2 Duo T9300 for less than 15 pounds. It runs great ! How my next plan is to upgrade my laptop with HDMI interface throughout the Express card slot and i already posted a thread in this forum to ask why there are no solutions for it.
If you have any idea about it , would be great .

Iliya


----------



## dylricho (Feb 20, 2014)

maximilion said:


> I have just got Core 2 Duo T9300 for less than 15 pounds. It runs great ! How my next plan is to upgrade my laptop with HDMI interface throughout the Express card slot and i already posted a thread in this forum to ask why there are no solutions for it.
> If you have any idea about it , would be great .
> 
> Iliya



I have one of those PCMCIA card slots as well, although I've never worked out what I could use it for. If it's to add an HDMI port functionality, then I'd be interested to know more. It would make it much easier to use my laptop with my LED TV that way (as a second monitor).


----------



## peterpan783 (Apr 6, 2014)

dylricho said:


> I have one of those PCMCIA card slots as well, although I've never worked out what I could use it for. If it's to add an HDMI port functionality, then I'd be interested to know more. It would make it much easier to use my laptop with my LED TV that way (as a second monitor).


----------



## peterpan783 (Apr 6, 2014)

maximilion said:


> I'm running latest BIOS version , so I guess there is microcode for Penryn support. The price tag between T9300 and T9500 is not that absurdly big because the purchase will be second hand anyway.I'll be Ok with both of them . In Bios environment I can see the 4 GB of memory detected , but as soon as I try to start any task the blue screen comes up. With the T7500 the SpeedStep is working nice , but I can't get my 800 MHZ memory modules to work at this rate. They get reduced to 667 MHZ and this is because of the chipset limitation.
> 
> Regards ,
> Iliya


----------



## peterpan783 (Apr 6, 2014)

Issues: BIOS recognizes 4GB RAM but windows gives blue screens

Whenever you encounter blue screens in windows, the first suspect is always the memory! Second in the list are drivers. You need to test memory first, because if it's defective, nothing will work properly from there.

There is a possibility that one of the RAM chips is defective. In that scenario, the situation that you are describing would be perfectly possible: BIOS detects full size of RAM but when Windows actually tries to use a bad spot then you get the blue screen.

Without discussing any further, you need to rule that possibility out and BE sure that both your ram chips are good. 

To rule that possibility out, try running memtest on either chip one at the time. If both chips pass the test independently, then try running the same test with both chips installed (no windows). It'd be interesting to see what you get.  If it fails, then you probably DO have a compatibility problem and memory isn't fully/properly recognized. Try swapping the chips and re-running the test. If it fails regardless of the order of the chips, it's possible compatibility is the problem.

If the laptop can test successfully both chips at same time and recognizing the full amount of memory, then your next suspect in line is Windows!

Still with the full amount of memory installed (provided that it's been fully tested and OK), try booting the laptop with a USB key running any flavor of linux. If there are any memory issues, you'd expect problems with Linux, too. If Linux boots successfully to the desktop, then even more reason to be suspicious of your windows installation.

RE: 800 mhz memory "downgraded" to 667, this is something that usually happens automatically and is made by BIOS, you can't "control" it nor "force" the chipset.
The chipset will never work at a speed higher than it supports, at least not safely, regardless of the factory memory speed.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 6, 2014)

Both 2 GB RAM modules worked fine independently, but refused to work together.

The RAM support limitation is indeed the chipset, but you see, the GL960 chipset, which is supposedly what I have, wasn't designed for anything over a processor with a 533 MT/s FSB, and DDR2-533 RAM.

In my "GL960" machine, I've had a 'Merom' Core 2 Duo T5900, a 'Penryn' Celeron 925 and a 'Penryn' Core 2 Duo T9300 work perfectly fine - all with 800 MT/s front-side bus frequencies. On-top of that, I have 3 GB of DDR2-800 RAM working (2 + 1), and as with the *GM965 chipset limitation*, it is downclocked to 667 MT/s.

Core 2 Duos are not supposed to be supported by the GL960 chipset, nor a RAM capacity above 2 GB DDR2-533. ASUS even lists the Celeron M 575 as the lowest processor configuration (which has a 667 MT/s FSB), while a real GL960 would support something like the 550 (533 MT/s), and nothing above.

So, if anyone has an X58L (mine, specifically, is the AP020A), the T9300 (with BIOS 203) and 3 GB DDR2-800 RAM is the best you'll get out of it.


----------



## peterpan783 (Apr 6, 2014)

dylricho said:


> Both 2 GB RAM modules worked fine independently, but refused to work together.
> 
> The RAM support limitation is indeed the chipset, but you see, the GL960 chipset, which is supposedly what I have, wasn't designed for anything over a processor with a 533 MT/s FSB, and DDR2-533 RAM.
> 
> ...



I suppose that at this point after all the things you have tried, you'd be more concerned about being able to use fully up to 4GB in dual channel mode rather than 3GB single channel at 800MHz. I know that certain chipsets have limitations regarding speed vs max ram, where if you use the faster memory the capacity is shortened. 
Have you tried putting 2 chips of 2GB factory 667 mhz instead? Different brands may also give you different results. I would try that next.

I'd rather have 4 GBs dual channel 667 than 3GB single channel 800.  You don't necessarily need to have 800 mhz ram installed to have the cpu working at their full (800) speed. 667 ram with 800 CPU is also possible without performance penalty.


----------



## dylricho (Apr 10, 2014)

peterpan783 said:


> I suppose that at this point after all the things you have tried, you'd be more concerned about being able to use fully up to 4GB in dual channel mode rather than 3GB single channel at 800MHz. I know that certain chipsets have limitations regarding speed vs max ram, where if you use the faster memory the capacity is shortened.
> Have you tried putting 2 chips of 2GB factory 667 mhz instead? Different brands may also give you different results. I would try that next.
> 
> I'd rather have 4 GBs dual channel 667 than 3GB single channel 800.  You don't necessarily need to have 800 mhz ram installed to have the cpu working at their full (800) speed. 667 ram with 800 CPU is also possible without performance penalty.



The machine originally came with 1 module of 1 GB DDR2-800, and I had purchased the 4 GB kit before realizing the GM965 limitation. However, I think the greater capacity is better for me instead of the increased bandwidth as I usually have a lot open - 10-30+ Chrome tabs alone, plus Notepad++, Skype and Opera's 5-10 tabs, and sometimes Photoshop as well.

The machine handles this load reasonably well, despite the crappy RAM limit. Needless to say, I'm going to be purchasing a custom-built desktop machine in the near future, so the laptop will only have a use when I'm not at home.


----------

