First off, the "u" stands for "micro" so the boards are the same.
As for P4 versus CD versus C2D. You probably won't notice the difference in "real time"... meaning you won't "sense" anything. All of them will "seem" fast and all of them will run applications very well. You will only notice a difference if you have to start crunching numbers... ie, encoding video... and only if you actually "measure" the time it takes for different processors. But then, it won't be a humoungous increase just because it's C2D over P4. Don't get the wrong impression... P4's aren't slouches! However, given your choices, I would go with the C2D E7400. If I had to choose given "mine"... I would go with the E8400.
Did you read the Wiki page I linked? Here's the P4 PAGE. I realize that all of this is information overload, but you need to read to gain some sort of grasp on processors and the differences between them.
Hi thanks for your help & the mobo id - you know it would help us newbies if the hardware makers would keep to one set of codes & not use different reference terms to confuse ....imo .
Anyway - yes i have read the link you supplied and also many of the links that provided and yes it is quite hard to take in but i can see the progression and evolution of CPU's .
To be honest i could easily get carried away with this particular rebuild and want to put in a better mobo & higher processor but i'm going to restrict myself to a set budget as you had earlier suggested .It seems pretty much any dual core /Core2 will be an improvement and (i hope ) also this will be the case with the mobo . For that reason with my approx figure in my mind and allowing for the new PSU already invested i'm asking myself this question -
"would i be better off spending just a little more on a higher spec mobo and going with, say the the Dual Core E5300 - or keeping to the Asus P5KPL-AM and paying the extra towards the C2D ?"
That's tricky for me to decide - if i was building from scratch and taking into account my requirements i'd allow a higher budget but right now &for this PC's purpose i can't justify that & think it's right to keep to a limit .
I've seen a number of mobo ad's - my impression is that Asus is a good reliable maker (?) so keeping with their models within my price range about the main difference i can see is with the graphics chip - a lot seem to be using either the Intel G31 or G41 .
Now as with my previous comment on the CPU debate -i can only really decide this on how any of these chipset's compare to the ATI Radion Xpress200 on the old Intel board .
Can you offer any advice on this issue of the G31/ G41 comparison -we're talking general usage here /DVD /editing/ripping etc - no real game playing .
I mean i got by with the Xpress200 , so if both the G31 & 41 are improvements on this than i'd be satisfied with either but i hate the thought of missing out on a better board for only a few dollars(pounds) extra ? (assuming compatability with my IDE drives)
Sorry for another long post -i think i'm getting near the end of this thread now ... i hope