Why would adding 2 new chips of memory cause Win XP Pro Not to Boot?

I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get:

Windows could not start because of an error in the software.
Please report this problem as :
load needed DLLs for kernel
Please contact your support person to report this problem.

Take the 2 chips out, problem fixed, boots up fine. What about these
chips would make the system fail? They should be compatible with my
system.

Any help would be appreciated

thanks,
Oscar

On 5 Feb 2004 11:31:12 -0800, wrote:

I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get:

Windows could not start because of an error in the software.
Please report this problem as :
load needed DLLs for kernel
Please contact your support person to report this problem.

Take the 2 chips out, problem fixed, boots up fine. What about these
chips would make the system fail? They should be compatible with my
system.

Any help would be appreciated

thanks,
Oscar

Unfortunately many boards aren't extensively tested with all memory
slot populated, or perhaps those that are, are not redesigned if
that's a problem. In other words, simply because your board has 3
slots, and can theoretically accept X amount of memory per slot, you
can't necessarily assume it would run stable with all slots maxed out.

You could try entering the BIOS and relaxing, rasing the memory timing
numbers, or choosing "slower" or similar wording, but even that may
not help enough. Test the memory with http://www.memtest86.com,
ALWAYS, for several hours before ever booting to the OS, to avoid file
corruption.

You might also try different combinations, see if the system would
even run stable with only the pair of "new" modules in it. By "run
stable" I again mean running memtest86, not booting to the OS till it
at least tests ok at that.

In article ,
says...
On 5 Feb 2004 11:31:12 -0800, wrote:

I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get:

Windows could not start because of an error in the software.
Please report this problem as :
load needed DLLs for kernel
Please contact your support person to report this problem.

Take the 2 chips out, problem fixed, boots up fine. What about these
chips would make the system fail? They should be compatible with my
system.

Any help would be appreciated

thanks,
Oscar

Unfortunately many boards aren't extensively tested with all memory
slot populated, or perhaps those that are, are not redesigned if
that's a problem. In other words, simply because your board has 3
slots, and can theoretically accept X amount of memory per slot, you
can't necessarily assume it would run stable with all slots maxed out.

You could try entering the BIOS and relaxing, rasing the memory timing
numbers, or choosing "slower" or similar wording, but even that may
not help enough. Test the memory with http://www.memtest86.com,
ALWAYS, for several hours before ever booting to the OS, to avoid file
corruption.

You might also try different combinations, see if the system would
even run stable with only the pair of "new" modules in it. By "run
stable" I again mean running memtest86, not booting to the OS till it
at least tests ok at that.

Kony,

I have tested with just the new modules in it and I get the same
results. I took your advice and dowloaded memtest86. Both chips failed
miserably on test 4, the errors just kept incrementing. Now, does this
mean the chips are bad or that these chips just are not compatible on my
system? Thanks for your help.

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:49:36 -0500, Oscar G. Carranza
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On 5 Feb 2004 11:31:12 -0800, wrote:

I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get:

Windows could not start because of an error in the software.
Please report this problem as :
load needed DLLs for kernel
Please contact your support person to report this problem.

Take the 2 chips out, problem fixed, boots up fine. What about these
chips would make the system fail? They should be compatible with my
system.

Any help would be appreciated

thanks,
Oscar

Unfortunately many boards aren't extensively tested with all memory
slot populated, or perhaps those that are, are not redesigned if
that's a problem. In other words, simply because your board has 3
slots, and can theoretically accept X amount of memory per slot, you
can't necessarily assume it would run stable with all slots maxed out.

You could try entering the BIOS and relaxing, rasing the memory timing
numbers, or choosing "slower" or similar wording, but even that may
not help enough. Test the memory with http://www.memtest86.com,
ALWAYS, for several hours before ever booting to the OS, to avoid file
corruption.

You might also try different combinations, see if the system would
even run stable with only the pair of "new" modules in it. By "run
stable" I again mean running memtest86, not booting to the OS till it
at least tests ok at that.

Kony,

I have tested with just the new modules in it and I get the same
results. I took your advice and dowloaded memtest86. Both chips failed
miserably on test 4, the errors just kept incrementing. Now, does this
mean the chips are bad or that these chips just are not compatible on my
system? Thanks for your help.

It could mean either, but it doesn't really matter... for your needs,
they're not suitable. You may as well try to get them replaced.

Gateway is particularly evil about providing memory facts.
Better to go to someone like www.crucible.com to learn which
types of 256 memory is required.

For example, same size memory in nine chip or two chip
configurations; and other differences. To you, difference
should be transparent. But computer hardware accesses
memories differently. BIOS should solve that identification
for you.

Memories have a single pin that tells computer what kind of
memory it is. However many Gateway BIOSes are not properly
programmed and will not be corrected by updates. Some Gateway
motherboards only understand nine chip memory. Even worse,
Gateway cannot be bothered to inform you which memory will and
will not work.

Look. Any decent computer vendor also provided
comprehensive diagnostics for each machine - for free.
Gateway does not. No diagnostics and their inability to even
report which kind of memory works in their machines are but
some reasons why Gateway is no longer on my recommended list.
Add to this - even their technical support does not understand
difference exists between two chip and nine chip memory!

Goto to crucible.com to learn which type is acceptable for
your machine. Don't even waste time with Gateway support or
their 'tech unfriendly' website - that does not even provide
diagnostics for your machine.

Customer support tech claimed he had access to more
information than I did. So I had him read from his screen.
From memory, I interrupted his sentences and finished them.
Gateway customer support is that technically ignorant. That
website contained little useful technical facts.

wrote:
I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get:

Windows could not start because of an error in the software.
Please report this problem as :
load needed DLLs for kernel
Please contact your support person to report this problem.

Take the 2 chips out, problem fixed, boots up fine. What about these
chips would make the system fail? They should be compatible with my
system.

wrote:

I have a Gateway Athlon 700 with 584MB of memory. 1 256MB SDRAM chip
with ECC, 2 128MB chips, non ECC. Got 2 256MB SpecTek Non ECC chips
from my brother from his old computer. Replaced the 2 128 chips with
the 2 256MB chips, figuring no problems would occur. Lo and behold,
boot the system up and get: ... snip ...

If you have any system with ECC capability, you should ensure ALL
your memory is ECC memory. The ECC corrections won't work
otherwise. The few extra dollars will give you a reliable memory
system.

BTW, the numbers you posted indicate you have 512 M mounted now,
not 584.

--
Chuck F ) )
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net USE worldnet address!

This morning I recieved a 256mb module of Spectek DDR333 (non-ECC), and
as soon as I got into Windows, the machine would crash. Sometimes it
didn't even make it into Windows. I changed the speed of it from 333mhz
down to 250mhz and it's running fine at the moment (I haven't had a
chance to test it extensively in games or run MemTest86 on it, yet).

I will be sending it back to the place I got it, though! Apparently
Spectek memory is made by Micron (see
http://www.spectek.com/menus/about.asp) and it's the stuff which has
failed testing for Crucial memory so they pass it off as this Spectek ****.

Before I send it back, though, I'll make sure it's not the fact that I'm
running 2 different makes of DDR333 alongside it (TwinMOS and Samsung)
so I'll take the TwinMOS and Samsung modules out and try it at 333mhz
with just the Spectek (I hate the name already).

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:57:18 +0000, Anton Gysen
wrote:

This morning I recieved a 256mb module of Spectek DDR333 (non-ECC), and
as soon as I got into Windows, the machine would crash. Sometimes it
didn't even make it into Windows. I changed the speed of it from 333mhz
down to 250mhz and it's running fine at the moment (I haven't had a
chance to test it extensively in games or run MemTest86 on it, yet).

I will be sending it back to the place I got it, though! Apparently
Spectek memory is made by Micron (see
http://www.spectek.com/menus/about.asp) and it's the stuff which has
failed testing for Crucial memory so they pass it off as this Spectek ****.

Before I send it back, though, I'll make sure it's not the fact that I'm
running 2 different makes of DDR333 alongside it (TwinMOS and Samsung)
so I'll take the TwinMOS and Samsung modules out and try it at 333mhz
with just the Spectek (I hate the name already).

No, it did not "fail testing for crucial", it's not "****", it's
simply the lower grade memory, which can't run at the faster timings.
More often than not, when a motherboard won't run the lower grade
memory, it's a flaw with the motherboard, not the memory. Many boards
require higher-spec memory to run at lower spec settings to compensate
for that motherboard's design, especially when multiplie modules are
used.

You're running 3 modules... it was pretty likely you'd have problems
with most modules you try. Many boards required lowering memory bus
speed or relaxing the memory timings to run 3 modules. In other
words, it's "almost" always better to use the least number of modules
possible, though that's 2 if you're running a dual-channel board.

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:57:18 +0000, Anton Gysen
wrote:

This morning I recieved a 256mb module of Spectek DDR333
(non-ECC), and
as soon as I got into Windows, the machine would crash.
Sometimes it
didn't even make it into Windows. I changed the speed of
it from 333mhz
down to 250mhz and it's running fine at the moment (I
haven't had a
chance to test it extensively in games or run MemTest86
on it, yet).

I will be sending it back to the place I got it, though!
Apparently
Spectek memory is made by Micron (see
http://www.spectek.com/menus/about.asp) and it's the
stuff which has
failed testing for Crucial memory so they pass it off as
this Spectek ****.

Before I send it back, though, I'll make sure it's not
the fact that I'm
running 2 different makes of DDR333 alongside it (TwinMOS
and Samsung)
so I'll take the TwinMOS and Samsung modules out and try
it at 333mhz
with just the Spectek (I hate the name already).

No, it did not "fail testing for crucial", it's not
"****", it's
simply the lower grade memory, which can't run at the
faster timings.
More often than not, when a motherboard won't run the
lower grade
memory, it's a flaw with the motherboard, not the memory.
Many boards
require higher-spec memory to run at lower spec settings
to compensate
for that motherboard's design, especially when multiplie
modules are
used.

You're running 3 modules... it was pretty likely you'd
have problems
with most modules you try. Many boards required lowering
memory bus
speed or relaxing the memory timings to run 3 modules. In
other
words, it's "almost" always better to use the least number
of modules
possible, though that's 2 if you're running a dual-channel
board.

Good points but there is some real junk, untested memory on
the market that wont work in fussy systems.

Three memory slots create real electrical problems for
motherboard engineers (Read they are too cheap to add some
additional Caps) !

Intel reduced the slots from 3 to 2 on some of their mobos
for this reason. Some of the early DIMM mobos only had 1
memory slot.
--
Chas. (Drop spamski to E-mail
me)

No, it did not "fail testing for crucial", it's not "****", it's
simply the lower grade memory, which can't run at the faster timings.
More often than not, when a motherboard won't run the lower grade
memory, it's a flaw with the motherboard, not the memory. Many boards
require higher-spec memory to run at lower spec settings to compensate
for that motherboard's design, especially when multiplie modules are
used.

I do not buy memory *rated* at DDR333 and then be happy with it not to
work at that speed. Quite simply, the memory is ****, with only that
module in the motherboard it did not even make the memory test on the
POST. I've run a Nanya memory chip (not exactly the most respected brand
in the world) quite happily alongside the existing TwinMOS and Samsung
modules without any hassles. It's a good motherboard and not one which
is fussy as far as memory is concerned, in my experience. I can honestly
concluse that Spectek honestly is "****".