A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » Homebuilt PC's
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 31st 19, 07:36 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)

So hello all,

Maybe this is a little bit too advanced for home-built guys, but maybe not.... maybe you know more than the "experts" LOL, maybe you are an EXPERT

Here is a real computer architecture question for you:

(First I will explain why I ran into this issue and it also has me wondering a little bit of this might be the reason why windows 10 x64 does not boot on this specific processor, it probably because of something else: because of swap exchange 128 missing or so.)

But anyway I ran into this issue with Linux, Sparky Linux and others.

During booting of Linux apperently Linux assumes that an APIC chip is present ?!

Now why would Linux do that ? Apperently Linux is/was written for Intel systems cause according to the wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanc...upt_Controller

APIC is an Advanced PIC chip (FROM INTEL ! )

Now I have heard of and programmed a PIC chip before, but never an APIC as far as I know.

So linux won't initially boot if there is no APIC present.

However linux can boot with the NOAPIC boot option which is cool.

Now that I have read the wikipedia... why is this chip missing on AMD systems ?!

Why did AMD not include some kind of CLONE of this chip ? Or even the original ?

How important is this APIC chip ? The wikipedia cause on about multi processor systems ?!

Would an APIC chip make sense for dual core systems ?! Apperently not ? Cause it not there ? Or is this perhaps a missed oppertunity for AMD to enhance this sytem ?

Is there some kind of alternative chip inside this specific AMD processor ?!

I didn't read the entire wikipedia article yet, just some initial exploring..

Maybe you guys know much more about this or not... and know if it's essentiel or not... lol.

Would threadripper 3 have this chip ? And if so why ? and if not why not ?

Kinda wondering if I will run into this NOAPIC boot issue on other AMD processors and systems ?!

Perhaps APIC chip is not inside processor but actually part of the chipset ?!?

So maybe it's an NVIDIA nforce4 chipset issue ? NVIDIA did not include it ?

I believe it's NFORCE4... for AMD X2 3800+... A winfast motherboard...

Bye,
Skybuck.
  #2  
Old December 31st 19, 11:10 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 hasno APIC chip ? (1)

wrote:
So hello all,

Maybe this is a little bit too advanced for home-built guys, but maybe not... maybe you know more than the "experts" LOL, maybe you are an EXPERT

Here is a real computer architecture question for you:

(First I will explain why I ran into this issue and it also has me wondering a little bit of this might be the reason why windows 10 x64 does not boot on this specific processor, it probably because of something else: because of swap exchange 128 missing or so.)

But anyway I ran into this issue with Linux, Sparky Linux and others.

During booting of Linux apperently Linux assumes that an APIC chip is present ?!

Now why would Linux do that ? Apperently Linux is/was written for Intel systems cause according to the wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanc...upt_Controller

APIC is an Advanced PIC chip (FROM INTEL ! )

Now I have heard of and programmed a PIC chip before, but never an APIC as far as I know.

So linux won't initially boot if there is no APIC present.

However linux can boot with the NOAPIC boot option which is cool.

Now that I have read the wikipedia... why is this chip missing on AMD systems ?!

Why did AMD not include some kind of CLONE of this chip ? Or even the original ?

How important is this APIC chip ? The wikipedia cause on about multi processor systems ?!

Would an APIC chip make sense for dual core systems ?! Apperently not ? Cause it not there ? Or is this perhaps a missed oppertunity for AMD to enhance this sytem ?

Is there some kind of alternative chip inside this specific AMD processor ?!

I didn't read the entire wikipedia article yet, just some initial exploring.

Maybe you guys know much more about this or not... and know if it's essentiel or not... lol.

Would threadripper 3 have this chip ? And if so why ? and if not why not ?

Kinda wondering if I will run into this NOAPIC boot issue on other AMD processors and systems ?!

Perhaps APIC chip is not inside processor but actually part of the chipset ?!?

So maybe it's an NVIDIA nforce4 chipset issue ? NVIDIA did not include it ?

I believe it's NFORCE4... for AMD X2 3800+... A winfast motherboard...

Bye,
Skybuck.


An IOAPIC, is a way for incoming interrupts to the CPU, to be
"vectored" to a particular core. By adjusting how things work
on the fly, the CPU loading from interrupts is "smeared"
over all CPU cores, so every core does a little of the work.

If the IOAPIC is missing, then Core0 likely fields all
the interrupt traffic. Just a guess.

In the following article, APIC (programmable interrupt controller)
and ACPI (the power management thing) are mentioned too many
times, and the author of the article used the wrong term
a few times. Basically, the BIOS code must be modern enough,
to use ACPI with the proper tables, to tell the OS that is
booting, what the situation is with the IOAPIC mapping.
As to what interrupts are tied to what lines.

https://wiki.osdev.org/IOAPIC

In other words, the flaky version of ACPI offered by
your BIOS, has likely broken the ability for the
OS you've chosen, to figure out how the IOAPIC is
set up.

I have one Asus board, where the BIOS has a setting.
It has "Enable ACPI 2.0". It was considered at one time,
that ACPI 2.0 was "too advanced" for the OS. Now, you
want to turn that on in the BIOS for sure. This might
have happened around the year 2001 or so, and your
hardware is more modern than that, and the IOAPIC
setup really should have worked.

I don't think the hardware is missing, but the
ACPI tables could be malformed. Bad ACPI information
happens even on modern pieces of hardware, and when it
happens to you, it's a bitch to have to deal with
all the time. The computer would get the Logitech
keyboard treatment after a while... :-)

Go to the BIOS Setup, visit Power Management, and
make sure "ACPI Function [Enabled]", save and exit.
Page 48 or so of NF4SK8AA manual PDF file.

Paul
  #3  
Old December 31st 19, 07:31 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)

Hi Paul,

Good to see you still alive ! I hope you have a happy and fun new year soon ! =D

Anyway how is ACPI related to APIC ? For now I assume ACPI allows GUI control over APIC options and somehow ACPI might inform computers what kind of capabilities are present.

I think ACPI is already on.

At best perhaps a new bios version was bad/altered and APIC was removed, I wrote about this suspicion before, but perhaps the APIC chip is simply not present on this NFORCE4 chipset ?!?

Perhaps you could check if this APIC chip is present at all ?

Otherwise the whole enabling theory goes straight out the window ! LOL =D

Trying to enable a "ghost" chip lol, that's funny.

I like your joke about the logitech keyboard treatment ! =D

This newyear here in Netherlands gonna be smelly apperently, somebody out there is cooking some kind of tuna fish... and damn... it's a bit misty as usual.

Last couple of new years was pretty misty... I wonder if somebody out there is maybe turning on a mist generator for some reason.

Maybe evil angry russians ! LOL....

Or maybe it's some kind of climate change related thing or just bad fluke of
luck.

It's becoming a bit suspicious though. The fog is not as bad as in other years, though there are 4 hours and 30 mins still to go before the big bangs start happening.

I am a bit bored with fireworks this year.... hmmmm.... guess I am just not really in the mood, and rather play with my computers and source code, but first I need a good night sleep for that or so...

Anyway soon new year hope to feel better than... not that I am sick or anything but just in this strange mood of I don't care about new year =D

I do care about threadripper 3 though, I should check google if there is any news on it ! =D

Apperently CES 2020 is starting in 3 to 7 january or something like that, I hope to hear more about this somewhat new 64 core processor ! =D

One comment of your intrigued me a bit though:

"Bad ACPI information
happens even on modern pieces of hardware, and when it
happens to you, it's a bitch to have to deal with
all the time."

But you mean with this ? What kind of problems issues what this create ? And also why would it be hard to solve ? What would it require to solve this ?! =D

I can maybe vaguely remember some things about this with windows 98, not sure though !

Oh one more question:

How you ever got usb 2.0 storage device working/usuable on windows xp on a usb 1.0 port ? Or never tried ? =D Or it simply not possible ? =D

Bye,
Skybuck =D
  #4  
Old December 31st 19, 07:33 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)

Now that I think about it... the last part about usb 2.0 not being backwards compatible with usb 1.0 is kinda laughable/funny/ironic... so much for "universal".

I also kinda wondered if maybe 4 TB is too much for windows XP to handle, but I have never heard of such a thing so I don't think that's the problem

(I know NTFS is 64 bit file system)

Bye for now,
Skybuck =D
  #5  
Old January 1st 20, 04:08 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 hasno APIC chip ? (1)

wrote:
Now that I think about it... the last part about usb 2.0 not being backwards compatible with usb 1.0 is kinda laughable/funny/ironic... so much for "universal".

I also kinda wondered if maybe 4 TB is too much for windows XP to handle, but I have never heard of such a thing so I don't think that's the problem

(I know NTFS is 64 bit file system)

Bye for now,
Skybuck =D


Both Western Digital and Seagate, provided software for
moving files from the old drive to the new. It was
written by Acronis, as a free software that is locked
to the hard drive brand. You download the software from
the correct web site, of the two companies above.

As part of the software, is Acronis Capacity Manager.
It splits a 3TB hard drive, into a 2TB drive and a
~800GB drive or so. The second drive is "virtual" and
is created by the Acronis driver it installs.

Part way up the disk, is a second MBR and the
file systems of the second disk. This allows a good
portion of the capacity to be seen under WinXP. The
registration of the virtual disk, tends to be checked
later than the physical disk portion.

Disk1
Disk2 === 2TB part of 3TB disk
Disk3
Disk4
Disk5 === 800GB part of 3TB disk (the "top" part)

I've not tested it with really big disks, like
a 14TB drive broken up into 7 total drives. And the
partitions are likely to be a bit slower than with
the regular disk drivers.

But it can be done.

One problem is, there's no driver so you can share
the disk with Linux, and for some reason when you
manually use a loopback mount, the writes to the 800GB
portion are only 10MB/sec! Bad news indeed for
interworking with the "top" part.

Today, I boot Windows 8 on the WinXP machine to do backups,
and use GPT disks and the full disk capacity, during backup
runs. The processor is barely enough for that. The WinXP
machine processor isn't Skynet.

*******

The advantage of a USB2 card, is mass storage transfer
rates of up to 35MB/sec. Whereas USB1.1 manages 1.0MB/sec
or so (tested on my year 2003 Mac G4). If you want to know
what misery is, try to load files for transport to another
PC, when the write goes at 1MB per second. You can have
a good long nap.

You should still be able to plug a USB3 key into a USB1.1
jack, but the rate can never go faster than 1MB/sec.

And the reason for selecting USB2 is:

1) On a given day, cannot find a PCI bridged USB3 card
(100MB/sec).
2) Old OSes have only USB2 drivers (Win98 one written by some guy,
not written by Microsoft). It's possible MCCI has drivers
but they're a pay to play company. (Asus buys MCCI drivers
for some USB3 stuff, likely UASP drivers.)
3) Decent USB2 cards used to be readily available,
and now only VIA remains. I hope all drivers work OK
on them, but have no VIA chip samples to test with.

Paul
  #6  
Old January 1st 20, 07:25 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)

HOLY**** PAUL.

A LINK TO MICROSOFT describing their supported **** of BIOS would have been enough.

Not Microsoft problem, BIOS problem.

THIS IS SO PAINFULL TO READ. I HATE ADDRESSING LIMITATIONS.

I WISH HARDWARE INDUSTRY WOULD STOP ARTIFICIALLY LIMITATING COMPUTERS:

Apperently BIOS + MASTER BOOT RECORD + WINDOWS XP 32 BIT, though the latter is probably not at fault, CAN'T SUPPORT DRIVES LARGER THAN 2 TB.

Somebody in comments says it can but that only applies to if GPT is used instead of master boot record.

I feel like I wanna shoot myself through the head right now GOD DAMN MOTHER****ING HARDWARE PEOPLE.

At least GPT works somewhat... still working on BIOS based systems, but apperently it needs newer windows vesrion.

Windows 7 64 bit edition works ok ?!

HOLY****

Does this mean windows 10 can't work on 4 TB drives ?! Now I am confused... can't it not read 4 TB drives or what ?! Again confused.

Planning to install windows 10 on smaller partition but still I want it to read bigger drives maybe too.

WHAT A ****ING MESS.

ANYWAY I HATE USB TOO MUCH SO I ENJOYED SCREAMING AT IT A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH.

Will try USB STICK soon, thanks for warning about shady usb sticks, but have no choice, the plastic will break soon if necessar hahaha.

"
Windows support for hard disks that are larger than 2 TB
Applies to: Microsoft Windows XP Home EditionMicrosoft Windows XP ProfessionalMicrosoft Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition (32-bit x86) More
Summary
In order for an operating system to fully support storage devices that have capacities that exceed 2 terabytes (2 TB, or 2 trillion bytes), the device must be initialized by using the GUID partition table (GPT) partitioning scheme. This scheme supports addressing of the full range of storage capacity. If the user intends to start the computer from one of these large disks, the system’s base firmware interface must use the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) and not BIOS.

This article outlines Microsoft support across all Windows versions since Windows XP. It also describes the requirements to address the full storage capability of these devices.

Note that this article refers to disk capacity in powers of two instead of powers of 10, which is the more common designation on storage device capacity labels. Therefore, references to “2 TB” actually refer to a product that is labeled as having “2.2 TB” of capacity.

Also note that the operating system-specific behavior that is noted in this article also applies to the server variants of that system. Therefore, a reference to “Windows 7” includes Windows Server 2008 R2, “Windows Vista” includes Windows Server 2008, and “Windows XP” includes Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2003 R2..
More Information
The management of modern storage devices is addressed by using a scheme called Logical Block Addressing (LBA). This is the arrangement of the logical sectors that constitute the media. "LBA0" represents the first logical sector of the device, and the last LBA designation represents the last logical sector of the device, one label per sector. To determine the capacity of the storage device, you multiply the number of logical sectors within the device by the size of each logical sector. The current size standard is 512 bytes. For example, to achieve a device that has a capacity of 2 TB, you must have 3,906,250,000 512-byte sectors. However, a computer system requires 32 bits (1s and 0s) of information to represent this large number. Therefore, any storage capacity that is greater than what can be represented by using 32 bits would require an additional bit. That is, 33 bits.

The problem in this computation is that the partitioning scheme that is used by most modern Windows-based computers is MBR (master boot record). This scheme sets a limit of 32 for the number of bits that are available to represent the number of logical sectors.

The 2-TB barrier is the result of this 32-bit limitation. Because the maximum number that can be represented by using 32-bits is 4,294,967,295, this translates to 2.199 TB of capacity by using 512-byte sectors (approximately 2.2 TB). Therefore, a capacity beyond 2.2 TB is not addressable by using the MBR partitioning scheme.

To make more bits available for addressing, the storage device must be initialized by using GPT. This partitioning scheme lets up to 64 bits of information be used within logical sectors. This translates to a theoretical limitation of 9.4 ZB (9.4 zettabytes, or 9.4 billion terabytes). However, the issue that affects GPT is that most currently available systems are based on the aging BIOS platform. BIOS supports only MBR-initialized disks to start the computer. To restart from a device that is initialized by using GPT, your system must be UEFI-capable. By default, many current systems can support UEFI. Microsoft expects that most future systems will have this support. Customers should consult with their system vendor to determine the ability of their systems to support UEFI and disks that have storage capacities that are greater than 2 TB.
"

^

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/...rger-than-2-tb

I kinda suspected this already but ARRRGGGHHH I guess I just didn't wanna face reality and first HAD TO SCREAM AT SOME PEOPLE LOL.

Or to lazy to figure it out myself, don't know... I gamed too much my brain a bit fried... getting back into it though =D

THX ! You got me on the right track primarily, and one other guy was hinting at parition table didn't know why though.

Again your amazing PAUL ! =D

The rest of sci.electronics.design was pretty clueless ! HAHA.

Bye,
Skybuck.
  #7  
Old January 1st 20, 09:31 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Paul[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,467
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 hasno APIC chip ? (1)

wrote:
HOLY**** PAUL.

A LINK TO MICROSOFT describing their supported **** of BIOS would have been enough.

Not Microsoft problem, BIOS problem.

THIS IS SO PAINFULL TO READ. I HATE ADDRESSING LIMITATIONS.

I WISH HARDWARE INDUSTRY WOULD STOP ARTIFICIALLY LIMITATING COMPUTERS:

Apperently BIOS + MASTER BOOT RECORD + WINDOWS XP 32 BIT, though the latter is probably not at fault, CAN'T SUPPORT DRIVES LARGER THAN 2 TB.

Somebody in comments says it can but that only applies to if GPT is used instead of master boot record.

I feel like I wanna shoot myself through the head right now GOD DAMN MOTHER****ING HARDWARE PEOPLE.

At least GPT works somewhat... still working on BIOS based systems, but apperently it needs newer windows vesrion.

Windows 7 64 bit edition works ok ?!

HOLY****

Does this mean windows 10 can't work on 4 TB drives ?! Now I am confused... can't it not read 4 TB drives or what ?! Again confused.

Planning to install windows 10 on smaller partition but still I want it to read bigger drives maybe too.

WHAT A ****ING MESS.

ANYWAY I HATE USB TOO MUCH SO I ENJOYED SCREAMING AT IT A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH.

Will try USB STICK soon, thanks for warning about shady usb sticks, but have no choice, the plastic will break soon if necessar hahaha.

"
Windows support for hard disks that are larger than 2 TB
Applies to: Microsoft Windows XP Home EditionMicrosoft Windows XP ProfessionalMicrosoft Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition (32-bit x86) More
Summary
In order for an operating system to fully support storage devices that have capacities that exceed 2 terabytes (2 TB, or 2 trillion bytes), the device must be initialized by using the GUID partition table (GPT) partitioning scheme. This scheme supports addressing of the full range of storage capacity. If the user intends to start the computer from one of these large disks, the system’s base firmware interface must use the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) and not BIOS.

This article outlines Microsoft support across all Windows versions since Windows XP. It also describes the requirements to address the full storage capability of these devices.

Note that this article refers to disk capacity in powers of two instead of powers of 10, which is the more common designation on storage device capacity labels. Therefore, references to “2 TB” actually refer to a product that is labeled as having “2.2 TB” of capacity.

Also note that the operating system-specific behavior that is noted in this article also applies to the server variants of that system. Therefore, a reference to “Windows 7” includes Windows Server 2008 R2, “Windows Vista” includes Windows Server 2008, and “Windows XP” includes Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server 2003 R2.
More Information
The management of modern storage devices is addressed by using a scheme called Logical Block Addressing (LBA). This is the arrangement of the logical sectors that constitute the media. "LBA0" represents the first logical sector of the device, and the last LBA designation represents the last logical sector of the device, one label per sector. To determine the capacity of the storage device, you multiply the number of logical sectors within the device by the size of each logical sector. The current size standard is 512 bytes. For example, to achieve a device that has a capacity of 2 TB, you must have 3,906,250,000 512-byte sectors. However, a computer system requires 32 bits (1s and 0s) of information to represent this large number. Therefore, any storage capacity that is greater than what can be represented by using 32 bits would require an additional bit. That is, 33 bits.

The problem in this computation is that the partitioning scheme that is used by most modern Windows-based computers is MBR (master boot record). This scheme sets a limit of 32 for the number of bits that are available to represent the number of logical sectors.

The 2-TB barrier is the result of this 32-bit limitation. Because the maximum number that can be represented by using 32-bits is 4,294,967,295, this translates to 2.199 TB of capacity by using 512-byte sectors (approximately 2.2 TB). Therefore, a capacity beyond 2.2 TB is not addressable by using the MBR partitioning scheme.

To make more bits available for addressing, the storage device must be initialized by using GPT. This partitioning scheme lets up to 64 bits of information be used within logical sectors. This translates to a theoretical limitation of 9.4 ZB (9.4 zettabytes, or 9.4 billion terabytes). However, the issue that affects GPT is that most currently available systems are based on the aging BIOS platform. BIOS supports only MBR-initialized disks to start the computer. To restart from a device that is initialized by using GPT, your system must be UEFI-capable. By default, many current systems can support UEFI. Microsoft expects that most future systems will have this support. Customers should consult with their system vendor to determine the ability of their systems to support UEFI and disks that have storage capacities that are greater than 2 TB.
"

^

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/...rger-than-2-tb

I kinda suspected this already but ARRRGGGHHH I guess I just didn't wanna face reality and first HAD TO SCREAM AT SOME PEOPLE LOL.

Or to lazy to figure it out myself, don't know... I gamed too much my brain a bit fried... getting back into it though =D

THX ! You got me on the right track primarily, and one other guy was hinting at parition table didn't know why though.

Again your amazing PAUL ! =D

The rest of sci.electronics.design was pretty clueless ! HAHA.

Bye,
Skybuck.


Windows 7 supports GPT as far as I know. I think
I've used the backup drive, the big one, with it.

The reason I was using Windows 8, is it was cheap
at the time ($39.95), so I got a copy for both
machines. The Win7 Pro I got, cost more than that,
and only one machine got that.

The most I paid for an OS, was a copy of Win2K. It
was like $300 in local currency. And the store I bought
that at, went bankrupt. How could they go bankrupt
selling OSes for $300 ???

Paul
  #8  
Old January 2nd 20, 07:21 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 533
Default Why AMD X2 3800+ Dual Core (Manchestor)/Socket 939/NForce4 has noAPIC chip ? (1)

Ok but now I have to figure out what the partition limit is of ms-dos 6.22.

Some say 2 GB, which is quite suprising low and high at the same time.

Then other's say 503 MB or something... it depends on the hardware I guess.

I think I will try 2 GB, FAT 16.

I did come across ibm dos 7.1 but that would require crazy installs over pc dos 2000 and I don't know if this will work.

Windows 95 and Windows 98 have ms-dos 7.0 and ms dos 8.0 or something.

But I am not sure if these dos versions can actually run ms dos 6.22 games... and sound drivers and such.

Could try it if I place my 80486 here which has windows 95...

Would be cool if x-com/ufo worked on it and maybe dune 2.

But as far as I can remember dos 7.0 might be 32 bit protected mode dos and can't run games, I could be wrong though.

There was a reason why I had system commander, tripple boot this pentium 166 and this might be it.

System commander is quite cool though.

I understand it a little bit better now and was able to modify the autoexec.bat..

Saving it twice, main one and the one sc copies when booting.

Problem was time/date is resettd cause battery dead.

I also set it to prompt... using alt-s to go to setup and such...

Sometimes it's necessary sometimes not, best is to save both version and then it won't detect any time/date change which is kinda funny.

It's a bit shady... but I got it to work by setting rem in front of himem.sys or emm386 or something like that in config.sys...

I think ufo didn't like ems memory... or maybe it was cause soundblaster was chosen...

after running setup from ufo to not use sound the game played..

But without sound it would not be any fun.

Anyway me go back to figuring out how to move my files from P166 to AMD X2 without using network lol.

I may have to install ms-dos 6.22 on usb mass storage device to be able to run guest so I can use zip drive lol.

Quite a work around but quite funny ! =D

But first I investigate linux and thus now I am back with the NOAPIC situation LOL.

Totally funny.

Bye,
Skybuck =D
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will a Dual Core 3800 be fast enough for two 7800 GT's in SLI ? Boris Easten Nvidia Videocards 4 December 3rd 05 09:11 PM
AMD X2 Dual Core 3800. How many different cores does this chip have ? Paul Mathews Homebuilt PC's 1 November 24th 05 04:28 PM
AMD to release dual-core X2 3800+ @ $345, August 1. John Lewis Asus Motherboards 12 July 9th 05 06:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.