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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
memory upgrade already built pc
Hi,
I would like to replace the 256MB memory on my mobo with 1GB. I've never done this on a PC that is already built. Can I just replace the memory, or do need to start taking all my cards out first? Will this impact the OS (dual boot Windows 98SE/XP)? Regards, Michael |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"who" wrote in message ... Hi, I would like to replace the 256MB memory on my mobo with 1GB. I've never done this on a PC that is already built. Can I just replace the memory, or do need to start taking all my cards out first? Will this impact the OS (dual boot Windows 98SE/XP)? Regards, Michael l t You must shut down AND UNPLUG the computer. Then take out the 256MB and insert the 1GB. There was a problem with Windows 98 recognizing more than 512MB of memory. But as you are dual-booting . . . At worst, you might have to boot into XP momentarily to hop on the web and google the workaround for the 512MB Windows 98 problem. But then I think it was possibly solved by SE anyway. Once you get both OS'es working OK, you will want to check your swap file/page file settings. With one GB of RAM, I'd suggest minimum and maximum of 512MB for both operating systems. But then, you might want to up that a bit if you are working with really large data files that consume a lot of RAM. -Dave |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Of course do like they said and unplug and all, but if you want to
really kick up your memory i'd suggest going somewhere like, http://www.allcomponents.com/site/index.shtml and hitting their memory configurator link so you can find your board and all that, then you can optimize your memory and it will run your OS at top performance. This all depends on what kind of memory slots your using and how many ports you have to use as well. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Try the different manufacturers websites. They frequently have a
configuration tool to help you find the correct memory sticks based on your motherboard model number or your system model number. Here's a few links: http://www.samsung.com/Products/Semiconductor/DRAM/ http://www.ocztechnology.com/ http://www.mushkin.com/epages/mushkin.storefront http://www.legacyelectronics.com/ http://www.kingston.com/ http://www.gskill.com.tw/ http://www.geilusa.com/ http://www.crucial.com/ http://www.corsairmicro.com/ If you need information on your motherboard/system/memory try CPU-Z or SiSoftware Sandra from he http://www.cpuid.com/ http://www.sisoftware.net/ As far as Win98SE is concerned, there are a couple of issues that I am aware of: 1. The vcache (file cache) size 2. Large amounts of memory 3. Fast cpu's. To deal with the vcache issue, edit your system.ini file to add the following to the vcache section: (Try c:\windows\system.ini or wherever you have 98 installed.) [vcache] MaxFileCache=524288 MinFileCache=40960 chunksize=4096 Add these lines if they are not there currently. This limits the vcache to a maximum of 512MBytes of memory and deals with the issue very effectively. Without the max limit set, 98 can sometimes allocate too much system virtual memory address space to the vcache and cause problems. Some people recommand that the MaxFileCache setting be no more than 70% of physical memory up to a maximum of 512 MBytes. Others may recommend 80% or so but you get the idea. You must set some maximum so that the vcache cannot consume all your system virtual memory address space. I experimented with the MinFileCache value and found 40MBytes to be a good number. Smaller numbers seemed to slow my computer down, based on boot times. Larger numbers did not seem to produce improvement, again based on boot times. I left chunksize the way it was. You may want to 'tune' your MinFileCache size as well. For more information try posting to: microsoft.public.win98.setup microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion Many experts there. Look for posts by MVP's.Found some Microsoft documentation he About vcache issue: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=253912 I only have 768MBytes of ram so I have no experience with the large amounts of memory isuue. Take look at: "Out of Memory" Error Messages with Large Amounts of RAM Installed http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=184447 My cpu is only 733MHz so I have no experience with the fast cpu isuue. Take look at: Windows Protection Error in NDIS with a CPU That Is Faster Than 2.1 GHz http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;312108 general info sites: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm http://home.satx.rr.com/badour/ Regarding virtual memory: I recommend leaving it set to auto. Let windows handle your virtual memory settings completely automatically. Combine this with setting 'ConservativeSwapfileUsage' to 'one' in the [386en] section of the system.ini file. This setting biases 98 to not use virtual memory if it can avoid it. Since you will have lots of memory it may be able to run without using virtual memory, most of the time, quite easily. This will speed up your system since running from ram is faster than running from vitual memory. Should your system ever need to use virtual memory it will be able to do so and it will be able to adjust the virtual memory page file size as required. I have found that most of the time my system page file size is zero as reported by Sysmon. If I get hardcore and the system needs virtual memory it can adjust without intervention from me. I strongly recommend against turning off virtual memory. If your system ever needs virtual memory and it is off, it may crash or lockup. There are certain conditions where there must be virtual memory. Unfortunately I cannot remember specifics right now. So add the following to your system.ini file in the [386enh] section: [386enh] ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1 I have used 'ConservativeSwapfileUsage=0' as well and found that 98 will create a page file when this is done. However, it seems to me that this page file is not necessary most of the time since whenever it is set to 'ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1' the page file size is zero. These settings have greatly improved my system's performance. Good Luck |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave C." wrote in message ... "who" wrote in message ... Hi, I would like to replace the 256MB memory on my mobo with 1GB. I've never done this on a PC that is already built. Can I just replace the memory, or do need to start taking all my cards out first? Will this impact the OS (dual boot Windows 98SE/XP)? Regards, Michael l t You must shut down AND UNPLUG the computer. Then take out the 256MB and insert the 1GB. There was a problem with Windows 98 recognizing more than 512MB of memory. Actually, Dave, I believe this is one of those old myths that just won't go away. Win 98 can't *cache* more than 512MB memory, but that is very different from being unable to "recognize" it. (In other words, Win 98 caches up to the first 512MB of memory, but not any memory that exists above that amount.) Still, uncached memory is a heck of a lot faster than virtual memory (disk swapping), so the old rule still applies: The more memory, the better. But as you are dual-booting . . . At worst, you might have to boot into XP momentarily to hop on the web and google the workaround for the 512MB Windows 98 problem. But then I think it was possibly solved by SE anyway. Once you get both OS'es working OK, you will want to check your swap file/page file settings. With one GB of RAM, I'd suggest minimum and maximum of 512MB for both operating systems. But then, you might want to up that a bit if you are working with really large data files that consume a lot of RAM. -Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Hackworth" wrote in
: Actually, Dave, I believe this is one of those old myths that just won't go away. Win 98 can't *cache* more than 512MB memory, but that is very different from being unable to "recognize" it. This is true, sort of..., well... not really. Windows 98 doesn't cache memory. Windows does have a virtual memory system but virtual memory and cache are not the same. The CPU does cache memory and it can cache memory from anywhere in the address space, hi, lo, or otherwise. The problem is with vcache not memory cache. The vcache caches files from the hard drive in ram so that when data from a file is requested it can be retrieved from ram, which is fast relative to hard drive, instead going to the hard drive, which is slow relative to ram. The issue is that Windows98 can run into problems with a vcache (file cache not memory cache) size greater than 512 MBytes or so. For more info, see my other reply in this thread. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you all for your excellent comments, they have been very helpful.
Thanks John for your pointers and info, they go a long way in helping understand this. Regards, Michael |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"John Smithe" wrote in message . 1... "Hackworth" wrote in : Actually, Dave, I believe this is one of those old myths that just won't go away. Win 98 can't *cache* more than 512MB memory, but that is very different from being unable to "recognize" it. This is true, sort of..., well... not really. Windows 98 doesn't cache memory. Windows does have a virtual memory system but virtual memory and cache are not the same. The CPU does cache memory and it can cache memory from anywhere in the address space, hi, lo, or otherwise. The problem is with vcache not memory cache. The vcache caches files from the hard drive in ram so that when data from a file is requested it can be retrieved from ram, which is fast relative to hard drive, instead going to the hard drive, which is slow relative to ram. The issue is that Windows98 can run into problems with a vcache (file cache not memory cache) size greater than 512 MBytes or so. For more info, see my other reply in this thread. Oh, I see what what you're saying. Yeah, I do believe I recall hearing of folks who had more than 512MB and were required to twak their vcache settings to get Win 98 to play nicely with the additional memory. As for myself, I didn't have more than 512MB back then so I never had to mess with it. After all, 512MB ought to be enough for anybody.... ;-) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Win 98SE can ONLY use up to 512 MB of RAM or you'll get system instability
and errors. -- DaveW "who" wrote in message ... Hi, I would like to replace the 256MB memory on my mobo with 1GB. I've never done this on a PC that is already built. Can I just replace the memory, or do need to start taking all my cards out first? Will this impact the OS (dual boot Windows 98SE/XP)? Regards, Michael |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Dave, this has already been discussed in the thread. Is there something you
wanted to add to elaborate on your comments in disagreement to the preveious posts? Regards, Michael "DaveW" wrote in message news:IvLvd.570911$D%.332691@attbi_s51... Win 98SE can ONLY use up to 512 MB of RAM or you'll get system instability and errors. -- DaveW |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Athlon XP 3200+ Question | Travis King | AMD x86-64 Processors | 21 | January 11th 05 02:56 AM |
Dell Dimension 4600 memory upgrade problem with OCZ module | Stephane | Homebuilt PC's | 3 | October 13th 04 12:19 AM |
Memory upgrade - please help | Anatol | Homebuilt PC's | 3 | October 3rd 04 06:32 AM |
my new mobo o/c's great | rockerrock | Overclocking AMD Processors | 9 | June 30th 04 08:17 PM |
Questions about memory and a few other things for the AMD/Asus system I am building (long) | Jim | Homebuilt PC's | 3 | September 16th 03 09:05 AM |