• ### Announcements

Dear members, MSFN is made available via subscriptions, donations and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, become a site sponsor and ads will be disabled automatically and by subscribing you get other sponsor benefits.

# Help: I need to Get 2GB installed RAM working in Win98SE

## 136 posts in this topic

I think there might be a little problem with your IO.SYS patch!?

Look at the bytes in the following 2 lines: (o=0x0, d=0xd)

\HIMEM.SYSo/TESTMEM:ONdoo

\HIMEMX.EXEo/MAX=999999do

Good poit, can we display or log what will io.sys really call?

Anyway renaming to himem.exe is the simplest way to be sure.

Another thing is if /MAX= is needed at all, StarRiver claims

he run without this parameter. Hm, I will need to do some

more testing.

0

##### Share on other sites

Shortly

1) I upgraded io.sys patch to replace himem.sys by himem.exe so rename of the file is needed

2) I can confirm that /max=... parameter IS NOT really needed in config sys (so then I wondew why MS himem.dont work and this himemx works)

3) I did a finetune of MaxPhysPage and ended at value 488FF. Crazy is that when I set 1st itme edit 40000 to 48000 it booted but in VGA mode and display ed error of VGA configuration and open resolution change CPL. But whe I go back an increment MaxPhysPage with smaller steps and do rebooting between every change I was able to reach 488FF (over I got insufficent memory). I tried also xmsdsk again but always got VFAT error BSOD.

0

##### Share on other sites

Congratulations, xrayer!

Now your system is detecting the maximum amount of memory that Win 98SE can detect (for more see this link). Win ME, on the other hand, is known to detect about 1995 MB, but I've never had any success in devising a patch for having vmm.vxd v. 4.90.0.3003 load with Win 98SE. That vmm seems to be much different from v. 4.10.2226, so perhaps it is impossible to have it working in Win 98SE...

2) I can confirm that /max=... parameter IS NOT really needed in config sys (so then I wonder why MS himem don't work and this himemx works)

i) It has nothing whatsoever to do with their code, because, although Japheth's HIMEMX is carefully and elegantly coded, Win 98SE's vmm.vxd bypasses all code, literally taking possession only of the data areas (or of the XMS handle table, at the very least). Then again, HIMEMX puts its XMS handle table in its data area, well below 640 kB, in the normal DOS memory arena, while HIMEM.SYS uses the HMA for its table. Even so, I doubt this can cause the different behaviour you and StarRiver observed.

ii) Japheth's HIMEMX is *not* HIMEM.SYS, and does not try to fool Win 98SE into believing it is. So Win 98SE's vmm.vxd acts more tactful in its presence, probably forgoing the use of many undocumented hooks it cannot be sure would work, because it is not dealing with HIMEM.SYS and knows it. This probably is the main difference.

Be as it may, the fact is that you found a way that works, and that certainly will be of help to many others!

BTW, there is a rumour, over the net, that XMSDSK hates to be loaded at the top of XMS, with 2 GB or more of RAM.

The same rumour says it stops crashing if you load it without the "/T" command-line switch. Did you try this? I cannot tell you whether this is a urban legend or a fact, because I have only 1.5 GB in my machine, so it's below the purported threshold.

Edited by dencorso
0

##### Share on other sites
...Win ME, on the other hand, is known to detect about 1995 MB, but I've never had any success in devising a patch for having vmm.vxd v. 4.90.0.3003 load with Win 98SE. That vmm seems to be much different from v. 4.10.2226, so perhaps it is impossible to have it working in Win 98SE...

Hi dencorso,

I attempted earlier in the year to patch the Windows Me VMM.VXD 4.90.0.3003 to work in 98SE...

I got all the version checks sorted and also the VMM DOS loader version report to IO.SYS sorted...

Nine code changes in all.

The problem is that Me VMM.VXD does not like 98SE V86MMGR.VXD...

So I patched Me V86MMGR.VXD 4.90.0.3000 to work in 98SE with three code changes...

But... 98SE just does not want to work with Me V86MMGR.VXD. It fails with an exception.

Probably something to do with IO.SYS I expect.

I could not get past the V86MMGR.VXD exception, so I shelved it.

0

##### Share on other sites

Thanks again for xrayer

I have just installed HimemX.exe on Windosws 98 SE on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII -

My win98's modify steps are just as above

2. Copy himemx.exe to win98 directory

3. Add the line in config.sys

DEVICE=C:\WIN98\HIMEMX.EXE

I am now able to put a maxfilecache of 44000 (48000 did not work for me) while before I was only able to get as high as 40000.

And the most important thing is that I completely solved problems with dos boxes.

I can now start an almost unlimited number of dos windows instances while before (without the himemx) I was unable to run more than 3 dos boxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0

##### Share on other sites
The same rumour says it stops crashing if you load it without the "/T" command-line switch. Did you try this? I cannot tell you whether this is a urban legend or a fact, because I have only 1.5 GB in my machine, so it's below the purported threshold.

Hoho, it works

So now I got 850MB ramdisk for swapfile

c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /t /y

And thanks for thoughts about himem vs himemx. I don't know windows kernel magic how it can behave with different xms mgrs.

EDIT:

Ou, seems that windows cannot use xmsdsk ramdisk for swappping. I cannot see the drive letter in swap file setting dialog

EDIT2:

Aha, it can be redirected in system.ini now it works

[386Enh]

PagingDrive=Z:

Edited by xrayer
0

##### Share on other sites
So now I got 850MB ramdisk for swapfile

c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /t /y

Glad to know it works! Thanks to you we've learnt quite a bunch of new things about Win 98SE.

BTW, you meant to write: "c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /c1 /y" right?

I've also read somewhere that if you rename the ramdisk to any name, except "MS-RAMDRIVE", during autoexec.bat, then it'll show in the swap file setting dialog...

0

##### Share on other sites
BTW, you meant to write: "c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /c1 /y" right?

No, /c1 parameter only set cluster size I don't care about it let it set automatically. Parameter /t is important.

0

##### Share on other sites
Well I have tried everything that was possible (given my knowledge of the problem) and I have not been able to make XMSDSK work without problems.

I have Windosws 98 SE installed on an Asrock 4coredual-sata2 -Intel core 2 quad processor -2 Gb of DDRII -

I have developed the idea that the MaxFileCache entry does not solve definetely the out of memory error.

In some cases no matter what the entry for the MaxFileCache or for MaxPhysPage I got an out of memory error when starting dos.

(I have verified memory values with system monitor)

---------------------

My failed attempts

---------------------

Even in the most favourable situation after starting 6 instances of dos windows,

the out of memory error appears again.

At one point I was able to make XMSDSk work without problem with:

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /T /Y

(in autoexec.bat.)

At that point I did loose completely the use of Dos window.

(It is like some important memory resources are taken by the video card or something else and I have no clue about what is it! even if I have developed the idea that the solution is not in the maxfilecache settings : the solution must be in some kind of wise memory management I cannot find)

-----------------------------------

My present configuration (without XMSDSK)

----------------------------------

I have upgraded to service pack 2 for 98 SE.

and my present settings are:

autoexec.bat

mode con codepage prepare=((850) C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\ega.cpi)

mode con codepage select=850

keyb it,,C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\keyboard.sys

LH /L:2 C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\DOSKEY /INSERT

PROMPT $p$g

SET DIRCMD=/P /A

system.ini

[386Enh]

MaxPhysPage=40000

ebios=*ebios

mouse=*vmouse, msmouse.vxd

device=*dynapage

device=*vcd

device=*vpd

device=*int13

woafont=app850.fon

keyboard=*vkd

MinSPs=16

ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1

DMABufferSize=64

[vcache]

MinFileCache=3000

MaxFileCache=393216

(rest is omitted)

config.sys

DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\HIMEM.SYS /TESTMEM:OFF /Q

DOS=HIGH,UMB

DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\EMM386.EXE NOEMS X=A000-F7FF

DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\setver.exe

device=C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\display.sys con=(ega,,1)

Country=039,850,C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\country.sys

(I have tried and cannot use UMBPCI.SYS at the place of EMM386 cause my motherboard is not supported)

EMM386.exe did work only with the setting: X=A000-F7FF .

I do not think that EGOvoruhk either has solved the problem????

In this configuration I am able to start 2 (two) fresh dos windows before I get the out of memory at the 3rd dos istance.

-----------------------------------

XMSDSK Failure

-------------------------------------

Whenever XMSDSK succesfully creates a ram drive then my dos windows become unavailable for the "out of memory error"

MOREOVER XMSDSK does not work properly: when I start the scandisk, to check the sectors into the ramdrive Z, the write attempt fails after a while.

A more simple copy write attempts fails too.

The failure happens not at a specific point.

what happens is that I got a blue screen with not recoverable error sayng things like:

"An exception 0E has occurred at 0028:C0004D6D in VxD Vmm(01) + 00003D6D. This was called from 0028:C19359C4 in Vxd Rmm(01) + 00000254"

I have tried many different settings for XMSDSK.

(Some example :

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 1800000 z: /T /Y

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 1100000 z: /c1 /T /Y

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /T /Y

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /c64 /T /Y

c:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 500000 z: /c1 /T /Y

)

great!

0

##### Share on other sites
BTW, you meant to write: "c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /c1 /y" right?

No, /c1 parameter only set cluster size I don't care about it let it set automatically. Parameter /t is important.

Well, I think you didn't get my point...

I can run XMSDSK with or without the /T switch, and Win 98SE doesn't care. Older versions of Win refused to run without the /T parameter (which loads XMSDSK at the top of XMS, as farther away from HMA as possible), for sure. As I said, Win 98SE does not care whether XMSDSK is at the top or at the bottom (close to the HMA) of XMS, in my experience, so the /T parameter in not fundamental anymore. However, there is a legend that XMSDSK has a bug that prevents it from loading at the top with 2 GB or more of RAM. Since you are able to load and run XMSDSK OK, having 2 GB of RAM, you either demonstrated it is just a baseless legend, or, more probably, have found out yet another strange quirk related to HYMEM.SYS, for it works for you but you are using HIMEMX.EXE. Curiouser and curioser...

On the other hand, the /C1 switch directs XMSDSK to automatically select the smallest possible sector number per cluster, what leads to the best possible performance of the FAT, without you having explicitly to set that number. Hence, in my opinion, you should be using it.

Frank Uberto's XMSDSK is among the best and most carefully written pieces of software I've ever seen. It rocks.

Edited by dencorso
0

##### Share on other sites
And the most important thing is that I completely solved problems with dos boxes.

I can now start an almost unlimited number of dos windows instances while before (without the himemx) I was unable to run more than 3 dos boxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi, vick1111!

I confirm your finding: before I was able to open around 20 DOS Boxes, whereas, with HIMEMX and all other things unchanged, I can now open more than 40!

Edited by dencorso
0

##### Share on other sites
On the other hand, the /C1 switch directs XMSDSK to automatically select the smallest possible sector number per cluster, what leads to the best possible performance of the FAT, without you having explicitly to set that number. Hence, in my opinion, you should be using it.

I'm not sure about it. When you have small clusters then FAT must be greater and seeking for the specified cluster will take long time when browsing large FAT. And when using the ramdisk for paging file the minimum allocated size is one page - 4kB so smaller clusters don't bring any advantage. Anyway for my ramdisk size and FA16 FS limitation the smallest cluster size is 16kB. I didn't checked what value was automatically set.

Edited by xrayer
0

##### Share on other sites

>GreyPhound

Thaks for your effort with translation of Igor's technical article,

I got some better view or windows memory management now.

Spasibo!

But it's still not clear why in some cases himemx.exe works

and himem.sys not. Anyway I'm use this solutoin more than week

and didn't found problem. I only sometims hit the limit of swapfile

in ramdisk when etiting huge soundtracks in goldwawe, swapfile

ran out of space and shoot windows down. If I would had set swap to HDD

it could grow to bigger size. But from ramdisk it runs pretty fast!

Unfortunatelly memory protection is poor so instead kernel should

shoot the app exceeding memory it allow shoot off all system

It depends on used program.

0

##### Share on other sites

to XRayer:

if you enter XMSDSK line like this:

c:\dos\xmsdsk\xmsdsk.exe 524288 K: /c1 /t /y

C:\OS\COMMAND\label K: scorpion

then the xmsdsk will be labeled as scorpion drive and system will recognize it as a harddisk. than you can enter the parameters in system settings without manually editing system ini. the drive will become visible for swapping. you can do this in Autoexec.bat

0

##### Share on other sites
BTW, you meant to write: "c:\dos\xmsdsk.exe 850000 z: /c1 /y" right?
No, /c1 parameter only set cluster size I don't care about it let it set automatically. Parameter /t is important.
Well, I think you didn't get my point...

I can run XMSDSK with or without the /T switch, and Win 98SE doesn't care. Older versions of Win refused to run without the /T parameter (which loads XMSDSK at the top of XMS, as farther away from HMA as possible), for sure. As I said, Win 98SE does not care whether XMSDSK is at the top or at the bottom (close to the HMA) of XMS, in my experience, so the /T parameter in not fundamental anymore. However, there is a legend that XMSDSK has a bug that prevents it from loading at the top with 2 GB or more of RAM. Since you are able to load and run XMSDSK OK, having 2 GB of RAM, you either demonstrated it is just a baseless legend, or, more probably, have found out yet another strange quirk related to HYMEM.SYS, for it works for you but you are using HIMEMX.EXE. Curiouser and curioser...

1) I have 2Gb of RAM, of which 1150.0 MB are available as per System Properties WITHOUT xmsdsk.exe, io.sys patched with w98iopat.exe (many thanks to xrayer!)

device=c:\...\himem.exe /MAX=1178624 /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE

MaxPhysPage=48000

DMABufferSize=64

EMMExclude=C000-CFFF

MinFileCache=32768

MaxFileCache=261120

ChunkSize=4096

AGP aperture=64MB

The parameters are a modification of xrayer's

device=c:\...\himem.exe /MAX=1048576 /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE

MaxPhysPage=40000

PCI-graphics card (NO AGP aperture)

When I run with C:\...\xmsdsk.exe 524288 z: /c1 /t /y in autoexec.bat, a RAMdisk z: of 512MB is created, BUT:

System Properties now shows ONLY 640.0MB RAM (before: 1150.0MB)

With xrayer's parameters I had pre-RAMdisk 1022.0MB, post-RAMdisk only 513.0MB

The /t switch appearantly did NOT work for me - maybe because I use an AGP card? (xrayer uses a PCI graphics card)

"Parameter /t can be used to tell the driver to allocate XMS memory from the top addresses instead of lower ones. Some machines under Win95 hang up when there's no free memory under 16 MBytes. It can be used too if you have problem playing sounds under Windows. These 2 issues seem to be related to DMA buffering."

Any idea of how to set the parameters with a 64MB AGP aperture?

2) After setting the swapfile to RAMdrive z: with PagingDrive=Z: I got shutdown problems:

- Win98SE hangs after selecting either Shut Down, Restart or Restart in MS-DOS mode, with a blinking cursor on a black screen

- the selection Standby is not displayed in the Shut Down Windows menu anymore

xrayer possibly didn't notice, since the GeForce driver series 80 always has shutdown problems anyway with newer GeForce cards

3) I have seen in several system.ini files here the use of ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. Does this really do anything under Win98SE? Microsoft only lists Windows 98 Standard Edition, NOT Windows Second Edition http://support.microsoft.com/kb/223294

4) Has anybody tried any memory defragmentation software with 2GB RAM plus io.sys patched with w98iopat.exe, plus xmsdsk, plus swapfile location=ramdisk, with AGP vs PCI graphics card?

0

##### Share on other sites

Hi, Multibooter:

1)On thinking about them, your numbers make sense: 1151-512 = 639 and 1024-512 = 512

So, simply omit the /MAX=xxxxxxxx from HIMEM.EXE command, and things should be solved!

Also, do try XMSDSK with and without the /T switch, and tell us what happens.

2) After setting the swapfile to RAMdrive z: with PagingDrive=Z: I got shutdown problems:

- Win98SE hangs after selecting either Shut Down, Restart or Restart in MS-DOS mode, with a blinking cursor on a black screen

- the selection Standby is not displayed in the Shut Down Windows menu anymore

xrayer possibly didn't notice, since the GeForce driver series 80 always has shutdown problems anyway with newer GeForce cards

This matter you'll have to investigate further once you solve the one above. This is fully unexplored land. But do tell me: if you put the swapfile elsewhere, do these problems again disappear?
3) I have seen in several system.ini files here the use of ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1. Does this really do anything under Win98SE? Microsoft only lists Windows 98 Standard Edition, NOT Windows Second Edition http://support.microsoft.com/kb/223294
If you look inside vmm.vxd v. 4.10.0 2226, you'll find ConservativeSwapfileUsage starting at file offset 5287C, so not only vmm.vxd knows about it, but pays attention to it on Win 98SE startup. So, work it does, but with the amount of memory you have, I recommend you use ConservativeSwapfileUsage=0 instead, as I do.
4) Has anybody tried any memory defragmentation software with 2GB RAM plus io.sys patched with w98iopat.exe, plus xmsdsk, plus swapfile location=ramdisk, with AGP vs PCI graphics card?
Also unexplored land. I'll sure be looking forward to hearing your findings about it.

Good luck!

0

##### Share on other sites
Hi, Multibooter:

1)On thinking about them, your numbers make sense: 1151-512 = 639 and 1024-512 = 512

So, simply omit the /MAX=xxxxxxxx from HIMEM.EXE command, and things should be solved!

Also, do try XMSDSK with and without the /T switch, and tell us what happens.

Thanks dencorso,

removing the /MAX switch from himem.exe in config.sys solved the problem of the disappearing RAM.

config.sys with device=\...\himem.exe /NUMHANDLES=64 /VERBOSE is sufficient, /MAX is not needed

autoexec.bat WITH the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /t /y /c1 give RAM 1150MB and RAM drive 639MB

autoexec.bat WITHOUT the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /y /c1 give only RAM 512MB and RAM drive 639MB

The /t parameter is therefore necessary when 2GB of memory are installed.

0

##### Share on other sites
2) After setting the swapfile to RAMdrive z: with PagingDrive=Z: I got shutdown problems:

- Win98SE hangs after selecting either Shut Down, Restart or Restart in MS-DOS mode, with a blinking cursor on a black screen

- the selection Standby is not displayed in the Shut Down Windows menu anymore

This matter you'll have to investigate further once you solve the one above. This is fully unexplored land. But do tell me: if you put the swapfile elsewhere, do these problems again disappear?

I have found no solution to the shutdown problems when the swap file is located on RAM drive Z:

There are NO shutdown problems when the swap file is located on another drive.

Software does not function properly when the swap file is on RAM drive Z:. For example, Sims2 when mounted on virtual Alcohol drive V: hangs after the logo comes up. On the other hand, when the swap file is located on a hard drive Sims2 functions as usual. I would therefore not recommend to put the swap file onto the RAM drive.

It is interesting to note that the memory defragmentation software Fast Defrag 2 http://www.amsn.ro/ gets confused by the memory between 1150MB & 2048MB. With 2GB of memory installed, it reports:

Total Physical Memory: 1150MB

Virtual Memory Size: 898MB (2048-1150=898!!) [actual size of win386.swp: 0 bytes]

BTW Performance - Virtual Memory - Hard Disk D [location of the swap file] is indicated as "D:\-9480MB" (negative sign!) even if the actual size is 130017MB =about 126GB. ScanDisk has a 127 GB limit, the ATA protocol a 137GB limit, is there any limitation of the Win98 swap file? Win98 has chosen by itself to use the D: partition (FAT32, 126GB) instead of the C: partition (FAT16, 1.99GB)

All the above questionmarks regarding the Win98 swap file would suggest that when using 2GBs of memory it's best not to enter unknown territory with the swap file, and under no circumstance put it onto a RAM drive.

Fast Defrag 2 seems to defrag memory ok with 2GB installed, although an annoying error msg "AMS specific__debuginteger function", displaying the value 10, comes up everytime after memory is deframented: displayed once when there is no RAM drive installed, displayed twice when there is a RAM drive Z: installed.

Did anybody find 2GB-memory-bugs in other Win98 software? It might be useful to set up a list of software running bug-free, and software which is buggy/unreliable with 2GB.

0

##### Share on other sites
...ScanDisk has a 127 GB limit, the ATA protocol a 137GB limit...

Actually, the 36-bit 28-bit LBA ATA specification has a limit of under 128GB or under 137438953472 bytes...

It all depends who's selling the size!

Hard drive manufacturers use 10^9 (1000000000) bytes for each 'GB' since it 'looks' bigger to the buyer!

Everyone else uses 2^30 (1073741824) bytes per GB since computers are binary (2) based.

Originally 1KB was decided as 2^10 since it kind of looked like a base-10 number and was close to 1000 (1024).

Therefore 1MB was 2^20, 1GB was 2^30, and so on, not 10^3, 10^6, 10^9...

So, back to the original concept, 128GB or 137GB... Who's selling?

When you buy that 1TB disk, is it 1TB or is it actually 931GB?

Windows Explorer and every other piece of software will give the 'correct' base-2 sizes (converted to base-10 for us humans of course!).

The only ones who use base-10 '000' for computer storage calculations are storage hardware manufacturers!

Afterall, you don't go and buy a 537MB stick of RAM, you buy a 512MB stick.

When drive sizes were smaller, they could explain away the descrepancies by terms like "the format takes up space" and "Windows does not report all the space"...

But now, the descrepancy between the manufacturer size and the real size are getting noticable...

So, next time that sales person tries to pull a fast one on you about the formatting, just tell him that actually the labeled drive size is the "formatted" size, and that hard drive manufacturers need to catch up with the 80s (and then the 21st century!).

Edited by RetroOS
0

##### Share on other sites

Hi, Multibooter!

autoexec.bat WITH the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /t /y /c1 give RAM 1150MB and RAM drive 639MB

autoexec.bat WITHOUT the /t parameter \...\xmsdsk.exe 655360 z: /y /c1 give only RAM 512MB and RAM drive 639MB

The /t parameter is therefore necessary when 2GB of memory are installed.

Thanks for testing and reporting it. You rock!
0

##### Share on other sites
C:\OS\COMMAND\label K: scorpion

Sometimes I work with huge sound files in goldwave and 800MB of pagefile wasn't enough.

But I also had problems when copying a big file, say 600MB to ramdrive - in about 60% of progess

system falls to BSOD. I tied it again with different file size copied. For less about 400MB it didn't fail.

I didn't figure out the source of unstability so I disabled ramdisk and put page file back to HDD.

As I have quite fast SATA drive it's not problem.

0

##### Share on other sites
...But I disabled pagefile on ramdisk for stability reasons.

...

That makes sense since XMSDSK is a DOS driver and as far as Windows is concerned, it is a Real Mode driver.

So... Windows will be switching between Protected and Real modes when ever the RAM drive is accessed...

This would cause real contention in the Windows kernel if the switching happened with paging...

The ideal option would be a RAM Drive VxD that could bypass VMM and access the addressable RAM outside of Windows control...

Dream on they say!

0

##### Share on other sites
ScanDisk has a 127 GB limit, the ATA protocol a 137GB limit, is there any limitation of the Win98 swap file? Win98 has chosen by itself to use the D: partition (FAT32, 126GB) instead of the C: partition (FAT16, 1.99GB)
It is actually the same limit in both cases 137 GB = 137000000000 / (1000*1000*1000) and 127 GB = 137000000000 / (1024*1024*1024)... To be less confusing we ought to say 137 GB = 127 GiB... But GiB arrived too late, I think, so almost nobody uses it. See "Binary Prefix" in the Wikipedia.
All the above questionmarks regarding the Win98 swap file would suggest that when using 2GBs of memory it's best not to enter unknown territory with the swap file, and under no circumstance put it onto a RAM drive.
Yes. That's my opinion too.
Fast Defrag 2 seems to defrag memory ok with 2GB installed, although an annoying error msg "AMS specific__debuginteger function", displaying the value 10, comes up everytime after memory is deframented: displayed once when there is no RAM drive installed, displayed twice when there is a RAM drive Z: installed.
You don't need very constant defragging with such a huge memory. I, with 1.5 GiB, use a command-line defragger, but only once in a while. You might find it useful. Download it here: Memdefrag
Did anybody find 2GB-memory-bugs in other Win98 software? It might be useful to set up a list of software running bug-free, and software which is buggy/unreliable with 2GB.
I think it's still too early to know. I know of about ten people using more than 1 GiB: RLoew, RetroOS, xRayeR, yourself, myself, eidenk, Offler, StarRiver and vick1111 are the names that come to my mind, right now. There may be some others I can't remember at the moment. And most of us have stepped over 1 GiB quite recently... So reports should begin appearing at any moment... in fact, you've just started it. Edited by dencorso
0

##### Share on other sites
It is actually the same limit in both cases 137 GB = 137000000000 / (1000*1000*1000) and 127 GB = 137000000000 / (1024*1024*1024)... To be less confusing we ought to say 137 GB = 127 GiB... But GiB arrived too late, I think, so almost nobody uses it. See "Binary Prefix" in the Wikipedia.
You're right, I didn't read critically enough Mosaddique's otherwise excellent article "Working with large hard drives - the issues and the limits"

By the way, Win98 CAN access an EXTENDED partition >128GB (e.g. on a 750GB HDD an extended partition of 695.5GB, consisting of a 126GB FAT32 logical partition D: and an (invisible) logical 569.6GB NTSF partition E:). Also, the 128GB limit doesn't apply to USB HDDs.

0

##### Share on other sites
Also, the 128GB limit doesn't apply to USB HDDs.

Really?

Can you elaborate on that?

jaclaz

0

## Create an account

Register a new account