dencorso

Day-to-day running Win 9x/ME with more than 1 GiB RAM

162 posts in this topic

Hello @Rloew,

As usual, your response to my latest post has been prompt and, most importantly, quite comprehensive. Thank you very much for staying with me so far! :>)

My references to "NRU"/"RU" do not aim at establishing some kind of objective dichotomy. Rather, they reflect my actual experiences and puzzlements with various aspects related to the topic under discussion. Please remember that, in your case, my subjective status may come across as decidedly "yesterday's news" since "you've been there, done that", so to speak. I am still struggling with basic moving parts that are super-foundational by the their very all-encompassing nature (e.g. XMS issues, 4th GB mapping issues etc.)

Here is an example. Leyko writes:

[What's needed done first is to forget, once and for all, EMM386 and other memory managers; more or less stable work, or even (system) booting can't be guaranteed with them]

What is one to make of this? Is he including such venerable "beasts" as HIMEM or HIMEMX ?!!? What aspects of EMM386 (QEMM etc) are potentially problematic here? Is it the Expanded Memory or, perhaps, the DEVICEHIGH/LOADHIGH invokations, or both? You see what I mean?

In any case, any and all assistance with such matters is greatly appreciated.

Cheers

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. He meant EMM386, QEMM, CEMM, 386MAX and NETROOM... because they are simple VMMs which run DOS in V86 mode, and have to be suspended in order for Windows own full-fledged VMM to take over, while leaving lots of things for Win VMM to take care of that otherwise wouldn't exist.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello @Dencorso,

Thanks for the prompt response. That's what I thought too! :>) I speculate that, as experienced "old pros", @Rloew and you have seen your fair share of digital pathologies... To this effect, I would like to ask your opinion about a couple of things regarding HIMEMX and EMM386.

First off, when it comes to HIMEMX, is DOS=HIGH required, implied or, even understood? Also, how can one activate the DOS=UMB option? Does one have to use EMM386? Finally, I have read somewhere that there are some drawbacks to using HIMEMX in MS-DOS 7.1 real-mode. Is this true?

My second question has to do with the Win98se environment itself (not real-mode). Is there a drawback to utilizing the DOS=UMB option while making darn sure that EMM386 (or whatever works with HIMEMX) does not provide Expanded Memory services (i.e., NOEMS NOVCPI)?

Thanks for your patience.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again,

I made some progress in dealing with my second question. I have experimented with EMM386 in the context of HIMEMX. My attempt at just allowing UMA/UMB utilization while blocking the provision of Expanded Memory services (NOEMS NOVCPI) led to quite a surprise. Namely, Win98SE just recognized 384 MB of physical memory!!

I wonder if HIMEMX is compatible with some other, hopefully unobtrusive, way to *just* allow UMA/UMB utilization *within* the Win98SE environment...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First off, when it comes to HIMEMX, is DOS=HIGH required, implied or, even understood?

It's not required nor implied, but is understood and will work.

Also, how can one activate the DOS=UMB option? Does one have to use EMM386?

Either EMM386, or any of CEMM, 386MAX, QEMM or NETROOM. None are good ideas with Win 9x/ME so, if you cannot live without UMBs, and have an AMD based machine, the best solution (which is not so good) is to keep using EMM386. If you have an Intel based machine, UMBPCI is the way to go.

Finally, I have read somewhere that there are some drawbacks to using HIMEMX in MS-DOS 7.1 real-mode. Is this true?
HIMEMX has some bugs (at least four, I think, but I'm not finding my notes on it), but none are really serious. I don't think it'd cause any problems in Real Mode DOS. The problems it may cause in windows were already described by RLoew, some posts above.

I think this answers the questions your experimentation hasn't already answered. Now, enough of thread hijacking. If you want to discuss anything outside the scope of this thread's title, please do open another thread.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since dencorso has updated the list with my new system without doing the usual thread bump ( :whistle::realmad: ), please allow me guys to bump it myself:

This topic has been updated!

What's New?

on post #2:

loblo's 4GB system (the only known 4GB Windows Me system in the world :w00t:) has been added.

:thumbup

Edited by loblo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

loblo's 4GB system (the only known 4GB Windows Me system in the world :w00t:) has been added.

With exactly 4GiB yes. The larger ones all multi-boot ME.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please add the following system to the list.

Motherboard: Asus M5A97

OSes: Windows 98SE + Windows 95, ME, 3.11 and XP SP3 + MSDOS 7.10, using RFDISK Multi-Boot Profile MBR

Memory: 32 GiB (4x 8 GiB DDR3 DIMMs; 3069 MiB available to Win 98SE; 29692 MiB available to RAMDISKs and 64-Bit Memory SDK)

CPU: AMD FX-8120 Eight Core

Motherboard Ethernet and Sound Disabled (No Win 9x Drivers)

USB 3 (XP Only)

Video Card: NVIDIA 7200GS PCI-E (with 81.98 Driver, with shutdown problem)

Sound Card: Envy24

Ethernet Card: RTL8139

2 Removable SATA Trays

1TB SATA Hard Drive currently installed

Blu-Ray Writer

TBPLUS Disk Package

CONFIG.SYS:

DEVICE=C:\HIMEMEX.SYS /S /V ; used with RAMDSK64 and 64-Bit Memory SDK.

DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\HIMEM.SYS /NUMHANDLES=64

AUTOEXEC.BAT:

RAMDSK64 R: 6000000 (6GB non-XMS RAMDISK For Internet Temporaries)

Remaining 64-Bit RAM reserved for 64-Bit RAM and Multi-Core SDKs.

vmm32.vxd (real mode), vcache.vxd: 4.10.0.2222, vmm.vxd: 4.10.0.2226 with RAM Limitation Patch 7.1 (with /M and /P Options)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic has been updated!

What's New?

on post #2:

RLoew's #2 machine has been updated. Now it is the new RAM record holder for 9x/ME: 32 GiB RAM onboard! :thumbup

Let's keep the list up-to-date:

If you are using 9x/ME with more than 1 GiB RAM, do PM me your info and you shall be added to the list!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

loblo's 4GB system (the only known 4GB Windows Me system in the world :w00t:) has been added.

With exactly 4GiB yes. The larger ones all multi-boot ME.

Only known 4GB Windows Me system in the world in daily "production" use I guess then. ;)

That's not why I am posting however, but because my system specs have slightly changed, I have replaced my sound card again and I am now happily using an ESI Juli@.

I had too many issues with the M-Audio 2496 vxd driver, ranging from it not being fully multiclient to having noise in the output of some audio applications and generating OS freezes if using GPU accelerated applications after using certain audio apps such as winamp because of some bad interaction with directdraw apparently... None of that crap with the Juli@ which sounds better than the 2496 and whose wdm driver is apparently flawless and has I believe the lowest known audio latency (down to 1ms). B)

Tip in case of problems for installing/reinstalling wdm audio drivers correctly btw: deleting the HKLM\Enum\SW registry key before install/reinstall is a VERY GOOD IDEA. B)

Edited by loblo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic has been updated!

What's New?

on post #2:

LoneCrusader's #1 machine has been updated, and his new #2 machine has been added. :thumbup

Let's keep the list up-to-date:

If you are using 9x/ME with more than 1 GiB RAM, do PM me your info and you shall be added to the list!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My system details need a bit of an update now too!

:hello:

I decided to change my graphics card back to the nVidia one I tried out some time ago, as I'm now running more demanding applications on the XP side of the system.

The card is now a XFX branded nVidia GeForce 7950GT AGP card with 512 MB of memory on-board.

Works fine with the unofficial tweaked nVidia Display Driver 82.69 at 1920 x 1080 (I've finally bought a 21st century monitor!)

The AGP aperture is now set to 128 MB (the only configuration that works with the card IIRC).

I now have only (!) 3071 MB available to Win 98SE.

I'm putting up with the bad 98 shutdown caused by the card, in every other respect the system is running beautifully!

Cheers, Dave.

:)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My #3 machine now has changed video card : Ati Radeon X850XT PE 256MB. Rest is unchanged.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic has been updated!

What's New?

on post #2:

Dave-H's, TmEE's #3 and LoneCrusader's #2 machines configurations have been updated. :thumbup

Let's keep the list up-to-date:

If you are using 9x/ME with more than 1 GiB RAM, do PM me your info and you shall be added to the list!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just also noticed that my specs say I'm running PatchMem version 6.0.

I'm actually now running version 7.0.

I've now realised there is a 7.1 so I've contacted Rudolph Loew about an update.

Interesting to see that loblo's second machine is using the same graphics card and driver that I am, but with the AGP aperture set to 64 MB.

If I do that with my system Windows 98 won't load the desktop and just sits permanently on a flashing cursor after the splash screen.

I guess that's probably down to being a different motherboard, or possibly because he's running ME not 98SE.

:)

Edited by Dave-H
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.