Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
cnelson14

512 Ram

25 posts in this topic

I Have Win98SE working with 2Gbt memory ram on board.

Config system.ini is:

[vcache]

MaxFileCache=292754

[386enh]

MaxPhysPage=3C0000

In this configuration Windows 98 really see 960Mbt RAM and this enough, so do not prevent load another installed operation systems.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I Have Win98SE working with 2Gbt memory ram on board.

Config system.ini is:

[vcache]

MaxFileCache=292754

[386enh]

MaxPhysPage=3C0000

In this configuration Windows 98 really see 960Mbt RAM and this enough, so do not prevent load another installed operation systems.

Of course that would work... you're just limiting the amount of RAM it can use.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is better for a system with 2 memory slots:

A. 2 sticks of 128MB SDRAM (PC133)

B. 1 stick of 256MB SDRAM (PC133)

Is there a performance hit for the system to address both slots for the memory vs. only one slot?

As for price, I see that option B is cheaper than option A

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less expensive is better, but it depends on mobo support of ram, if mobo will support 512mb go with 256mb[naturally] as you can always kick it to 384mb or 512mb later. Also make sure you place ram in slot 1[usually closest to cpu]

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> a machine running win98 should be able to accept 1.5 gigs of ram...

>> or possibly 2 gigs

>

>That may sound good on paper but is an inaccurate assumption in todays world,

>and the current day truth is that W9x is just not designed to handle more than 1

>GB of ram.

I know Win 98 SE works well with my 1 GB of RAM.

However, it should also be possible to exploit 3 GB of RAM on Win 98 SE. Simply use freeware XMSDSK (xmsdsk.zip / furd19i.zip) to create a RAM drive up to 2 GB. Then, place Win 98 SE's swap partition on this RAM drive.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

xmsdsk:

http://www.mdgx.com/dos.htm#DOS

* XMS/EMS RAMdisk v1.9i 16-bit DOS TSR improved Microsoft RAMDRIVE.SYS

replacement for MS-DOS 5/6 + Windows 3.1x/9x/ME [74 KB, freeware]:

http://www.uwe-sieber.de/files/xmsdsk.zip

XMS/EMS RAMdisk v1.9i with installer/uninstaller for Windows 9x/ME [114 KB,

freeware]:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/RAMDRIVE.EXE

Creates, loads + resizes RAM drive (up to 2 GB) from AUTOEXEC.BAT, CONFIG.SYS or

native MS-DOS. Does NOT shift drive letters. Includes 2 separate drivers:

- XMSDSK.EXE = loads in extended RAM (requires an upper/extended memory manager

in CONFIG.SYS).

- EMSDSK.EXE = loads in expanded RAM (requires EMM386.EXE with the "RAM" switch

or any other 3rd party expanded memory manager in CONFIG.SYS).

Uses 688 Bytes of upper DOS RAM if loaded with LOADHIGH in AUTOEXEC.BAT (upper

memory manager required in CONFIG.SYS). Example using E as RAM drive letter:

LH C:\RAMDISK\XMSDSK 32768 E: /C1 /T /Y

/T = use extended (XMS) RAM from top in a contiguous block: A MUST!

IMPORTANT:

/T MUST be used with ANY 16 MB or larger RAM disk, otherwise Windows 95/98/ME

does NOT properly initialize IOS (Input Output Subsystem) and RMM (Real Mode

Mapper) fails to load. As a consequence LFNs (Long File Names) support will be

DISABLED on the RAM disk.

See "BROWSER CACHE IN MEMORY" for more info:

http://www.mdgx.com/newtip12.htm#CACHRAM

Hope this helps.

Edited by MDGx
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just installed the ram. A 1 gig stick of PC3200 with timings of 3-4-4-8, single channel. Booted up the computer windows loaded fine. Tried to open a game to see if the system was stable and it wasn't. Game crashed and windows froze, rebooted and tried the same thing, again a crash but system didn't freeze.

Then I changed some setting on my system.ini file. Modified [vcache] to include MaxFileCache=524288. Reboot and the same problems occurred. Then lowered "MaxFileCache=524288" to "MaxFileCache=524200" I did this because some people recommended lowering the last value a bit. Again same problems, games crash windows stays up and running.

Lastly I checked

[386enh]

MaxPhysPage=40000

under the system.ini file. Reboot, same problems.

I am running windows 98SE modified with UNOFFICIAL Windows98 Second Edition Service Pack 2.1a from exuberant software. AMD 2700, 1 gig of ram PC3200 single channel, 120 gig hard drive, ABIT NFS7-S2G motherboard, 400W power supply.

In the next hour I will be placing back in my two previous sticks of PC3200 256 MB ram, and seeing if the problems go away. If I can't seem to solve this problem, then it looks like I'll have to switch to XP :(

Actually, if it's unstable when using more than 1 RAM module, the RAM you inserted is incompatible with the motherboard, bad or you have a bad RAM slot. May also be because if an insufficient power supply. If you're overclocking, I heard that using more than 1 RAM module can cause your RAM to overclock crappily.

If NT-based Windows versions give you file corrupted error messages and file not found error messages, I can guarantee that you have a RAM chip or RAM slot problem.

Did you check your voltages? Also if you run Prime95 and Prime95 fails, your CPU likely isn't stable!

Edited by RJARRRPCGP
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 2 Gig PC that dual boots W98SE and W2K, and it took me quite a while to get W98SE to be stable. For starters, it would not install with more than 1 Gig in said PC. (had 768 meg in during install) Later, when I got it to boot, it wouldn't run programs, had weird errors about the graphics card, etc. In any case, for me, claims of Win98 running on more that 1 Gig of RAM is in the "even if it's true I don't beleive it" category. Having more that 1 Gig and restricting it with MaxPhysPage doesn't count, unless it's over 1 Gig, which I'm almost certain is not the case for a working system.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a 2 Gig PC that dual boots W98SE and W2K, and it took me quite a while to get W98SE to be stable. For starters, it would not install with more than 1 Gig in said PC. (had 768 meg in during install) Later, when I got it to boot, it wouldn't run programs, had weird errors about the graphics card, etc. In any case, for me, claims of Win98 running on more that 1 Gig of RAM is in the "even if it's true I don't beleive it" category. Having more that 1 Gig and restricting it with MaxPhysPage doesn't count, unless it's over 1 Gig, which I'm almost certain is not the case for a working system.
It must depend on the exact mobo and CPU design...
I'm running 768MB of RAM [which is the most my motherboard supports] with no problems at all.

I've heard of people successfully using 1GB and I think I saw someone claim 1.5GB. Anything more and you're probably pushing it.

2Gb with borrowed RAM for 3 months with no problem here :) I'm going to see if I can borrow another gig and try 3GB, since that's what my mobo claims to support.
Supposedly, the theoretical limit is 4GB but I seriously doubt that will work since consumer level motherboards that could accept 4GB of memory simply didn't exist when Win98SE was developed so there was no way to test it.
The addressing limit of every CPU since the i386 was 4Gb, but the design of the PC architecture limits it to approximately 3Gb of physical memory. The upper 1 Gb is reserved for I/O ports and other miscellaneous items.

You don't need the unofficial service pack to work with lots of RAM - it's all in the MaxFileCache setting. A stock install of 98se will work as long as you set MaxFileCache=524288 or less.

Edited by LLXX
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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.