Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kelsenellenelvian

512 MB ram and above?

67 posts in this topic

OK might be a stoopid Question I have a second system with a gig and a half of ram I am planning on Dual-booting XP and 98. So does 98se with all patches and mods (Gapes SP, Tihiys Revo pack and Maximus's patch) ACTUALLY support more than 512 megs of ram or not? I mean Yeah it might show all of the ram and recognize that there is a 1.5 gigs yet does it actually use ALL of it or does it kinda bottleneck at 512?

Trying to make a really good gaming system. :lol:

Edited by Kelsenellenelvian
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used 2Gb successfully for a few months (on borrowed RAM, the two sticks didn't even match :lol:). Nothing more than stock 98SE with MaxFileCache limit setting. From what I could see, it does use all of it - I had disabled the swap file and never ran into any "out of memory" errors.

Edited by LLXX
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problems running 1gb ram, plan on boosting to 2gb as can :D

LLXX, did you run into any probs when you first introduced 2gb to 98se?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed pretty thoroughly before...

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=63970

But to summarize...

There are two limitations: hardware and software.

On the hardware side, some motherboards / BIOSes simply have problems with problems with large amounts of memory. But, assuming you have a decent motherboard that can handle the amount of memory you're wanting to use, you'll run into the software limits of Windows...

You can use 512M-1GB by changing some settings in system.ini. The unofficial service pack can make these changes. It's one of the install options.

Using over 1GB is iffy. Typically, people that run over 1GB in windows 98 modify their windows settings to tell Windows not to use it all. This is pointless unless you are dual booting with another operating system that CAN see the extra memory.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LLXX, did you run into any probs when you first introduced 2gb to 98se?
Original configuration (still using it now):

1 256Mb

2 empty

3 empty

4 empty

1 256Mb

2 256Mb

3 empty

4 empty

No problems, 512Mb

1 256Mb

2 256Mb

3 512Mb

4 empty

Didn't work at first, needed MaxFileCache=524288 and then worked fine.

1 256Mb

2 256Mb

3 512Mb

4 1Gb

No problems, 2Gb.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had disabled the swap file and never ran into any "out of memory" errors.

Interesting, were you using any memory intensive prgms[ie:graphics editing]? I don't "Game" , but do alot of graphics & multitasking.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one point I remember having several IE windows, Photoshop with a rather large image, and several Torrents running in the background. Probably around 20 processes total.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx LLXX, soon as I get my other 1gb stick in I'll give er a go & report my experiences here :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My multi-boot PC had problems with this until i did an edit to MaxFileCache

MaxFileCache=524288

After that it worked and when i added to 1.5 GB no problems as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread necromancy rules!

.. anyway - after a bit of testing myself and pondering. Even after the VCache settings and the rest - my system would bork (self-restart before reaching the GUI without any messages) if I were to add more than 1GB of ram. However, I found there is a way around that without hard limiting your ram through msconfig in such a case. I thought this might help those who too might have had troubles trying to get into windows while using more than 1gb of ram despite the use of vcache tweaks.

Using a freeware tool called XMS-DISK can effectively let you use up to 3GB (1gb direct + 2gb through a ramdisk) of ram overall and use it all as well without any troubles. Unzip it into a folder such as 'ramdisk' into your c drive. Then add the following line to your autoexec.bat file:

C:\ramdisk\xmsdsk.exe 262144 Z: /C1 /T /Y

Z: will be the drive letter it will be assigne dto so as not to interfere with your other drive lettering order. The number 262144 is to handle 256mb additional ram (256 x 1024). So if you have say 1.5gb ram , set it to 512000.

Once in windows - you'll need to set your swapfile to the new ramdisk (z:) to it's fullest size so that windows can use the ram above 1gb in the form of a ram-based swapfile (rather than disk-based).

Now, there is a drawback to using this workaround. To access safe-mode you'll need to use the step-by-step method to load your config.sys & autoexc.bat (set no to load registry and no to loading drivers). Otherwise the ramdisk will not utilize the ram above 1gb in safemode and the PC will likely self-reboot before hitting even the safemode GUI again.

Additionally another drawback - being that the ramdisk is now using that extra ram above 1gb - your 'my computer' property sheet will only show 1gb of ram as it's allocated the rest above it for the ramdisk (now used as a RAM-swapfile).

Edited by Chozo4
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have "just" 384 MB ram. I use the "conservative swapfile" setting and with this amount of ram my system barely uses the swapfile. Suppose I have >1gig, what extra performance gain will a fast swapfile on a ramdrive give me?

Edited by noguru
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have "just" 384 MB ram. I use the "conservative swapfile" setting and with this amount of ram my system barely uses the swapfile. Suppose I have >1gig, what extra performance gain will a fast swapfile on a ramdrive give me?

The method I'd mentioned is for those who experience problems with running more than 1gb of ram. Whereas they'd normally have to set maxphsypage to cap the ram no higher than 1gb (thus making as if anything over never existed). Which would be a last resort if even vcache adjustments didn't help.

A swap file in effect is just emulated ram once your ram runs out. Which is normally a file on your hard disk. Paging to a hard disk is only as fast as the disk itself (slow) whereas ram is much faster. Putting the swap file into a ram disk is the same as using the ram itself. So we basically use the ram above 1gb to turn that emulated ram into real ram again with such a workaround through the use of a ramdisk.

Edited by Chozo4
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have "just" 384 MB ram. I use the "conservative swapfile" setting and with this amount of ram my system barely uses the swapfile. Suppose I have >1gig, what extra performance gain will a fast swapfile on a ramdrive give me?

The method I'd mentioned is for those who experience problems with running more than 1gb of ram. Whereas they'd normally have to set maxphsypage to cap the ram no higher than 1gb (thus making as if anything over never existed). Which would be a last resort if even vcache adjustments didn't help.

A swap file in effect is just emulated ram once your ram runs out. Which is normally a file on your hard disk. Paging to a hard disk is only as fast as the disk itself (slow) whereas ram is much faster. Putting the swap file into a ram disk is the same as using the ram itself. So we basically use the ram above 1gb to turn that emulated ram into real ram again with such a workaround through the use of a ramdisk.

I know what a swapfile is and how it works :)

My point is that if a system is not swapping, because 1gig is huge for Win98, the ramdisk is not used. This ram is just sitting there. There is no real effective difference with capping the mem with maxphyspage. It's only usefull when you run a dualboot with a os that can handle 1gig better.

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.