Memory Question
in [Windows 98]
|
From: Daave on 12 Dec 2006 08:57 "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > Still, at $19 a pop, I'd go ahead and fill that baby up. Note that > Win98 can make decent use of RAM totalling up to 1 GB. That's the max. > However, some tweaks are required for using more than 512 MB. At or > under 512 MB, the only limiting factor is the hardware, and don't > trust the hardware's specs to match reality. Just becasue it *says* it > can handle 768 MB doesn't make it so. I know editing images and video requires a large amount of RAM. How about viewing streaming video? Even though I have DSL, my system (which is well maintained and lean) has trouble with streaming video. Do you think this is a function of RAM? Or might it perhaps be the limitations of my motherboard? (500 MHz Celeron, 128 KB secondary memory cache, and a 66 MHz system bus) And regarding your last sentence, are you saying that my board might not be able to handle the 768 MB or that I will need to tweak my system in order to accommodate this much RAM? If the former, how do I determine that it *can* handle that much? -- Dave
From: "MEB" meb@not on 12 Dec 2006 09:06 "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM(a)myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message news:usK8pwaHHHA.1008(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... | MEB wrote: | > PER | > Manual | > | http://www.ecs.com.tw/ECSWeb/Downloads/ProductsDetail_Download.aspx?DetailID=100&DetailName=Manual&DetailDesc=P6SET-ML(V1.4)&MenuID=0&LanID=9: | | Wow. That was thorough. And fast! | | Actually, I have the manual and understand everything in your post. I'm | aware that my system is capable of a total of 768 MB RAM. | | I guess I'm curious as how much memory is used by other users of 98 SE. | For some reason, I was thinking that 256 MB was a decent amount. I was | even thinking of going as high as 384. Hell, I'll go whole hog and go | for the max of 768; it's just that I don't want to get to the point of | overkill--I ain't running XP! | | So... how much RAM do others use? | | Also... | | Perhaps I should also upgrade the processor to a Pentium III? Thoughts? | | TIA. | | -- | Dave | | As pointed out by others, depends upon your intended usage. My 98 machine presently runs 256, though has been as high as 512, but I liked it at and it appeared to run the best at 384 {tested with a Celeron 300a both standard and over-clocked}. Had to use those memory chips in another test system, and their bus speed now negates their usage in the present FSB configuration. At 512 it handled memory hungry programs well, though some of the older programs seemed to have difficulty with memory over that amount [which may have been due, in part, to the OS rather than the program], yet 384 still "screamed' {related to that time period, test configuration, and the Celeron processor}. So, for the price, 384 meg would likely serve your needs without unnecessary problems, though its your judgment call. -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real world" "Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth. Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happen." Winston Churchill Or to put it another way: Morpheus can offer you the two pills; but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one. _______________
From: Gary S. Terhune on 12 Dec 2006 09:09 Daave wrote: > "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: >> Still, at $19 a pop, I'd go ahead and fill that baby up. Note that >> Win98 can make decent use of RAM totalling up to 1 GB. That's the >> max. However, some tweaks are required for using more than 512 MB. >> At or under 512 MB, the only limiting factor is the hardware, and >> don't trust the hardware's specs to match reality. Just becasue it >> *says* it can handle 768 MB doesn't make it so. > > I know editing images and video requires a large amount of RAM. How > about viewing streaming video? Even though I have DSL, my system > (which is well maintained and lean) has trouble with streaming video. > Do you think this is a function of RAM? Or might it perhaps be the > limitations of my motherboard? (500 MHz Celeron, 128 KB secondary > memory cache, and a 66 MHz system bus) It's a function of both RAM and CPU (and FSB) speeds. Ram for bufffering, speeds for quality. > And regarding your last sentence, are you saying that my board might > not be able to handle the 768 MB or that I will need to tweak my > system in order to accommodate this much RAM? If the former, how do I > determine that it *can* handle that much? Only way to know that is try it. Or get lucky and find some dependable source that has knowledge of that particular board's qualities. You'll often see someone pop up in here, for example, saying something like, "There's a known issue with that particular board and it.." blah, blah. As for the in-excess-of-512 MB tweak, I'll have to look it up (unless someone else chimes in). But that will have to wait until I can see straight. I'm up a few hours past my usual 3 am bedtime already. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://grystmill.org/articles/cleanboot.htm http://grystmill.org/articles/security.htm
From: "MEB" meb@not on 12 Dec 2006 09:39 "Gary S. Terhune" <grystnews(a)mvps.org> wrote in message news:egRgycfHHHA.1912(a)TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... | | Daave wrote: | > "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: | >> Still, at $19 a pop, I'd go ahead and fill that baby up. Note that | >> Win98 can make decent use of RAM totalling up to 1 GB. That's the | >> max. However, some tweaks are required for using more than 512 MB. | >> At or under 512 MB, the only limiting factor is the hardware, and | >> don't trust the hardware's specs to match reality. Just becasue it | >> *says* it can handle 768 MB doesn't make it so. | > | > I know editing images and video requires a large amount of RAM. How | > about viewing streaming video? Even though I have DSL, my system | > (which is well maintained and lean) has trouble with streaming video. | > Do you think this is a function of RAM? Or might it perhaps be the | > limitations of my motherboard? (500 MHz Celeron, 128 KB secondary | > memory cache, and a 66 MHz system bus) | | It's a function of both RAM and CPU (and FSB) speeds. Ram for bufffering, | speeds for quality. | | > And regarding your last sentence, are you saying that my board might | > not be able to handle the 768 MB or that I will need to tweak my | > system in order to accommodate this much RAM? If the former, how do I | > determine that it *can* handle that much? | | Only way to know that is try it. Or get lucky and find some dependable | source that has knowledge of that particular board's qualities. You'll often | see someone pop up in here, for example, saying something like, "There's a | known issue with that particular board and it.." blah, blah. | | As for the in-excess-of-512 MB tweak, I'll have to look it up (unless | someone else chimes in). But that will have to wait until I can see | straight. I'm up a few hours past my usual 3 am bedtime already. | | -- | | Gary S. Terhune | MS-MVP Shell/User | http://grystmill.org/articles/cleanboot.htm | http://grystmill.org/articles/security.htm | | Got ya covered Gary,, Posted and re-posted by too many to place the originators [note the first comment is the general MAX supported memory statement]: This Courtesy of MVP's Bert Kinney, anf Ron Martell: AM. In reality it will only handle 1 GB of RAM. This will also depend on hardware installed, in particular the mother board and it's components. In some cases Win98/ME will function normally with 1.5 GB of RAM. See the MS KB articles below. If the system has 384MB's of RAM installed following line can be added to the [vcache] section of windows\system.ini file. MaxFileCache=275000 If the system has 512MB's of RAM installed following line can be added to the [vcache] section of windows\system.ini file. MaxFileCache=358000 If the system has 700MB's of RAM or more installed following line MUST be added to the [vcache] section of windows\system.ini file but never more. MaxFileCache=512000 If you go over 1GB of RAM and still receive errors add the following line to the [386enh] section of the System.ini file: MaxPhysPage=40000 This limits the amount of physical RAM that Windows can access to 1GB. If the errors go away with this setting remove the memory over 1GB as it will not be used with this setting. Windows 95 Can Access Up to Two GB of RAM: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q181/5/94.asp Error Message: Insufficient Memory to Initialize Windows: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;184447 "Out of Memory" Error Messages with Large Amounts of RAM Installed: http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q253/9/12.ASP Computer May Reboot Continuously with More Than 1.5 GB of RAM: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304943 Now the question arises, is the increase of RAM going to make my system faster! Ron Martel [MS MVP] has a technique for determining this. http://onlinehelp.bc.ca/tips.htm#faster Regards, Bert Kinney [MS-MVP DTS] http://dts-l.org/ **************************************** Free memory testers: http://www.memtest86.com/ and DocMemory from: http://www.simmtester.com/ Curt BD-MVBT http://dundats.mvps.org/ http://dundats.proboards27.com/index.cgi http://www.aumha.org/ --------- Per Gary's and your discussion on memory vs. FSB verses video streaming verses ... Your limitations will likely be processor [Celeron at 500mhz] and its speed relationships [FSB at 66mhz], though memory MAY help... -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ BLOG http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real world" "Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth. Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happen." Winston Churchill Or to put it another way: Morpheus can offer you the two pills; but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one. _______________
From: Daave on 12 Dec 2006 10:47
"MEB" <meb(a)not real(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23b8PZtfHHHA.3668(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Per Gary's and your discussion on memory vs. FSB verses video > streaming > verses ... > > Your limitations will likely be processor [Celeron at 500mhz] and its > speed > relationships [FSB at 66mhz], though memory MAY help... Thanks for the input, MEB; I had a feeling that might be the case. So I guess even if I were to put in a faster Pentium III, the FSB would be the bottleneck. -- Dave |