 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / General Topics / March 2007A performance issue
I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. Can I run both DRAMS at 100MZ without damaging anything? If I can't will I see a performance boost or degradation by setting the bus to 100MZ and running both DRAMS? Thanks, Dan Hacker  Signature---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- | I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has | 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] | Thanks, | Dan Hacker First: there isn't enough information to answer your question from what you supplied. Your processor [speed and type] and motherboard [model and BIOS or at least the computer manufacturer and model] along with the actual attempted memory manufacturer and IDs are necessary. Pending that information: The general recommendation is to not mix speeds /CAS of memory IF any chips are made within the last three [to five] years without first checking to see if they can support different clock speeds and at what CAS/RAS they support that speed. Likely you may not be able to lower your present FSB [front side bus speed] due to your processor requirements unless you have a split/dual bus configuration [not likely] though you may be able to downgrade your processor through the BIOS, though that would defeat the purpose. You MAY however, be able to overclock [per the module rating] the 100 to 133 if we are supplied with the information. Please post your information so we can help determine your potentials. SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ BLOG - http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real world" http://groups.google.com/group/the-peoples-law?hl=en - discussion group for general aspects of Law verses the Peoples' of the 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. _______________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "MEB" <meb@not real@hotmail.com> > | I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently > has [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > the computer manufacturer and model] along with the actual attempted memory > manufacturer and IDs are necessary. System Processor Model : AMD Athlon(tm) XP Name : Duron M8 & Athlon MP/XP & Sempron (Thoroughbred) 130nm 1.5-2.5GHz+ 1.5-1.65V Speed : 1.25GHz Manufacturer : MICRO-STAR INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD Model : MS-6378 System BIOS : 01/17/2003-8361-686B-6A6LMM4SC-00 Chipset : VIA KT133/A Bank 0 : 64MB SDRAM 2-2-2-0CL Bank 2 : 128MB SDRAM 2-2-2-0CL Shared Memory : 8MB Speed : 1x 100MHz (100MHz data rate) Memory Module 1 : Toshiba THMY6480F1BEG-80 140A0501 64MB 8x(8Mx8) SDRAM PC100-222-622 (CL3 up to 125MHz) (CL2 up to 100MHz) Memory Module 2 : SpecTek 128MB 4x(16Mx16) SDRAM PC133U-333-5412 (CL3 up to 133MHz) (CL2 up to 83MHz) > Likely you may not be able to lower your present FSB [front side bus speed] > due to your processor requirements unless you have a split/dual bus > configuration [not likely] though you may be able to downgrade your > processor through the BIOS, though that would defeat the purpose. You MAY Front Side Bus Speed : 2x 100MHz (200MHz data rate) Maximum FSB Speed / Max Memory Speed : 2x 133MHz / 1x 133MHz > however, be able to overclock [per the module rating] the 100 to 133 if we > are supplied with the information. > > Please post your information so we can help determine your potentials. > > -- Thanks for your time and expertise, Dan Hacker Hi Dan, What motherboard is it, or if it is a major name computer what brand and model is it? SignatureGlen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+ http://dts-l.org/ http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm >I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has > 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thanks, > Dan Hacker Yes, you can usually do that. However, why don't you try it and see if the performance really does increase. Some motherboards do not work well with a processor (cpu) running at a different freq than the DRAM. ie: cpu on a 133MHz FSB and the SDRAM on a 100MHz FSB. With ram so cheap, why not just buy what your motherboard mfg recommends? PS: If you have to set your cpu FSB to 100MHz to use the ram, your performance will be noticeably worse. > I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has > 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thanks, > Dan Hacker If your PC100 DRAM is high quality, it may run just fine at 133MHz. Mine did. PS: I used it in combo with a stick of PC133 DRAM. > I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has > 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thanks, > Dan Hacker I may be wrong, but I was told if you mix speeds, you were automatically limited to the slowest speed. I'm mixing 133 and 100, and what is more important to me is the added memory, not the speed. I don't believe one could actually see the difference between 100MHz and 133MHz, but the additional memory, yes. The biggest consideration in my opinion, is whether or not the mis-matched memory will "play well" together. Fire away! <vbg> SignatureHTH, Curt Windows Support Center http://aumha.org/ > If your PC100 DRAM is high quality, it may run just fine at 133MHz. > Mine did. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> Thanks, >> Dan Hacker Not really true if you set the FSB speed to 133MHz for the ram. If you let the system do it automatically, it will usually revert to the speed of the slowest ram stick. Some of the high quality 100MHz ram will easily run at 133MHz or higher. Generally, mixing ram speeds and sometimes even CAS rating and brands is not recommended for optimal success. However, if he wants to try it, then he will have the answer. If it gets into a non-boot scenerio, usually just removing the slower stick will correct the problem. If it does not and he cannot get into the BIOS to set the ram speed manually, he will have to shut down and clear the BIOS using the 'jumper' to clear it and then reboot. If he has to run his cpu at the slower 100MHz FSB also, he will be slower, even with the addition of more memory. PS: running the memory at 133MHz or 100MHz would not show a major difference in his system. The cpu FSB speed is much more important in terms of performance improvement. > I may be wrong, but I was told if you mix speeds, you were automatically > limited to the slowest speed. I'm mixing 133 and 100, and what is more [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> --- | I may be wrong, but I was told if you mix speeds, you were automatically | limited to the slowest speed. I'm mixing 133 and 100, and what is more [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | | Fire away! <vbg> Along those lines; I have tried to address those potential issues sufficiently through several discussions in this group: Short, yes, the lowest "supported" CAS and/or speed: Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823421 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823473 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823477 Re: tried PC133 memstix - DBLBUFF & IFSHLP went corrupt/missing 02-22-06 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:807307 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:807352 The summary is don't try this anymore: The days of switching "any old memory" with "any old memory" or mixing such went the way of abilities to blindly overclock processors [though that ability with memory lasted for several more years]. As memory manufacturers became more productive at module creation, and specific processor/mother boards began to require specific and limited modules; the ability to use that memory in the old fashion of "trial and error" or reliance upon supposed new automatic BIOS recognition when mix/matching went the way of the dinosaur when attempting to deal with newer controller chips in a mixed environment. New module "controller chip" designs coupled with better QC apparently allowed the manufacturer to essentially lock the supported speeds and CAS/RAS available/or for which they could be used [Think Intel's better manufacturing and QC allowing them to lock processors. SEE NOTE * ]. Mixing those essentially locked modules, has been found to cause corruption issues. So the long held belief that CAS2 100 could easily replace or work with 133 CAS3 was/is no longer viable. Moreover, if CAS3 100 [which was/is the most prevalent produced] is attempted at 133 at ANY CAS/RAS, numerous issues pop-up. They may pass POST, but when actually used by the OS, the errors abound. The same has been found true, at times, with 133 CAS2 attempted at 100. All the major manufacturers openly supported, CAUTIONED, and specifically noted on their websites and in their adverti$ing, that one must carefully match the BIOS support, processor and the memory, as failing to do so, likely would cause failures. One can still find smaller manufacturers that create multi FSB/CAS support modules, though that's likely due to the controller chip they used, rather than any real intent. *This change over related directly with the Asian memory crash and burning of a memory chip manufacturing plant. The investors and the "BANKS" demanded updated manufacturing techniques from the survivors. Siemans apparently implemented this around the same time period. | > If your PC100 DRAM is high quality, it may run just fine at 133MHz. | > Mine did. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] | >> I | >> see a performance boost or degradation by setting the bus to 100MZ and | >> running both DRAMS? | >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- SignatureMEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ BLOG - http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real world" http://groups.google.com/group/the-peoples-law?hl=en - discussion group for general aspects of Law verses the Peoples' of the 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. _______________ Boy, you sure give a guy his money's worth. And so do glee, Buffalo, Curt Christianson, and Frank Zabkar. I tried mixing the sticks. The bus was reset to 100MZ by jumpering. The results seem to be a zero sum equation. The processor dropped from 1.6MX to 1.25MZ. And there seems to be no gain or loss in performance. Oh, well. I think I'll just pull the stick and save it for another machine--an OLD machine. Dan > | I may be wrong, but I was told if you mix speeds, you were automatically > | limited to the slowest speed. I'm mixing 133 and 100, and what is more [quoted text clipped - 110 lines] > but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one. > _______________ > Boy, you sure give a guy his money's worth. And so do glee, Buffalo, Curt > Christianson, and Frank Zabkar. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Dan Did you try it a 133MHz with both sticks in? If it runs that way you should see a boost in performance. But you should back up your system, just in case. Like I said earlier, it worked for me. Buffalo After MEB's post I'm a little worried about damaging something for squeezing out a little bit of performance. The system seems to be okay as is, but windows maybe freezing up a little more often. Thanks for the help, Dan Hacker ----- Original Message ----- From: "Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 8:40 PM Subject: Re: A performance issue > > Boy, you sure give a guy his money's worth. And so do glee, Buffalo, Curt > > Christianson, and Frank Zabkar. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Like I said earlier, it worked for me. > Buffalo > After MEB's post I'm a little worried about damaging something for squeezing > out a little bit of performance. The system seems to be okay as is, but > windows maybe freezing up a little more often. > > Thanks for the help, > Dan Hacker Better safe than sorry. I gambled and won, then again I don't mind spending hours fixing my mistakes (as Glee,PCR,Gary and others will attest to, as they helped pull me out of some tough ones). :-) I would rather have the cpu run faster with less ram than the other way around. Ram is fairly cheap now, if you want to buy some. Match it up if you wish, or just buy a matching pair. If you are experiencing slowdowns or other problems that you think may be fixed by adding ram, please post them under a new topic and I'm sure someone here would happily give you some good ideas. Better safe than sorry. I gambled and won, then again I don't mind spending hours fixing my mistakes (as Glee,PCR,Gary and others will attest to, as they helped pull me out of some tough ones). :-) I like safe! While there is a great deal of satisfaction from fixing a problem, I find the frustration may not have been worth it. I would rather have the cpu run faster with less ram than the other way around. I don't think he will notice the difference between 1.6GHZ and 1.25GHZ. But I definitely see your point. Ram is fairly cheap now, if you want to buy some. Match it up if you wish, or just buy a matching pair. "Waste not, want not." The 64MB stick was a freebie, and I was just trying to squeeze out a _little_ more performance. If you are experiencing slowdowns or other problems that you think may be fixed by adding ram, please post them under a new topic and I'm sure someone here would happily give you some good ideas. My wife had only 64MB in her W98SE system, and was s-l-u-g-g-i-s-h. I went to e-bay and got a good deal on some used, compatible sticks (I did my homework before buying) and the difference was amazing! |> After MEB's post I'm a little worried about damaging something for |> squeezing out a little bit of performance. The system seems to be [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] | spending hours fixing my mistakes (as Glee,PCR,Gary and others will | attest to, as they helped pull me out of some tough ones). :-) I attest to it. But if I had the option to change it, probably I'd leave the processor speed where it is these days. There was a day I would play with such a thing, though. But it came & went! | I would rather have the cpu run faster with less ram than the other | way around. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | may be fixed by adding ram, please post them under a new topic and | I'm sure someone here would happily give you some good ideas. SignatureThanks or Good Luck, There may be humor in this post, and, Naturally, you will not sue, Should things get worse after this, PCR pcrrcp@netzero.net Hey Dan, At least we had fun, and learned a bit. Take care. SignatureHTH, Curt Windows Support Center http://aumha.org/ > Boy, you sure give a guy his money's worth. And so do glee, Buffalo, Curt > Christianson, and Frank Zabkar. [quoted text clipped - 139 lines] >> but only you can choose whether you take the red pill or the blue one. >> _______________ Thanks for the in-depth info. However, I can't figure out how to access it. I went to Google and did both a general group search and a search in Microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion. I searched for the numbers you referenced at the end of each line, but was only directed back to this message you posted. Appreciate it, Dan "Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message news:eOA67WQbHHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... | I may be wrong, but I was told if you mix speeds, you were automatically | limited to the slowest speed. I'm mixing 133 and 100, and what is more | important to me is the added memory, not the speed. I don't believe one | could actually see the difference between 100MHz and 133MHz, but the | additional memory, yes. The biggest consideration in my opinion, is whether | or not the mis-matched memory will "play well" together. | | Fire away! <vbg> | | -- | HTH, | Curt | | Windows Support Center | http://aumha.org/ Along those lines; I have tried to address those potential issues sufficiently through several discussions in this group: Short, yes, the lowest "supported" CAS and/or speed: Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823421 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823473 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:823477 Re: tried PC133 memstix - DBLBUFF & IFSHLP went corrupt/missing 02-22-06 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:807307 Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion:807352 The summary is don't try this anymore: The days of switching "any old memory" with "any old memory" or mixing such went the way of abilities to blindly overclock processors [though that ability with memory lasted for several more years]. As memory manufacturers became more productive at module creation, and specific processor/mother boards began to require specific and limited modules; the ability to use that memory in the old fashion of "trial and error" or reliance upon supposed new automatic BIOS recognition when mix/matching went the way of the dinosaur when attempting to deal with newer controller chips in a mixed environment. New module "controller chip" designs coupled with better QC apparently allowed the manufacturer to essentially lock the supported speeds and CAS/RAS available/or for which they could be used [Think Intel's better manufacturing and QC allowing them to lock processors. SEE NOTE * ]. Mixing those essentially locked modules, has been found to cause corruption issues. So the long held belief that CAS2 100 could easily replace or work with 133 CAS3 was/is no longer viable. Moreover, if CAS3 100 [which was/is the most prevalent produced] is attempted at 133 at ANY CAS/RAS, numerous issues pop-up. They may pass POST, but when actually used by the OS, the errors abound. The same has been found true, at times, with 133 CAS2 attempted at 100. All the major manufacturers openly supported, CAUTIONED, and specifically noted on their websites and in their adverti$ing, that one must carefully match the BIOS support, processor and the memory, as failing to do so, likely would cause failures. One can still find smaller manufacturers that create multi FSB/CAS support modules, though that's likely due to the controller chip they used, rather than any real intent. *This change over related directly with the Asian memory crash and burning of a memory chip manufacturing plant. The investors and the "BANKS" demanded updated manufacturing techniques from the survivors. Siemans apparently implemented this around the same time period. | | "Buffalo" <eric(nospam)@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message | news:AfSdneGoE9Jdqp7bnZ2dnUVZ_uGjnZ2d@comcast.com... | > If your PC100 DRAM is high quality, it may run just fine at 133MHz. | > Mine did. | > PS: I used it in combo with a stick of PC133 DRAM. | > | > "Rubyjack" <rubyjack@frontiernet.net> wrote in message | > news:EfoMh.5256$B25.217@news01.roc.ny... | >> I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently | >> has | >> 128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. | >> | >> Can I run both DRAMS at 100MZ without damaging anything? If I can't will | >> I | >> see a performance boost or degradation by setting the bus to 100MZ and | >> running both DRAMS? | >> | >> | >> Thanks, | >> Dan Hacker | >> | >> -- | >> | >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- | >> --- | >> Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change. | >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ BLOG - http://peoplescounsel.spaces.live.com/ Public Notice or the "real world" http://groups.google.com/group/the-peoples-law?hl=en - discussion group for general aspects of Law verses the Peoples' of the 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. _______________ >I have come into possession of a 64MB PC100 DRAM. My computer currently has >128MB PC133 DRAM. Running W98SE. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Thanks, >Dan Hacker Can your motherboard/chipset cache more than 128MB of RAM? If not, then you may actually experience a slowdown when you add your 64MB stick, even if you can get it to run at PC133 speeds. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.