IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Re: Pls. see my post starting "ATTN" below
Okay, I moved your reply up here because I made this new thread to follow more easily.

You may have bad memory, not a Doze failure of the usual incomprehensible kind. Trouble is (as in a case recently experienced) - if the failure is above the 640K of base memory (I think) -- even though initial memtest may stop counting before max size is reached:


Well, we put in brand new memory. Let me give you a short update:
Andrei has: a new motherboard, Tyan Trinity 400, a brand new memory bank of 256, and an old one (tested and works) of 256 to make 500 Ram, a new video card, a newly updated IE (as of last week), runs Win 98, on a Celeron 400.

I don't know what 640K of base memory means... the DOS startup screen tells us we have all 500 RAM

Doze may recognize it all anyway. Or in your case, maybe Doze won't! But you need to find out what is tested at boot-up before even DOS loads, and whether than number is anytime *less* than the max value.


By this do you mean the number that comes up on the black screen before Windows opens? If so, that number is always 500. Dos and the Bios recognize the whole memory amount.

You may have actual memory failure, not a 'leak'; depends on *when* you are looking at memory size -- at boot or, only after Win starts.


I'm looking at memory after Windows starts, and the only thing in startup beside TweakRam, is Anytime Organizer. Tweakram gives me a number, which should be at least 382-386, and sometimes it comes up 332 or less.

Do you mean: while DOS is starting and you see the BIOS info passing by and memory test: you sometimes see *less* than your installed memory?


Nope, DOS and Bios always register 500 RAM.

(If your BIOS has a 'silent boot' feature and it is turned ON: you won't see this early bookkeeping stuff)


We don't have a silent boot, and I always see my screen run the info past me. Including the tagline, "I am Andrei" that my friend put in there. ;)

If you are now regularly checking only Windows' version of how much memory you have, and sometimes - immediately after Windows starts - you see less RAM: I think I'd reboot a few times and see if you can catch a lower reading on the memtest which occurs before DOS is loaded.


I expect Windows to use a certain amount, and what should be left over is approximately 382-386 RAM. I have never seen a lower reading on the DOS/BIOS screen, but I'll look. I can reboot a few times and check that.

In a notebook, recently - the initial memtest indeed showed "40" MB for what should have been 80. In this case though, Windows recognized the full 80. What the memtest was *really* reflecting was: a 'stuck-bit' at a particular address. This was proven by diags. New memory fixed all the BSOD and other symptoms.


This part is greek to me, sorry. John was gonna read this and help me understand it, but it stormed and I couldn't get on last night.

It may be worth your while to observe a series of boots, looking only at the turn- on memtest. Hit f-8 to avoid waiting for Doze to load, so you can test again. If you see a similar symptom to above: power down, remove mem and clean edges with 97% (ie conc.) Isopropyl alcohol and reinsert. Obey static-electricity drill, natch.


I can try that, like I said, but it is new memory. I suppose new memory can still get dirty?

That might cure it, but you'd have to again try several boots. It's clear that Windows will recognize memory which the memtest has 'rejected'. (Bad memory in bottom 640K should.. halt the boot, freeze display - at least for some kinds of failure)


Hmmm, I don't get this part either... sorry. Hopefully John can read this tonight if it doesn't storm, but I wouldn't bank on it. Stupid storms.

PS re the query above, about WHEN all this started: could it have been just after you bought more memory ?? If so, well.. time to run diagnostics on your motherboard and make it "loop" for continual memory test. That would be better than the above tool-free tests.


No, it started happening and THEN we bought more memory. It's also a brand new motherboard, do we still need to run diagnostics on it?

Thanks, and hopefully the storms will stay away long enough for me to run these tests I'm supposed to!

Nightowl >8#
"Only dead fish swim with the stream."
Linda Ellerbee
New Memory and such.
No, it started happening and THEN we bought more memory. It's also a brand new motherboard, do we still need to run diagnostics on it?
OK - that probably makes "bad physical memory" an unlikely cause.

Diags? - Can't hurt when you have an inexplicable phenom, either all the time or intermittently. Letting Diags test everything and then run overnight, repeatedly checking memory:

If all tests have 0 failures: at least you probably can eliminate hardware (though not necessarily hardware setup, IRQs and such).

As to "base 640K":
DOS is a crude theft of the CP/M OS, slightly redone for a particular microprocessor - as usual with virtually every M/Soft "innovation": stolen from someone who really did know how to innovate, a place called Digital Research.

Without going into details: "640K" in those days was thought to be vastly more memory than anyone would ever need! It became necessary to do lots of clever coding things to address memory beyond 1 MB and then ---> onwards.

IF.. there's a problem in memory within that first 640 Kilobytes (of your 256 or whatever Megabytes of total RAM) - usually the so-called POST (Power On Self Test) will stop everything, with beeps or maybe even a "bad memory" display - depending on exact address of first bad location, regarding the video display.

This would happen while still in the "black screen = DOS" first stage you always pass through before 'Doze loads all its toys.

Anyway.. running Diagnostics may reveal that the new memory IS bad (too) or improperly 'seated' or that the motherboard has suffered "infant mortality failure" etc. Electronics can fail any old time.. no matter what probability says! There's no reason Not to run Diags, so - why not run them?

Knowledge is good (up to the point of making it some sorta God and all)


Ashton

PS: What I meant about "total memory detected by Windoze" was:

MyComputer/ControlPanel/System [Performance Tab] should show (at least in the 9.x series, dunno re Ex-Pee): what Doze thinks is the total "System RAM". almost always it will agree with POST results -- except in the case I described. Not your problem, here - apparently. Doesn't mean you don't have some subtle memory problem though; just less likely to be It.

A

Expand Edited by Ashton March 21, 2003, 06:49:02 AM EST
New Could it be heat related?
Since the "reboots" don't bring back all the memory until you're tried a few times (chips have "cooled").

Ashton, Andrew, others... does this seem probable?

Nightowl, do you always have the correct RAM upon startup when computer has been off for a period of time?
[link|mailto:jbrabeck@attbi.com|Joe]
New Re: Could it be heat related?
Since the "reboots" don't bring back all the memory until you're tried a few times (chips have "cooled").


Ashton, Andrew, others... does this seem probable?


Well we also recently replaced the CPU fan, there should not be a heat problem. Hmmm.

Nightowl, do you always have the correct RAM upon startup when computer has been off for a period of time?


Nope, I've even had it off all night long, and booting it up sometimes only brings us 332 in tweakram's counter. Still has the right number in DOS bootup though.

Perplexing isn't it? ;)

Thanks for your input, still searching and analyzing :)

Nightowl >8#
"Only dead fish swim with the stream."
Linda Ellerbee
New Re: Memory and such.


Diags? - Can't hurt when you have an inexplicable phenom, either all the time or intermittently. Letting Diags test everything and then run overnight, repeatedly checking memory:


What do I run a diagnostic with? Is there a specific software?

As to "base 640K":


DOS is a crude theft of the CP/M OS, slightly redone for a particular microprocessor - as usual with virtually every M/Soft "innovation": stolen from someone who really did know how to innovate, a place called Digital Research.


Without going into details: "640K" in those days was thought to be vastly more memory than anyone would ever need! It became necessary to do lots of clever coding things to address memory beyond 1 MB and then ---> onwards.


IF.. there's a problem in memory within that first 640 Kilobytes (of your 256 or whatever Megabytes of total RAM) - usually the so-called POST (Power On Self Test) will stop everything, with beeps or maybe even a "bad memory" display - depending on exact address of first bad location, regarding the video display.


This would happen while still in the "black screen = DOS" first stage you always pass through before 'Doze loads all its toys.


Anyway.. running Diagnostics may reveal that the new memory IS bad (too) or improperly 'seated' or that the motherboard has suffered "infant mortality failure" etc. Electronics can fail any old time.. no matter what probability says! There's no reason Not to run Diags, so - why not run them?


I'll ask John if we have something to run them with.

PS: What I meant about "total memory detected by Windoze" was:


MyComputer/ControlPanel/System [Performance Tab] should show (at least in the 9.x series, dunno re Ex-Pee): what Doze thinks is the total "System RAM". almost always it will agree with POST results -- except in the case I described. Not your problem, here - apparently. Doesn't mean you don't have some subtle memory problem though; just less likely to be It.


Thanks for explaining that. John helped me understand it some too, but we have seen no indication so far on the DOS bootup screen of any memory issues.

Thanks also for your input. I'm still running individual tests, too. :)

Nightowl >8#
"Only dead fish swim with the stream."
Linda Ellerbee
     A new twist on losing memory with Andrei - (Nightowl) - (8)
         Are you - (jbrabeck) - (1)
             Re: Are you - (Nightowl)
         Pls. see my post starting "ATTN" below - (Ashton) - (5)
             Re: Pls. see my post starting "ATTN" below - (Nightowl) - (4)
                 Memory and such. - (Ashton) - (3)
                     Could it be heat related? - (jbrabeck) - (1)
                         Re: Could it be heat related? - (Nightowl)
                     Re: Memory and such. - (Nightowl)

Why does this guitar smell like CHEESE?!?
54 ms