RAM problems

1) Win98SE does not load with 2GBytes or 3Gbytes of RAM; it bitches (get
this) "Insufficent memory...".
How do i get it to work with at least 2Gbytes of RAM, or better yet,
3Gbytes?

2) Win2K does not load with 3Gbytes of RAM; it re-boots before the
desktop gets filled.
It does accept 2Gbytes of RAM; how do i get it to work with 3Gbytes of
RAM?

3) Does WinNT or WinXP allow 3Gbytes of RAM, and if so, do they have a
DOS like Win98 or CMD like Win2K?

Robert Baer

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:54:42 GMT, Robert Baer <> wrote:

>1) Win98SE does not load with 2GBytes or 3Gbytes of RAM; it bitches (get
>this) "Insufficent memory...".
> How do i get it to work with at least 2Gbytes of RAM, or better yet,
>3Gbytes?

There are instructions on getting 98 to 'work' with more than 512Mb, its to do
with cache settings.

Anybody trying to run 98 with 3Gb of ram needs help, 98 can only 'use' 512Mb,
the rest for cache only.

>2) Win2K does not load with 3Gbytes of RAM; it re-boots before the
>desktop gets filled.
> It does accept 2Gbytes of RAM; how do i get it to work with 3Gbytes of
>RAM?

Have you tried M$ KB?

>3) Does WinNT or WinXP allow 3Gbytes of RAM, and if so, do they have a
>DOS like Win98 or CMD like Win2K?

That much ram is likely to be limited by motherboard?
Win2k and XP are built on the NT kernel, so they have cmd

Derek

derek / nul <> wrote in
news::

> That much ram is likely to be limited by motherboard?

It should be stated more clearly that NT/2000/XP can easily handle 3 GB of
physical RAM. The limitation with them is 4 GB, unless you are running a
machine with something like a Xeon that can do Page Address Extension (PAE)
which will bump that up a little bit.

--
AIM: FrznFoodClerk
email: de_on-lag@co_cast.net (_ = m)
website: under construction
Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
email/IM for rates/services

derek / nul wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:54:42 GMT, Robert Baer <> wrote:
>
> >1) Win98SE does not load with 2GBytes or 3Gbytes of RAM; it bitches (get
> >this) "Insufficent memory...".
> > How do i get it to work with at least 2Gbytes of RAM, or better yet,
> >3Gbytes?
>
> There are instructions on getting 98 to 'work' with more than 512Mb, its to do
> with cache settings.
>
> Anybody trying to run 98 with 3Gb of ram needs help, 98 can only 'use' 512Mb,
> the rest for cache only.
>
> >2) Win2K does not load with 3Gbytes of RAM; it re-boots before the
> >desktop gets filled.
> > It does accept 2Gbytes of RAM; how do i get it to work with 3Gbytes of
> >RAM?
>
> Have you tried M$ KB?
>
> >3) Does WinNT or WinXP allow 3Gbytes of RAM, and if so, do they have a
> >DOS like Win98 or CMD like Win2K?
>
> That much ram is likely to be limited by motherboard?
> Win2k and XP are built on the NT kernel, so they have cmd
>
> Derek

My motherboard accepts up to 1Gbyte sticks in each of three slots for
a total of 3Gbytes maximum (stated spec), so the 3Gbytes is allowed, and
the BIOS sees whatever (and where ever) i plug in.

Well, i have been running Win98SE with 1Gbyte of RAM for a long time
with no problems.
And i have some multi-million digit math routines i wrote that can use
all of the available memory; if i go for enough digits, the RAM gets
(almost) filled and then virtual memory (ie: HD sloshing) comes into
play.

So, on that basis, it would seem that that 512K "limit" is incorrect.

What is this Micro$oft "KB"?

Good to hear that concerning WinNT and WinXP; but do any of them
accept 3Gbytes?
Or a way to get Win2K to allow 3Gbytes?

DeMoN LaG wrote:
>
> derek / nul <> wrote in
> news::
>
> > That much ram is likely to be limited by motherboard?
>
> It should be stated more clearly that NT/2000/XP can easily handle 3 GB of
> physical RAM. The limitation with them is 4 GB, unless you are running a
> machine with something like a Xeon that can do Page Address Extension (PAE)
> which will bump that up a little bit.
>
> --
> AIM: FrznFoodClerk
> email: de_on-lag@co_cast.net (_ = m)
> website: under construction
> Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
> email/IM for rates/services

So, if Win2K can allow 3Gbytes, what exactly should i do (with only
1Gbyte or 2Gbytes RAM) to then get it to accept the full 3Gbytes?

Any "work-around" for Win98SE other than (hassle of) unplugging the
RAM when i want to rin it?

I work with three OSes; DOS7, Win98SE and Win2K; and sometimes switch
around a number of times in a day.

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:22:45 GMT, Robert Baer <> wrote:

> My motherboard accepts up to 1Gbyte sticks in each of three slots for
>a total of 3Gbytes maximum (stated spec), so the 3Gbytes is allowed, and
>the BIOS sees whatever (and where ever) i plug in.
>
> Well, i have been running Win98SE with 1Gbyte of RAM for a long time
>with no problems.
> And i have some multi-million digit math routines i wrote that can use
>all of the available memory; if i go for enough digits, the RAM gets
>(almost) filled and then virtual memory (ie: HD sloshing) comes into
>play.
>
> So, on that basis, it would seem that that 512K "limit" is incorrect.

MIcrosoft Knowledge Base (KB) article outlining 98 memory problem
http://support.microsoft.com/default...71&Product=w98
http://support.microsoft.com/default...12&Product=w98
http://support.microsoft.com/default...62&Product=w98

> What is this Micro$oft "KB"?
>
> Good to hear that concerning WinNT and WinXP; but do any of them
>accept 3Gbytes?
> Or a way to get Win2K to allow 3Gbytes?

Win2000 memory

http://support.microsoft.com/default...roduct=win2000

Derek

"derek / nul" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:22:45 GMT, Robert Baer <>
wrote:
>
> > My motherboard accepts up to 1Gbyte sticks in each of three slots for
> >a total of 3Gbytes maximum (stated spec), so the 3Gbytes is allowed, and
> >the BIOS sees whatever (and where ever) i plug in.
> >
> > Well, i have been running Win98SE with 1Gbyte of RAM for a long time
> >with no problems.
> > And i have some multi-million digit math routines i wrote that can use
> >all of the available memory; if i go for enough digits, the RAM gets
> >(almost) filled and then virtual memory (ie: HD sloshing) comes into
> >play.
> >
> > So, on that basis, it would seem that that 512K "limit" is incorrect.
>
> MIcrosoft Knowledge Base (KB) article outlining 98 memory problem
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...71&Product=w98
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...12&Product=w98
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...62&Product=w98
>
> > What is this Micro$oft "KB"?
> >
> > Good to hear that concerning WinNT and WinXP; but do any of them
> >accept 3Gbytes?
> > Or a way to get Win2K to allow 3Gbytes?
>
> Win2000 memory
>
>
http://support.microsoft.com/default...roduct=win2000
>
> Derek

I believe the reason for the 512MB figure, is because beyond that amount,
Vcache may consume all the remaining available addresses. Hence, the
workaround is to limit the amount of memory that Vcache can use, not windows
in general. Windows can still allocate the memory safely to programs from
512MB up to 1GB. So the limit according to microsoft is really 1GB or more,
not 512MB.

Thor wrote:

> "derek / nul" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:22:45 GMT, Robert Baer <>
>
> wrote:
>
>>> My motherboard accepts up to 1Gbyte sticks in each of three slots for
>>>a total of 3Gbytes maximum (stated spec), so the 3Gbytes is allowed, and
>>>the BIOS sees whatever (and where ever) i plug in.
>>>
>>> Well, i have been running Win98SE with 1Gbyte of RAM for a long time
>>>with no problems.
>>> And i have some multi-million digit math routines i wrote that can use
>>>all of the available memory; if i go for enough digits, the RAM gets
>>>(almost) filled and then virtual memory (ie: HD sloshing) comes into
>>>play.
>>>
>>> So, on that basis, it would seem that that 512K "limit" is incorrect.
>>
>>MIcrosoft Knowledge Base (KB) article outlining 98 memory problem
>>http://support.microsoft.com/default...71&Product=w98
>>http://support.microsoft.com/default...12&Product=w98
>>http://support.microsoft.com/default...62&Product=w98
>>
>>
>>> What is this Micro$oft "KB"?
>>>
>>> Good to hear that concerning WinNT and WinXP; but do any of them
>>>accept 3Gbytes?
>>> Or a way to get Win2K to allow 3Gbytes?
>>
>>Win2000 memory
>>
>>
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...roduct=win2000
>
>>Derek
>
>
> I believe the reason for the 512MB figure, is because beyond that amount,
> Vcache may consume all the remaining available addresses. Hence, the
> workaround is to limit the amount of memory that Vcache can use, not windows
> in general. Windows can still allocate the memory safely to programs from
> 512MB up to 1GB. So the limit according to microsoft is really 1GB or more,
> not 512MB.
>
>

I saw nothing in any of those articles claiming that anything over 512MB
is only used for cache either. But I am curious-the first article says
Win98/ME has problems with "1GB or more". That seems to imply that you
can't use a 1GB stick with those and the maximum memory the OP could use
(with 3 slots) would be 896MB (512MB + 256MB + 128MB). Correct?

> >
> >
> > I believe the reason for the 512MB figure, is because beyond that
amount,
> > Vcache may consume all the remaining available addresses. Hence, the
> > workaround is to limit the amount of memory that Vcache can use, not
windows
> > in general. Windows can still allocate the memory safely to programs
from
> > 512MB up to 1GB. So the limit according to microsoft is really 1GB or
more,
> > not 512MB.
> >
> >
>
> I saw nothing in any of those articles claiming that anything over 512MB
> is only used for cache either. But I am curious-the first article says
> Win98/ME has problems with "1GB or more". That seems to imply that you
> can't use a 1GB stick with those and the maximum memory the OP could use
> (with 3 slots) would be 896MB (512MB + 256MB + 128MB). Correct?

I would assume so.

Thor wrote:
>>>
>>>I believe the reason for the 512MB figure, is because beyond that
>
> amount,
>
>>>Vcache may consume all the remaining available addresses. Hence, the
>>>workaround is to limit the amount of memory that Vcache can use, not
>
> windows
>
>>>in general. Windows can still allocate the memory safely to programs
>
> from
>
>>>512MB up to 1GB. So the limit according to microsoft is really 1GB or
>
> more,
>
>>>not 512MB.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I saw nothing in any of those articles claiming that anything over 512MB
>>is only used for cache either. But I am curious-the first article says
>>Win98/ME has problems with "1GB or more". That seems to imply that you
>>can't use a 1GB stick with those and the maximum memory the OP could use
>>(with 3 slots) would be 896MB (512MB + 256MB + 128MB). Correct?
>
>
> I would assume so.
>
>
>
Curious. I'd always heard that 1GB was the maximum for Win98. Probably
just sloppy speech. Thanks.