MUTHERf#*($&#)(*$

OmniStrata · Post by **OmniStrata** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 8:16 pm

ok, I'm pissed, REALLY PISSED...

I've just worked from 9am to now trying to figure out wtf is wrong with my cpu NOT ACCEPTING 1GIG OF DDR RAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Everything ONLY SEEMS fine till I try my Direct3d tests, wherein my cpu very conveniently crashes every time...

I've formatted [NOT ONCE, FUKIN' TWICE!] To try and find the problem and in the end, lo and befukin' - hold, that by simply removing one of the RAM Chips, and leaving in only one DDR RAM chip (512M), the cpu's full potential returns. Direct3d, everything...

is win98 to blame? I doubt it since my Friend [an electrical engineer who minored in computer science software engineering] has 2 cpus with Win98SE and both of them run with a Gig of DDR RAM...

Someone help me here, is it true that Win98SE CAN'T run with a gig of ram? [or the DirectX at least...]

[aims gun at own foot...]

MOTHER - FU... [bang.........................]

Anime2Envy · Post by **Anime2Envy** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 9:34 pm

I am nearly positive that 98's limit is 512 megs of RAM. And I KNOW that 98 can't handle 2 CPU's! I think its time for an upgrade, 2000 or XP pro is much better then 98.

SS5_Majin_Bebi · Post by **SS5_Majin_Bebi** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:01 pm

Absolutely. XP can handle anywhere up to like 3 or 4 gb of DDR SDRAM cant it? Well, I think my next lot of ram is going to be a 1gb lot. At the moment I'm working with 256mb

so little memory!!!

Anime2Envy · Post by **Anime2Envy** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:38 pm

XP can handle much much more then 3 or 4 gigs, Its just that Most mobo's can't. my DVD266u-rn claims to handle up to 4 gigs, but I dont think anyone has been able to get this board to run stable with it.

OmniStrata · Post by **OmniStrata** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:41 pm

Thanks...

I had it running with 640 M, but I guess I WILL need to downgrade...

[face it, I've seen XP in action and I STILL like my 98SE more... :p]

SS5_Majin_Bebi · Post by **SS5_Majin_Bebi** » Wed Mar 19, 2003 11:45 pm

Its not about liking or disliking, doesn't anybody get that?? Its about the capabilities of the platform!! Okay, so XP is horrendously resource intensive but thats easily fixed. Considering that XP comes with a fuckload of preinstalled drivers and shit, it means less hassle for you!! Add that to the fact that Adobe Premiere 6.5 is made to work better under XP (thats what I've heard, but that seems to be the case for me; it always crashes in 98 for me, but XP runs sweet with it) There are software limitations as well as hardware limitations you know. 98 cant handle anywhere near as much as XP can. If it could, XP would have floundered, not to mention ME and 2000 as well. In some ways XP sucks ass majorly, but in others it kicks ass majorly!!

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 1:04 am

I would get Win2k + SP3 = DREAM :O...

It's very nice. Yes and Windows 98 does have issues with more then 512MB of ram. However, usually it's it telling you you do not have enough memory or your performance dropping sharply.

You can try installing Windows 2000/XP and see if that helps. If you still have crashes, I would guys your RAM is bad, or your motherboard does not like it, or it does not like two DIMMS in at once.

Also your friend is a fucking retard if he doesn't know that Win98SE is not multi-cpu aware. He has one CPU just sitting there doing nothing because Win9x cores WILL NOT SEE BOTH OF THEM! >_<. Also in dual cpu setups ram is shared between the CPUs.

Premiere and other programs aren't designed to work better with XP/2k. It's just the fact that XP/2k are better designed and more stable then the Win9x OSes.

>_<

~klinky

Zarxrax · Post by **Zarxrax** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 1:18 am

Yea I would recommend win2k too. It's very similar in look and feel to windows 98, but it is far far far more stable :\

SS5_Majin_Bebi · Post by **SS5_Majin_Bebi** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 1:23 am

Well isnt XP just 2000 with a different skin? Ive used XP with classic mode enabled and 2000, and theres not a whole hell of a lot of difference between them.

OmniStrata · Post by **OmniStrata** » Thu Mar 20, 2003 1:54 am

klinky wrote:I would get Win2k + SP3 = DREAM :O...

It's very nice. Yes and Windows 98 does have issues with more then 512MB of ram. However, usually it's it telling you you do not have enough memory or your performance dropping sharply.

You can try installing Windows 2000/XP and see if that helps. If you still have crashes, I would guys your RAM is bad, or your motherboard does not like it, or it does not like two DIMMS in at once.

Also your friend is a fucking retard if he doesn't know that Win98SE is not multi-cpu aware. He has one CPU just sitting there doing nothing because Win9x cores WILL NOT SEE BOTH OF THEM! >_<. Also in dual cpu setups ram is shared between the CPUs.

Premiere and other programs aren't designed to work better with XP/2k. It's just the fact that XP/2k are better designed and more stable then the Win9x OSes.

>_<

~klinky

What I meant was two Desktop computers, not a double cpu array, I know what I'm talkin' about and you misinterpret very easily :p

AnimeMusicVideos.org

MUTHERf#($&#)($

MUTHERf#($&#)($