Hi C_Legend, I think I've resolved this problem. I changed the L2 cache jumper from Linear to Interleave, and now I'm able to enable the external cache and still boot. I'm not sure what these two terms mean?? And yes, I'm going to get some more ram. John

0

I'm glad to see you have found an answer to your problem. If you are going to upgrade to more memory, be aware of an L2 cache/memory issue, though. Most Socket 7/Super Socket 7 systems are limited in how much memory the L2 cache will support. Many Socket 7 systems were limited to 64 meg in this regard, and 128 meg was somewhat common as the limit in Super Socket 7 systems. This is the reason I mentioned you going from 64 to 128 Meg. It all depends on the chipset on your motherboard and the cache involved. To be on the safe side, get 64 meg more and be happy. It's the memory upgrade in which you'll notice the biggest difference on your system anyway. If you get more than the L2 can cache, you will get a performance hit similar to what you noticed when you had the external cache disabled, unfortunately. Your system will (as I understand it) be caching the "last" 128 meg of your system (once again, all depending upon YOUR chipset), not the first, so the most used memory won't be cached - not good. You are welcome to look your chipset/cache up, and see if this is an issue for you, but otherwise I'd recommend going to 128 meg and no further (on this system). Good luck.

0

Thanks again C_Legend, I will try another 64 and let it go at that. I tried a 128 meg chip and it did seem to run slower, maybe you've explained why. The manual says that I can add up to 256mb, but it also says (about the boot to OS/2 bios option) "If your system has above 64MB of main memory, set the option to Yes to allow the system to run OS/2 Warp version 3.0 properly." John

0

The Super Socket 7 board I have allows for 768 meg of installed memory but will only cache 128 meg, due to the installed chipset/amount of cache, etc, so don't be fooled by the total amount of memory that can be installed, but what's more important is the amount that can be cached, which often isn't noted in the manual. You say "I tried a 128 meg chip and it did seem to run slower" Now, was that 128 chip alone (total of 128 meg) or along with the 64 meg (for a total of 192)? If it was by itself (and the system seemed slower), you may have a cache limitation of 64 meg, but let's hope that's not the case. It's been my experience that the only time you'd want to have more memory installed than can be cached is if you absolutely have to, such as an operating system or individual application memory requirement. You can ignore the OS/2 thing, as it appears you aren't running it. I don't believe it has anything to do with our L2 cache/memory issue.

0

Hi C_Legend, No, it was a 128 meg chip, one only. I suppose I could check the chipset and see if it will cache more than 64. How do I know which chipset to look up? Is it the one the schematic refers to as "L2 Cache" John

0

No, your chipset will not likely be defined around your "L2 cache", but rather will be likely something from Intel (such as 430FX) , SiS (5513), or Via (Apollo MVP), such as in these links: Intel (notice the "Max Cachable Memory" heading, which is what I've been alluding to, but just because it's not mentioned in the next two links doesn't mean there isn't any limitation in this regard.) SiS Via There are others, but these should give you an idea.

0

Hi C Legend, My board has the following chips, VIA Apollo MVP3 VT82C598MVP Chip Set VIA VT82C596 PCI bus mastering controller. Although my chips do not say MVP3 on them, this is what the Delhi III apparently has. If I read your link correctly it should take a lot more than 64 megs??? John

0

Check out this link. Down the page you'll see the "VIA MVP3, MVP4" cacheability table. As you've noted, you have 512k of L2 cache, which yields either 63.5 meg cacheable RAM or 127.5 meg cacheable RAM, depending upon whether or not the cache is being utilitized as write-back or write-through. If you can find a setting in your BIOS (CMOS Setup) or on your motherboard for this, change it to write-through if you want to go to 128 meg of RAM. If you stay at 64 Meg RAM, go with write-back (it's effectively faster, but probably slower than having your system running 128 meg RAM with write-through cache). So, chances are that when you "upgraded" to 128 meg before, the cache was set up as write-back (therefore only about half of your RAM was cached). If you can set up the cache as write-through, I'd upgrade to 128 meg, otherwise stick with what you have (until, of course, you can upgrade your motherboard/cpu/memory/case, etc). Good luck.

0

Hi C_Legend, I couldn't see anything, either in the manual or on the mobo, about write through or write back cache, so I posted to the emachines overclocking forum to see if anyone knows about it. I'll let you know what I find out. Thanks for your help. John

0

Hi C_Legend, I spoke with guy on the forum who has the exact same machine as I, and he says that he installed 512mbs without any cache setting changes, so I guess that's a go. Thanks for your help. John

0

I don't doubt he was able to install that much memory and didn't have to make any cache settings to make it "work", however I'm betting that only the "last" 64 meg (or 128 possibly) is being cached (and only guessing here, but it's likely that that 64 meg is rarely utilized, so the system is basically running as if it had the external cache disabled). Just something to consider. Good luck.

0