Solved AT machine, W98se, Need RAM Stick Where should I look first?

August 24, 2014 at 15:32:36
Specs: Windows 98SE, 700 megahertz Intel Celeron
------------------ Need RAM Stick:
approx; 2 in X 6 in
--- Label ----
Value RAM
KVR133/256R
740617069235 3.3V
Kingston
9905121-007.A02
1208288-0828972
--- Chip ID ----
hynix 243A
HY57V56820BT-H
------------------ My AT System:
---Windows 98 SE (build 4.10.2222) English (United States)
Windows version : Windows 98 (Version 4.10 Enhanced)
DOS version : 7.10 Rev=0 OEM=Microsoft (MS DOS)
Computer : AT (ID=FCh / Subm=01h / Vers=0)
Boot Mode: BIOS
BIOS date / name : 11/28/00 (C)1985-1999,American Megatrends Inc.,All Rig
: AMIBIOS 062710
: 62-1128-009999-00101111-071595-000000
: Release 11/28/2000S
: Virtual 8086 mode
Adv. Power Management : Version=1.2 (enabled)
ACPI : Version=1.0 OEM=AMI
Plug and Play BIOS : Version=1.0
PCI BIOS : Version=2.10
------------------------------
Enclosure Type: Desktop
PCCHIPS M756LMRT

See More: AT machine, W98se, Need RAM Stick Where should I look first?

Report •

#1
August 24, 2014 at 16:01:07
While Crucial has stopped selling memory for a lot of old machines, you should still be able to find out what kind of memory the system uses with their scanner:

http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/syste...

It should at least give you a general idea of the type of memory your system uses, and the maximum it'll handle. But also realize, Win9x has issues with large amounts of RAM:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/253912

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/118...

"Channeling the spirit of jboy..."

message edited by T-R-A


Report •

#2
August 24, 2014 at 17:01:57
This is a Stand-Alone system, ie, no Internet.
their scanner, "CrucialScan.exe" is first D/Led
and then put onto the system in question.
The, "scanner" then connects to the internet to complete its work of recomending memory.
This is a, "Web-Based", solution effort which will not work for a Stand-Alone solution.
But, thanks for the stab.

message edited by Walt43


Report •

#3
August 24, 2014 at 19:15:48
✔ Best Answer
Then this should be of some help (based on your specs, "PCCHIPS M756LMRT "):

http://www.memoryx.com/pcchm7mome45...

"Channeling the spirit of jboy..."

message edited by T-R-A


Report •

Related Solutions

#4
August 24, 2014 at 20:36:45
Are you looking for a 133 mhz, 256 meg stick of ram or is that what's in it now and you're looking for another or is that what's in it now and you're looking for something compatible but maybe not a 256?

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide.


Report •

#5
August 26, 2014 at 09:42:54
Did you try eBay?

If you already have 256MB, why do you need more? From what I remember, Win98 runs quite well with that amount. And with a 700MHz Celeron, you would be better off running PC100 rather than PC133, that way you can run the optimal FSB:DRAM frequency ratio of 1:1. Your system is taking a performance hit at 3:4 (100:133).

http://www.motherboards.org/mobot/m...

http://mujweb.cz/dzeman/mb/M756LMRT...


Report •

#6
August 27, 2014 at 14:28:08
Wow! That did the trick.... Memory(X) had the needed part, was able to converse with me about it, answer my many questions, advise me of potential upgrades and even took my order over the phone. I'm getting 1 Gig of RAM for my Win98, AT machine! Yay!
I can keep all my programs, I use!
I'm glad I ran across you guys!
Thanx.

Report •

#7
August 27, 2014 at 15:53:42
Thanx to riider. I was glad to get the specs on the motherboard links you provided. But I will pass on the suggestions of a diff RAM. This one system has been my, "MainStay", working machine from late nineties untill this spring, 2014. From my reading of sdram an vcsdram, I want to avoid any chance botching this system with timing chaos. I would rather dive head first into muddy water.

Report •

#8
August 28, 2014 at 01:00:29
Installing 98 on a system having a gig of ram is going to be a problems. You'll need to drop the ram to no more than 512 meg when doing the initial install. Then there's some modifications to some startup files that will be necessary for 98 to run smoothly. Let us know when you get to that stage.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide.


Report •

#9
August 28, 2014 at 08:07:53
"I'm getting 1 Gig of RAM for my Win98"

I was going to mention the memory limit in my other response, it's too bad you didn't tell us that you were considering jumping the memory amount so much. There are a few areas of concern with this upgrade. The 1st was mentioned by DAVEINCAPS - Win98 will most likely have problems with 1GB RAM, in fact, it sometimes has problems with 512MB. And I honestly don't know why you feel you'd need more than 512MB RAM with Win98 in the 1st place?

Anyhow, before installing your new RAM, make sure to edit vcache setting in the system.ini file, otherwise you will get the dreaded "out of memory" error (even though you have plenty).

http://www.thpc.info/ram/vcache98.html

Another issue is the makeup of the RAM itself. There is low density & high density RAM. Most of the "new" SDR-SDRAM is high density, especially if it's PC133 with a capacity greater than 256MB. And many old boards won't function when high density RAM is installed. It probably won't be a problem, but it is a possibility.

message edited by riider


Report •

#10
August 31, 2014 at 11:59:20
DAVEINCAPS August 28, 2014 at 01:00:29
"Installing 98 on a system having a gig of ram is going to be a problems. You'll need to drop the ram to no more than 512 meg when doing the initial install."
--------------
Thanx. Makes good sense, will do.
=========================
And thanx to:
riider August 28, 2014 at 08:07:53
"before installing your new RAM, make sure to edit vcache setting in the system.ini file, otherwise you will get the dreaded "out of memory" error (even though you have plenty).
http://www.thpc.info/ram/vcache98.h...

Yep..I needed to know that before installing.
After doing clean 98se setup, I began doing a lot file moving around, in an out, trying to get my "grand sum of knowledge", (saved files), I have noticed some strange behaviour. scandisk finding lost clusters, COPYor MOVE making copy errors, VXD, blu scrn hangup errors, etc. I have been searching for correct and workable updates and I'm sure this to be cause for out-of-the-box problems. This problem may warrent a new thread or other means of web talk. I don't know.

"Another issue is the makeup of the RAM itself."
Well, yes. But my knowledge is in-sufficant to consider such "ifs". I was assured by Memory ten my unit will do for my PCCHIPS M7xxxxx. That must do for now.

"And I honestly don't know why you feel you'd need more than 512MB RAM with Win98 in the 1st place?"

Now that WILL require another thread.

Thank you both, an I will be in contact to share results.


Report •

#11
August 31, 2014 at 19:16:49
What size partition do you have 98 on? Scandisk is a 16-bit program and won't run right on partitions larger than 127.53 gig. I believe Defrag has the same problem. Info here:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/184006

Also there's a patch--273017usa8.exe--that helps prevent loss of data when shutting down on faster machines. That might be a factor too. Google for a download.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide.


Report •

#12
September 1, 2014 at 03:56:32
There happens to be a 4 year old breakthrough in Win98 memory use - up to 4 gigs is possible with some trial and error tweaking along the way. It's not a smooth road in other words, but take a look at this post for more info:
Warez gone

DAVEINCAPS,
I believe you might be thinking of a DOS mode defrag program which I never did find for win98, 32 bit protected mode windows version should do just fine I would think. Huge drives being a real headache with a lot of gotchas popping up everywhere it seems. fdisk no good, format no good, use this one instead of that one, BIOS limit, etc. end of the day you still have to buy a patch after you jump all those hurdles, it just doesn't seem to end.

Lee

message edited by melee5


Report •

#13
September 1, 2014 at 07:55:25
Just trying to convey to you some of the info I've picked up over the years.

By running PC133 RAM with a 100MHz FSB CPU, your system is taking a performance hit because the RAM & CPU frequencies are out of sync. It's not a major hit, but it's there. And being that your board is based on an SiS (Slow is Slow) chipset, you should try every trick you can to boost the performance level.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/ma...

"I have noticed some strange behaviour. scandisk finding lost clusters, COPYor MOVE making copy errors, VXD, blu scrn hangup errors, etc."

It could be your RAM is bad (has it ever been tested?) or it could be your hard drive is failing (has it ever been tested?). You should NEVER install new RAM without testing it 1st. Bad RAM can wreak havoc on a system. Most of the time it will simply prevent a system from booting, other times it can cause data corruption. To test you RAM, all you need to do is boot off a memtest86 disk & let it runs thru one complete series of tests. Many people will let it run for hours or overnite, just to be sure. If any errors are found, the RAM should be replaced. There's no way to fix bad RAM.

Use version 4: http://www.memtest86.com/download.htm

If when running the test, the bottom portion of the screen turns red, the RAM is most likely bad. Here's a screenshot: http://wa.lzer.net/wiki/blog/articl...

To test the hard drive, try CrystalDiskInfo: http://crystalmark.info/download/in...

message edited by riider


Report •

#14
September 1, 2014 at 15:17:37
The limitations of scandisk with win 9x was something mentioned in the MS link and was a problem I'd run into before.

I thought too it might be bad ram but then got to thinking if he's installing gobs of ram (for 98) he's probabliy got a big ole hard drive too.

With ram and 98 if you were to graph performance on the y-axis and amount of ram on the x-axis I think you'd get something like the bell shaped curve with the top of the bell being at about 256 meg (a lot may depend on the software you run but I think that's a good average). The modifications you have to do to accomodate a large amount might stretch that curve out making it look more like a mesa but I have my doubts you're actually increasing optimal performance with more ram. I think it's more like you're making 98 functional and keeping it from crashing. (But I'm wrong every now and then and am about due.)

I uploaded a file named ram.zip to driverguide about 10 years ago that had some screen shots of one way to modify 98 for large ram. I suppose it's still there. At the time one contributer here, Whitphil, said that wasn't the best fix but you can take a look at it.

Yeah here it is:

http://download.driverguide.com/dri...

I don't know what hoops you have to jump though anymore to download from them.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide.

message edited by DAVEINCAPS


Report •

#15
September 1, 2014 at 22:38:32
If you want to use more than 512MB of RAM with Windows 9x the simplest way is to use Rudolph Loew's RAM Limitation Patch which allows up to 4GB under 9x. This method is not free but requires no endless "tweaking" or "experimenting." You install it and get on with using your system.

http://rloew1.no-ip.com/Programs/Pa...

A time-limited demo version is available.

I must disagree with some of the other well intentioned posters here... the idea that RAM under 9x is some kind of "bell curve" or that more than 512MB of RAM is "useless" under 9x is misguided. I've had this discussion with them before and I know they mean well, but they seem to be content to believe that Windows 9x should never be run on any hardware newer than what was available when 9x was released...

Also, the link to the Google groups page above should be removed by a moderator. It is a discussion of WAREZ - a German hacker cracked an old Demo version of Rudolph Loew's RAM patch and distributed it illegally.


Report •

#16
September 2, 2014 at 01:10:39
The bell curve I mentioned would be before any modifications were applied. It'd start at zero ram and zero performance, peak around 256 meg or maybe a little after and then begin dropping. It'd reach a second low around 512 or soon after. That's the curve I'm talking about. I called it a bell curve because that's a familiar concept. I don't have data points to plot. It's just an abstract way to illustrate what we already know.

I've never seen evidence that any more ram than that improves peak performance--only that with modifications 98 will run with it. And of course the problem with newer hardware and 98 is not ram, it's drivers. I would never dissuade someone from running 98 on hardware that has 98 drivers.

(Seems like we go back and forth on this everytime someone posts in with this type of situation. LOL)

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide.

message edited by DAVEINCAPS


Report •

#17
September 3, 2014 at 22:12:51
I edited the message in the meantime, but discussion always good, how else would I have learned the warez accusation in that other thread devoutly defended was in fact the truth of it?

Lee


Report •

#18
September 4, 2014 at 00:49:08
True, I see now that you meant no harm by it. If you want the real, dirty story, complete with examples of how this "98 Guy" and his buddies act, and rloew's response to their antics, then read this thread:
http://www.techtalk.cc/viewtopic.ph...

Report •

#19
September 6, 2014 at 13:10:42

LoneCrusader...thanx for this info:
"Also, the link to the Google groups page above should be removed by a moderator. It is a discussion of WAREZ - a German hacker cracked an old Demo version of Rudolph Loew's RAM patch and distributed it illegally."

And thanx to him who posted the topic link, where I found this:
"•If it is warez, it must not be "handled" on any of our servers anyway"

cuz.. that was a trap I would have surly fallen into.

Hay all! Complaint. I started this thread, got my answer and now its going all over the pace. I want to answer so many of your posts, but its all to fast for me. I finally saved the whole page, to take home an read so I can soak it up. But I am getting distracted from my present problem. Trying to get my 98se going again.
I D/L'ed MemTest86 and ran it to discover that only 128MB stick was indeed bad. One bit was dead as a doornail. Fortunatly my two 512MB sticks arrived. Tossing the bad, I seated one new stick. Ran MemTest86 and it passed!
I will put back the 2nd stick for a spare. But the mem fault left me with lots o bad files. I was counting on these to install and update., "Also, suddenly my only 98SE install CD developed read problems from scratches. I've no, "One Copy ALLOWED!", backup CD.
So...I want to now forget memory except the deffinant adjustment settings needed for 512MB on 98SE. I am using three systems in this problem, 98SE, the target, WinXP, the intermediate resevoir of storage and CD burning and This Vista Laptop for getting all your intellegence onto a 4G flash drive, (Fat 16-32?) which fits into my 98SE target sys.
Do I need another thread or maybe ten of 'm ?
But Davencaps, I am there now......
"Installing 98 on a system having a gig of ram is going to be a problems. You'll need to drop the ram to no more than 512 meg when doing the initial install. Then there's some modifications to some startup files that will be necessary for 98 to run smoothly. Let us know when you get to that stage."

And ridder..thanx about memtest86...I got that an its goog. I ran it on my XP and discovered it has a great manual on PDF. I will attack that later.

Ok one more question> On my XP, two Flash drives plugged into USB. One was the 4GB, Fat and another 16GB, NTFS. I there copied, using COPY all 4G into a folder on 16GB. Later, doing checksum discovery on multiple files, I discovered checksum disagreement in the copied data just done. There were a hand full of bad copies there of the few I checked for chksum. I don't have a good checking program for all these files I now need to sort out.



Report •

#20
September 6, 2014 at 13:40:42
Yeah, sometimes these threads take on a life of their own.

Fat32 on the flash drive. 98 won't see ntfs and fat16 has a 2 gig limitation on partition size. 98 didn't have built in flash drive support so you may need to hunt down drivers.

The scratched 98 disk shouldn't be a real problem. First you might try cleaning it real good and see if you can make a copy on another machine. If you do need another disk, 98 keys were not unique to the disk. The disks just had a formula to determine if the key you enter is valid so other disks work with the same key. My experience was that OEM disks all used the same formula so any OEM key worked with any OEM disk. Retail disks were the same way but used a different formula.

Or you may be able to find a download for a 98 .iso and make your own disk.

Edit About the gig of ram, just use one of the sticks during the install then either apply the fix LoneCrusader linked to or check riider's link in # 9 or download ram.zip from my link in my # 14 and check the screen shots. As I mentioned, that's just one way to modify the files and is probably good enough but may not be ideal. But it'll give you an idea on what's necessary. Once you've made the changes you can install the second 512 stick.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide. Better hurry. They're picking and shipping now.

message edited by DAVEINCAPS


Report •

#21
September 6, 2014 at 14:36:04
"""DAVEINCAPS September 6, 2014 at 13:40:42 --- Yeah, sometimes these threads take on a life of their own."""
""" melee5 September 3, 2014 at 22:12:51 ---- in the meantime, but discussion always good"""

""""""DAVEINCAPS ---Fat32 on the flash drive. 98 won't see ntfs"""
I knew that
""" and fat16 has a 2 gig limitation on partition size."""
Now this may be a great void of ignorance for me. I didn't find a problem formatting and dividing, way back, into ~= 3.xGB and ~= 2.xGB . And somehow I was impressed that 4GB was the max.
BTW... I am not going to do 1GB RAM. I'll keep my second stick for a spare. I don't want the grief of 1GB anymore.
Also BTW, 'bout nother 98SE Install CD...you were right..look here:
https://winworldpc.com/product/wind...

"""98 didn't have built in flash drive support so you may need to hunt down drivers."""
I knew that and found a solution....look for NUSB, (NativeUSB). I am using it. I've not seen any indication of not working untill now.
But another mistake I made was allowing a scandisk and defrag of the 4GB_FD_Fat while on the XP.
Hey...some of the files seem good on the FD....I just don't know which ones!
Now I've got to get another install CD before any going back to a simple new, clean install. So, I really have this tiger by the tail.

message edited by Walt43


Report •

#22
September 6, 2014 at 17:37:24
Yeah you should be able to download it there. It doesn't say if it's an OEM or retail version but if your key doesn't work with it we may be able to procure another one.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide. Better hurry. They're picking and shipping now.


Report •

#23
September 6, 2014 at 19:20:09
The files from winworldpc are .7z so you'll need 7-zip to unpack it.

http://www.7-zip.org/

Either that or look for a site that has it in ISO format. Burn the ISO to a CD using Imgburn (or similar software), then boot from the disk & do a repair install, or a clean install.

Click here: Win98SE ISO direct download


Report •

#24
September 10, 2014 at 13:21:02
Ahm D/L'ing now; 30% done & still got 30 min ta go. But Ahm hopeful about it. Whut Ah previously got wuz, "Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition [VMware VM].7z". When I opened it, (got PeaZip), only things there were strange looking extensions. Prolly was Linux and needed compiling. I have not mastered W98SE, so not ready for Linux.
SO... thanx riider !

Report •

#25
September 10, 2014 at 15:30:05
I haven't checked but a 98 cd ought to be cheap on ebay or maybe someone could burn you a copy.

Don't forget to preorder your Hatch green chili for this fall. Many vendors ship world-wide. Better hurry. They're picking and shipping now.


Report •

Ask Question