Word :    Username :           
 

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win95.general.discussion (More info?)

 

I am working on a Compaq Presario 4814 with win 95. I
upgraded the ram from 32mb to 256mb (max. allowed. The
computer freezes as soon as the Windows 95 start up
screen comes on. I updated the Bios and same thing. If
I use 1-32mb with 1-128mb of ram it is fine (not using
bad ram) If I start in safe mode it will boot up fine.
Any suggestions?

Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
- 0 +

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win95.general.discussion (More info?)

 

Which version of 95 are you using?

If its the original FAT16 version, it probably can't run
256MB of RAM.

If the computer can run 256MB in Safe mode, I would search
the Knowledge Base at http://support.microsoft.com/ for
articles that might shed light on the matter.

There may be as settings fix of the same kind that allows
Windows 98 to use more than 512MB.

Eric,
http://www.pcbuyerbeware.co.uk/
http://www.sharedbirthday.co.uk/


>-----Original Message-----
>I am working on a Compaq Presario 4814 with win 95. I
>upgraded the ram from 32mb to 256mb (max. allowed. The
>computer freezes as soon as the Windows 95 start up
>screen comes on. I updated the Bios and same thing. If
>I use 1-32mb with 1-128mb of ram it is fine (not using
>bad ram) If I start in safe mode it will boot up fine.
>Any suggestions?
>.
>

Reply to Eric

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win95.general.discussion (More info?)

 

"Jeff" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>I am working on a Compaq Presario 4814 with win 95. I
>upgraded the ram from 32mb to 256mb (max. allowed. The
>computer freezes as soon as the Windows 95 start up
>screen comes on. I updated the Bios and same thing. If
>I use 1-32mb with 1-128mb of ram it is fine (not using
>bad ram) If I start in safe mode it will boot up fine.
>Any suggestions?

Does it work fine with either of the 128 mb modules installed plus the
32 mb, or just with one and not with the other?

Are both of your 128 mb modules from the same manufacturer and the
same production lot? Windows can have problems when the memory
modules are not absolutely identical.

Unless you have some specific memory hungry application that you want
to use this computer for it is quite possible that 128 mb or 160 mb
will be fully adequate for whatever you want to do.

There is no problem with Windows 95 (any version) and 256 mb of RAM.
There are issues that do arise when you go beyond 512 mb but that is
not relevant to your situation.

Try the machine for a few days of normal to heavier than normal usage
with 128 or 160 mb of RAM. While it is running launch the System
Monitor utility that comes with Windows 95 (Accessories - System
Tools) and use Edit - Add to configure it to track "Memory Manager -
Swap File In Use". Leave the System Monitor running while you are
using the computer and check it periodically to see what the reported
values are.

Adding more memory can noticeably improve performance only if the
added memory results in reduced usage of the virtual memory swap file.
Therefore if the swap file is not currently being used to any
significant extent then adding more memory will not provide a
significant improvement. If the System Monitor reports "Swap File In
Use" as less than 20 mb most of the time then it is highly unlikely
that a further increase in RAM will result in any improvement in
overall performance. Unless, of course, you change your usage
pattern so that RAM requirements are increased.

Good luck

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win95.general.discussion (More info?)

 

"Eric" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>Which version of 95 are you using?
>
>If its the original FAT16 version, it probably can't run
>256MB of RAM.
>

That is not correct. There is no difference in the RAM capabilities
between the difference versions of Windows 95.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

Reply to Anonymous
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Windows 95/98/ME > Windows 95/98/Me General Discussion > Memory not recognized
Go to:

There are 1387 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them