ok not that it belogs just here since i have xp machines as well as a 98 but i have 
4 machines that will not recognise these 512 sdram chips... i have the latest bios 
for the boards... what more can i do?

y make a 512 if nothing uses them?

Tip: Run a free scan for common Windows errors ad

re: 512 sdram Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 6:37 pm Posted by Steve (23811 messages posted) sdram comes in low density, and high density. My experience 90 to 95 percent of the Motherboard Manufactures use the Low density variety. If you got High density, and your motherboards use the Low density variety then it is time to sell your wares on ebay. Also most the Motherboards that are Windows 98 vintage can't take sticks bigger then 128 to 256 megs no mater what Bios update you have done. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 sdram Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 11:40 pm Posted by DanTheMan (140 messages posted) yer what probloy what steve said is the problom i didit know win 98 may not see 128mbs or 256mbs lol i know win me can since it i got one 256mb and 128mb in the computer am using now with win me [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 sdram Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 6:26 am Posted by Steve (23811 messages posted) Most motherboards built around 10 years ago, can not use Ram sticks bigger then 128 or 256 megs. So the they won't recognize a 512 meg stick. Has nothing to do with Windows 98, it is a Hardware issue. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 sdram Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 6:39 am Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Yup.. What Steve said. Intel chipsets max on standard low density SDRAM was 256 meg modules (double sided/double density as it was called) per slot up to one gig of SDRAM with some tweaking by the hardware manufacturer. I have 4 old Asus P2B-DS boards used in low end servers at the time, with 4 slots that will take 256 low (or double) density only, up to 1 gig of RAM. (max 128 meg per side of the module) I have an old Asus CUV4X-DS with a VIA chipset that will take the high density (or Quad density some would call it) 512 SDRAM modules X 3. As far as I know, VIA (maybe SIS but I haven't seen any over the years) was the only manufacturer that made a chipset that did this before the switch to DDR. I run Win 9X on this board with one 512 meg module just fine. Intel made chipsets that would take RDRAM (before DDR hit the market) and DDR in the 512 meg in later, but never made a chipset that would support the HD SDRAM (greater than 256 meg) straight off the drawing board (natively). On top of that was the fact that the board manufacturer could put any limits on size and config of memory below what the chipset could handle. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 sdram Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 11:52 am Posted by chad (17 messages posted) these chips have a sticker on them that says sdr 64x4 pc133 512msum1009 black chips on both sides Product Description 512MB 168Pin SDRAM PC133 133Mhz MEMORY Brand NEW Product - Dual Channel Ready Low Cost High Density 168Pin SDRAM PC133 Product Details: • 168-pin unbuffered DIMM • Density: HIGH DESNITY • PC133 133FSB • 3.3 Volts • 6 Layer unbuffered • CAS Latency 3 • 4 Bank • Off-chip driver (OCD) impedance adjustment, and on die termination (ODT) Technical Information: Memory Size: 512MB SDRAM 168Pin Number: 1 x 512MB Memory Speed: 133Mhz More Information: 512MB x 1 Non ECC Non Registered UnBuffered 6 Layer Non Parity Physical Characteristics: Form Factor: 168-pin SDRAM, Gold Pin, Green PCB Warranty: Life Time Manufacturer warranty [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 sdram Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 12:45 pm Posted by C K (6910 messages posted) Exactly what brand name and model number is the computer or the motherboard?? Knowing the chip specs won't help if we don't know what machine or motherboard they are going into. Hardware questions are really off topic here but we try if we know and can give a quick answer. Dual channel ready isn't the old first generation SDRAM types as there were no dual channel boards for the old SDRAM, so we might not be thinking on the same terms! Dual channel ready is the newer SDRAM which is also DDR, DDR2 and the newer DDR3 type. Many people don't realize DDR "IS" SDRAM but an upgraded and faster version. DDR is also keyed differently and won't fit in the original SDRAM slots, so if it says, dual channel ready, it is has to be DDR ram or it is mislabeled/misrepresented. The old SDRAM is all but impossible to find and will be more costly than DDR RAM, if you can find it, and will in all likelyhood be used as it hasn't been manufactured in years! All that being said, you have to check the size limits and configuration restrictions of the machine or the motherboard, as hardware manufacturers customize them to different support levels, mostly to make cheaper boards, especially for the big OEM companies. The BIOS is also customized to fit these machines and/or motherboards. If you have 4 machines that act the same, then you have a hardware issue that only the manufacturer could help you with, or give you info on what the machine of the motherboard will support. Websites like Crucial or Kingston will have a tool to let you know what memory you need and the maximum amounts on a system or motherboard, unless it is a very obscure and unpopular model. [Reply or follow-up to this message] re: 512 MB sdram vs. MB Chipset BIOS Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 10:30 am Posted by Kiwi (2228 messages posted) I ran across something I considered rather odd / strange recently, reading the manual for a SOYO SY5-EMA+ motherboard. It only has the 168 pin older single rate DIMM slots (three of those), but there was reference to a dual channel efficiency situation. That surprised me, but it's not something I was concerned with, and I didn't make a note of where in the (PDF) manual I saw it. I say "unconcerned", because it's a platform for some early W9x game titles, and I already have an overkill (500 MHz) CPU in there, when the minimum was 200. However, now that I have things just about the way I want them, my sloppy swapping of audio & video devices and drivers for them to find the "best" out of all the old discarded components is now biting me hard -- and I may have to start all over with a fresh Win98 install! (See my new, separate message: a query about driver cleanup in W98. It doesn't *HAVE* to be freeware, but the latest of the "Driver Cleaner Pro" series have dropped the W9x OSes.) . Kiwi ** On Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 12:45 pm, C K wrote: >Exactly what brand name and model number is the computer or the motherboard?? Knowing >the chip specs won't help if we don't know what machine or motherboard they are going >into. Hardware questions are really off topic here but we try if we know and can >give a quick answer. > >Dual channel ready isn't the old first generation SDRAM types as there were no dual >channel boards for the old SDRAM, so we might not be thinking on the same terms! > Dual channel ready is the newer SDRAM which is also DDR, DDR2 and the newer DDR3 >type. Many people don't realize DDR "IS" SDRAM but an upgraded and faster version. > DDR is also keyed differently and won't fit in the original SDRAM slots, so if it >says, dual channel ready, it is has to be DDR ram or it is mislabeled/misrepresented. > >The old SDRAM is all but impossible to find and will be more costly than DDR RAM, >if you can find it, and will in all likelyhood be used as it hasn't been manufactured >in years! > >All that being said, you have to check the size limits and configuration restrictions >of the machine or the motherboard, as hardware manufacturers customize them to different >support levels, mostly to make cheaper boards, especially for the big OEM companies. > The BIOS is also customized to fit these machines and/or motherboards. If you have >4 machines that act the same, then you have a hardware issue that only the manufacturer >could help you with, or give you info on what the machine of the motherboard will >support. > >Websites like Crucial or Kingston will have a tool to let you know what memory you >need and the maximum amounts on a system or motherboard, unless it is a very obscure >and unpopular model. [Reply or follow-up to this message] Tip: Use one of the [Reply or follow-up to this message] links above to add a message to this thread Search this forum Start a new thread on a different subject Report abuse of the forum Return to the Windows 98 Discussion Forum