Hardware Analysis Community Forums http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/ 2008-11-22T11:32:22-05:00 http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/ http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/halogo.gif text/html 2008-04-03T08:25:27-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532744 Hehe, yeah. All my previous budget builds were with an NVIDIA nForce chip which doesn't mess with amount of memory reaching Windows (if it does, I missed it). I went with a VIA chip because the owner has 3 PATA devices so I needed 2 x ATA100/133. Only VIA had that at a good price point. The VIA board is pretty good but VIA needs to better arrange their drivers for download and give the downloads more descriptive names.<br /> <br /> I simply adore how simple the NVIDIA driver process is for entire NVIDA builds. text/html 2008-04-03T08:15:25-05:00 Rhort http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532741 Guess I've just spent too much time dealing with cr@ppier kit than you! <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile4.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=";)" title=";)"> Three years working at a site that ONLY bought Elonex (until they went bust!<img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile3.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":D" title=":D">) (which didn't surprise us!). text/html 2008-04-02T18:08:06-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532691 I don't deal with on-board very often and this is the first time I've ever used a VIA IGP. The thought never crossed my mind. XD text/html 2008-04-02T12:14:06-05:00 Rhort http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532678 You know, I'm genuinely surprise that this confused you <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile4.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=";)" title=";)"> text/html 2008-04-02T09:23:04-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532671 Yeah sure, it'd be well enough if thats all its used for.<br /> <br /> I used to run XP on an Athlon 750 with 256MiB ram text/html 2008-04-01T18:19:31-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532587 The owner uses it for pretty much strictly Internet access. 384 MiB should be enough to keep AVG, Windows, and Internet Explorer happy so I think I'll leave it. <img src="http://media.hardwareanalysis.com/smilies/smile1.gif" width="14" height="14" border="0" alt=":)" title=":)"> text/html 2008-04-01T15:04:01-05:00 Dragon Peaceful http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532572 Yup, yup. That's on board video share memory to you. You should be able to dial it down in the BIOS, with a bit sacrifice to video performance. Once you have the vid card in, you should have that 128MB back.<br /> text/html 2008-04-01T11:42:04-05:00 DublinGunner http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532559 Yep, that seems like the most likely cause.<br /> <br /> Is there a setting in the BIOS to allocate how much ram you want to the video adapter?<br /> <br /> If its a very basic workstation (internet etc) that could easily be lowered to 64MiB, or even 32 text/html 2008-04-01T10:32:23-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532558 I think you hit the nail on the head. It does have integrated graphics (VIA Chrome 9) and it is the only display adapter available at this time so I am using it. It could very well be using 128 MiB system RAM for itself.<br /> <br /> <br /> Edit: I haven't tried any other types of RAM because I don't have any other DDR2 sticks available to me. text/html 2008-04-01T08:51:12-05:00 john albrich http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532556 Well, that suggests to me that it's not a BIOS or mobo compatibility issue. AT this point, the only thing I can think of would be some sort of 128mb assignment to another resource...like a video buffer, RAM shadowing, or something like that getting assigned before total RAM is reported to Windows.<br /> <br /> You didn't say if you'd tried any other brand memory stick. text/html 2008-04-01T07:07:27-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532553 CPU-Z says 512 under Memory and 512 under SPD -&gt; Slot #2.<br /> <br /> Full report is here:<br /> <a class="ext" href="/action/r/http://fordgt90concept.homeip.net/cpuz.htm" target="_blank">http://fordgt90concept.homeip.net/cpuz.htm</a> text/html 2008-04-01T06:52:34-05:00 john albrich http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#532551 What does a program like CPUz report (both the &quot;Memory&quot; and the &quot;SPD&quot; (per slot) tabs)? text/html 2008-04-01T06:37:07-05:00 FordGT90Concept http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/71166/#0 This build has been nothing short of problematical with a box arriving damaged, other parts being defective, and another box arriving damaged. Things were looking pretty good today with the final shipment of replacement parts arriving...until now. I am <i>supposed</i> to have a single, 512 MiB, DDR2-800 stick in the computer. According to the task manager and system properties, it is only registering as 384 MiB. How is that possible?<br /> <br /> I must mention this Kingston stick is quite unique. It is singled sided memory and all the chips are only half the physical size of the typical memory chip. Is this because of incompatibility with the motherboard or is it because some of those memory chips are defective? Basically, I'm asking if I should refund or replace. XD<br /> <br /> <br /> Edit: The owner of this computer has been waiting for three weeks because of all the mess. If I need to replace it, I will demand <a target="_blank" href="/action/r/http://www.newegg.com/">Newegg</a> send me the replacement stick and I will send the defective stick when the new stick arrives. The computer is workable now and I don't want to keep it from the owner any longer than I have to.