At 2003-02-23 10:18 -0800, David Hopkins wrote: >Two days ago my eldest Son purchased a 256K memory stick to upgrade from the 128K he >had in his computer. No matter what we try the computer will only recognize 128K. We >have tried the memory in three different computers with the same results. He returned >the memory to the store who tested the memory in one of there computers and claimed >it worked fine.
Perhaps your son's computer expects 100 MHz memory and the new memory you bought is 133 Mhz. I don't think that they are compatible. I also had problems exchanging them. I tried to put a newly bought 256 Mbyte memory stick in my old mainboard with an 333 Mhz AMD CPU but it didn't work. (But at the same time I also tried to replace the 333 MHz CPU with an 380 Mhz version). It also gave problems (although less severely in a suspect no-brand mainboard with an 380 MHz AMD CPU that I tried to put in my mother's PC. The first thing I want from PC's is reliability so I removed it from my 333 Mhz mainboard again and put it in the 380 Mhz board, but that tilted about once an hour (for no apparent reason), so I put my 333 Mhz motherboard in my mother's PC and bought a new motherboard with a 1 GHz AMD CPU and put the 256 Mbyte module in it and build a new PC for myself with it. (This was december 2001.) Everybody happy. My mother's old PC (486/100 Mhz) is now helping a friend of my mother (about 74 of age like my mother) getting used to computers and the internet. When you're also considering fixing up your old computers for others: It's a lot of work and it doesn't pay well, except in appreciation. ;-) >Does the memory card require jumpers to be present >on the memory board to tell some computers how >much memory is mounted on the card? That is very unlikely, as others have said too. Like some one else on this list I think you should consider upgrading your son to a new motherboard. Just leave the working combo as it is and move it 'down the line'. By the way, why does he need 256 Mbyte instead of 128 Mbyte? Even most of the games don't really need it. Command and Conquer Generals seems to need a lot of memory and 1.2 GHz of speed, but most games don't. I could play most of the games on my 333 Mhz, 128 Mbyte system, except Diggles/Wiggles, but that was even still a bit shaky on the new 1 Ghz system. The latest 3D games may also need more memory, but they would benefit more from more CPU-speed and a newer graphics card, I think. If you're not playing 3D or RTS games yourself, you may want to consider putting your son on the top of the line and you next in line. Most business applications don't need much more than 333 Mhz, 128 Mbyte and a TNT1 level video card. Of course there are exceptions, like: - Multi track music studio usage - MP3 ripping - Film editing - 3D rendering - Engineering calculations with large matrices etc. BTW. In some cases a bigger and or faster cache (level 1, 2 or 3) can be much more important, but in some cases you're just wasting money buying a CPU or motherboard with more cache. Greetings, Jaap -- Author: Jaap van Ganswijk INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB CHIPDIR-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
