recommend mobo for AthlonXP 2000+

[Squisher]

<<Go for the Soltek SL75DRV2>>


Just got the email that my SL75DRV4 has just shipped, updates to follow.

 

[billyjak]

Abit KR7A Raid board

 

[SpecialEd]

i'd recommend the IWILL board as well.... their boards are the best!!

 

[TheLeviathan]

How about the soon to come out Asus A7V333.

 

[Devistater]

2phat4u:
You mention that you are going to get 1 gig of crucial 2100 DDR SDRAM. Well SDRAM is not DDRam, you are either getting one or the other You are probably wanting DDR though from what you say in the rest of your post. Second, what OS are you planning to use? You know that windows 95/98/ME does NOT like anything over 512 megs and will slow WAY WAY down right? So if you want a gig, plan to go with w2k or XP or NT or linux or something.

 

[Ju1cyJ]

<< 2phat4u:
You mention that you are going to get 1 gig of crucial 2100 DDR SDRAM. Well SDRAM is not DDRam, you are either getting one or the other You are probably wanting DDR though from what you say in the rest of your post. Second, what OS are you planning to use? You know that windows 95/98/ME does NOT like anything over 512 megs and will slow WAY WAY down right? So if you want a gig, plan to go with w2k or XP or NT or linux or something. >>





Uhhh, maybe I am wrong, but it is DDR SDRAM. SDRAM stands for Syncronse Dual (or something like that, but it means dual capaciter) Random Access Memory. DDR is just Double Data Rate. I am almost positive that if u have DDR ram it is SDRAM and therefore DDR SDRAM is correct.

 

[AAC]

<< 2phat4u:
You mention that you are going to get 1 gig of crucial 2100 DDR SDRAM. Well SDRAM is not DDRam, you are either getting one or the other You are probably wanting DDR though from what you say in the rest of your post. Second, what OS are you planning to use? You know that windows 95/98/ME does NOT like anything over 512 megs and will slow WAY WAY down right? So if you want a gig, plan to go with w2k or XP or NT or linux or something.[/q

With all due respect, where is this "fact" documented, please?

Thanks

 

[Devistater]

That "fact" about the 512 memory is documented on microsoft.com. There's a number of knowledge base articles about it, you just gotta search. One of the main articles about it: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q253912 Basically this one talks about how window will give you out of memory errors with more than 512 megs. The 3 fixes listed:

<< 1: Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less 2:Use the System Configuration utility to limit the amount of memory that Windows uses to 512 megabytes (MB) or less. 3: Reduce the amount of memory that is installed in your computer to 512 MB or less >>


So basically all you can do is make it so that win 95/98/ME can't use the extra memory.

Another article: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q184447
This one talks about how windows will crash upon startup "If your computer has 1 gigabyte (GB) or more of random-access memory (RAM) installed, Windows may not start." Again, the fix is to disable usage of memory. "Windows Me and Windows 98 are not designed to handle more than 1 GB of RAM. More than 1 GB can lead to potential system instability." Actually they aren't designed for more than 512 megs.

And another: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q304943
And finally this one, continuous rebooting at 1.5 gigs: "If your computer has more than 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of memory (RAM), the computer may reboot continuously when you try to start Windows Millennium Edition (Me) or Windows 98."

So basically anything over 512 megs is just ASKING for problems.

 

[AAC]

That is the information I wanted. Very kind of you to go to so much trouble. :Q



I thought you might be referring to the Vcache and async IO buffers, etc. settings.

However, we have been running 640+MB on 98SE and ME equipped workstations w/o problems, by properly configuring those settings.

Oh, BTW, limiting the Vcache and physpage settings does not limit the systems ability to use the total system memory, it just limits the amount that the Vcache manipulates. That is confusing, I suppose, but quite two different things. The other point is this, if these settings are correct, there is no system slowdown that we have been able to detect or bench, whatsoever. These settings are really quite simple.

In fact, if you do this correctly you can actually run 98, 98SE and, even ME on a 16MB DRAM 486SX-33 or even a 386DX-40. Do not expect too get great graphics performance on the 'Net, but they perform quite well for "normal" usage. Of course, to do the installations requires an undocumented setup switch.

Best and highest regards, sir. Interesting.

 

[Funky303]

well I would recommend you a

MSI K7N420 Pro (MS-6373)

or wait until the next Generatin MSI Board with the nForce 415-D chipset

 

[scorpio13]

Of course DDR is a flavour of SDRAM. Actually, though, SDRAM stands for Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory.
Anyway, does anyone have an opinion about the Gigabyte GA-7VTXE or the chaintech CT-7VJDA. I am planning on bying a new Athlon XP 1800+ in the near future, and in Greece you cannot always find all the different brands of mobos. (ASUS and MSI are too expensive).

 

[Funky303]

I just saw over NEWEGG that ECS/Elitegroup has released the board with SIS745 chipset for 70$ + 8$ shipping. This one is a cheap & good alternative.