Windows 98 SE Jacks my RAM

[cpuloser]

I have 512 MB of RAM on my system, and am running Windows 98 SE. I noticed that my memory continuously falls until I am left with around 33 MB. Then my computer crashes. Does anyone know why this is happening? I use antispyware, antivirus and a firwall program, but they shouldn't take up that much RAM.

 

[MrChad]

Could be a number of things. Windows 9x doesn't manage memory very well, and wayward programs that leak can take down the entire OS. What programs are you running, besides the ones you listed.

 

[cpuloser]

Webroot Anti-Spyware

Avast! Anti-Virus

Zonealarm Basic Firewall

Memokit Memory Optimizer

Usually IE 6

All programs are active and show up on the taskbar tray. I really can't use any other programs because my memory decline is around 100MB every 40 minutes


Also, If I boosted my memory to 768MB - 1 GB, will it help, or will Windows 98 still steal RAM until no more?

Thanks.



Oh also, is there a way that quotas can be on RAM? I remember memokit asking me about some "boundaries" but I didn't understand and pressed no (There was no other way to continue using my computer unless I hit YES or NO. I didn't want boundaries, so I pressed no). I know my system has 512 MB RAM, but it seems that Windows only recognizes 350 MB and the other 162 MB is missing.

Thanks again.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: cpuloser
Webroot Anti-Spyware

Avast! Anti-Virus

Zonealarm Basic Firewall

Memokit Memory Optimizer

Usually IE 6

All programs are active and show up on the taskbar tray. I really can't use any other programs because my memory decline is around 100MB every 40 minutes


Also, If I boosted my memory to 768MB - 1 GB, will it help, or will Windows 98 still steal RAM until no more?

Thanks.

Have you tried stopping the "Memory Optimizer"?

No, adding more memory will not help, as 9x doesn't play well with >512 MB of RAM without going through a few hoops.

 

[cpuloser]

Yes. I have. To tell you the truth, without it, there is no way (at least I don't know) to see how much free RAM I have. I feel performance is higher, but only because there is no declining green bar in my task tray.

The weird thing is while Memokit reports I have say, 40% free RAM, Windows Device Manager reports a number at least 20 digits higher like 60% free system resources.

Is system resources another way to say RAM? If not, then ignore the second paragraph.

 

[DasMan2]

cpuloser try a different memory reader program such as RAMpage: http://www.jfitz.com/software/RAMpage/index.html

It's freeware and helps you spot memory loss and can be configured to free up ram as set to your levels.

 

[thegorx]

you have to turn off some of those programs running in the background

simply end task and exit all back programs running the back ground and check out your memory and resources.

Webroot is a real memory hog, it's a nice program put I'd exit it or disable it at start up
it really doesn't need to be running all the time unless you have a bad spyware problem.

you want to have you're resources in the at least 80% area IMO while idle.

if you want to limit your vcache just do it manually don't use a program that more than likely will use resources.

if you need to see available memory, disk cache size, swap file in use and more use sysmon that comes with windows 98 or you might have to install it in add remove windows setup system tools

also try using regmon

a perfect 98 system when idle shouldn't have anything accessing the registry when idle
your AV will more than likely show up every once in a while but if something is constantly accessing the registry when you're not moving the mouse or anything then you should look into that because that more than likely is causing problems

also with regmon don't worry about the registry keys too much just pay attention to what is actively accessing the registry which means that program or file is agressisively running.

 

[Soggys1stBrat]

Did you go in to you system properties and manually set your virtual memory controller? If you leave it at the default setting " let windows manage your virtual memory" it may have an effect on how it controls your RAM. Virtual memory ties the free space on your hard drive with your RAM, and if for some reason your Virtual memory space runs too low it eats your RAM.

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Soggys1stBrat
Did you go in to you system properties and manually set your virtual memory controller? If you leave it at the default setting " let windows manage your virtual memory" it may have an effect on how it controls your RAM. Virtual memory ties the free space on your hard drive with your RAM, and if for some reason your Virtual memory space runs too low it eats your RAM.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Virtual memory is only used when the operating system runs out of physical memory (RAM) to use.

 

[Nothinman]

Win98 and memory optimizers are crap, get rid of both of them.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Virtual memory is only used when the operating system runs out of physical memory (RAM) to use.

To be pedantic, VM is always in use even in a crap OS like Win98. But the pagefile (or whatever Win9x/DOS calls it) should only be used if memory is low, but given how poor the memory management is in that line of OSes I wouldn't be surprised to see otherwise.

 

[redbeard1]

Somewhere I read that WinME could make meaningful use of 192 meg of ram, where 98SE was only 128 meg.

Either OS is still hamstrung by the low resource problem. Both of them put the main core of files that are running into the first 2 meg of memory. So a ton of things starting up at boot, or running numrous program at once, will eat system resources know matter how much ram you throw at it.

 

[cpuloser]

Wow. I have over 871 spyware files on my computer. I think that could be leeching massive amounts of my memory.

That RAMpage program works great. Memokit never could free up system RAM on command.

 

[Link19]

What the heck are you doing running a POS like Windows 98/ME on a system with 512MB of RAM?? BIG MISTAKE!! That is why you are having so many problems when trying to load too many background tasks. Windows 98 handles memory like utter horse sh*t That is your problem. Use Windows 2000 or XP. Trash Windows 98 for a decent system like that!!

 

[Nothinman]

Somewhere I read that WinME could make meaningful use of 192 meg of ram, where 98SE was only 128 meg.

Nah, most of the problem was the fact that motherboards of the time couldn't cache much memory. So adding more than the motherboard could cache would result in added latency since every memory access above that limit would guarantee a full trip to memory instead of just hitting the CPU cache. 512M is probably the practical limit for those OSes, but there are hacks to allow them to work properly with a gig or more.

 

[xgsound]

One of the programs on your system has a memory leak. This could be malware or a poorly written/corrupted program. Malware can cause your problems. Clean your system as completely as you can. Flying penguin has a guide at http://www.theflyingpenguin.com/penguin_blog.shtml#spyware-removal and the top sticky here at Anandtech in the Software/programs forum has another guide.

Your System resources % is a measure of a special part of win98 memory that is used to keep the win98 running. It is different from free memory. At bootup it should read above 80%. Remove spyware and startup programs until you reach above 80% at bootup. If it reads below 60% a crash is more likely since win98 can no longer keep itself running.

There is a win98se rollup at http://exuberant.ms11.net/98sesp.html that applies security patches, makes USB reliable, updates many drivers, and patches for >512 memory.

If your machine is 500 Mhz or above consider XP since it will run well on 512 MB.


Jim

 

[cpuloser]

Actually, my computer specs are:

AMD Athlon 3800+
512MB RAM
nForce 4 Mobo (don't know specifics)
80 GB Primary HDD
40 GB Secondary HDD

i use windows 98 because I don't have a xp disk.

 

[stash]

XP costs much less than a Athlon 3800+

You won't be able to take any advantage of the performance potential of that system running an OS from last century.

 

[cpuloser]

Come to think of it, I never did see the processor show any of the powers listed on the retail box.

I guess you're right. I know Windows Vista is comming out soon, but I'm still getting XP.

Which version is right for mostly business and programming orienting pesron? (I have never used XP for more than 3 minutes at a time so i know nothing about XP except for the fact that it is blue colored)

 

[cpuloser]

Pro seems good for me. thanks everyone.