503+ BIOS settings and random lockups

"Alex Zorrilla" <apz.DeleteThis@zxeng.com> wrote in message news:401EBA7A.4CDB6EBB@zxeng.com...
 > Try testing your RAM with Memtest86+, which you can get from
 > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.memtest.org" target="_blank">http://www.memtest.org</a> . Just load it to a floppy, boot to the floppy,
 > and let it go. If you do not get any errors, then it is is probably
 > something else.
 >
 > By the way, I believe 4-way memory interleaving should be OK, but I am
 > not 100% sure.
 >
OK thanks will test with disabled, 2 & 4 and see what happens, I see that
this program has just been updated, the first since mid 2002.

Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

If you can still find the utility ctspd it will tell you all the specs from
the spd on the sticks of memory including interleave.
Robert
"Den" <Den.RemoveThis@NoSpamOrNoCornedBeef.unlimited-But-Was-Limited.RIP> wrote in
message news:bvmv04$1js$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
 >
 > "Alex Zorrilla" <apz.RemoveThis@zxeng.com> wrote in message
news:401EBA7A.4CDB6EBB@zxeng.com...
  > > Try testing your RAM with Memtest86+, which you can get from
  > > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.memtest.org" target="_blank">http://www.memtest.org</a> . Just load it to a floppy, boot to the floppy,
  > > and let it go. If you do not get any errors, then it is is probably
  > > something else.
  > >
  > > By the way, I believe 4-way memory interleaving should be OK, but I am
  > > not 100% sure.
  > >
 > OK thanks will test with disabled, 2 & 4 and see what happens, I see that
 > this program has just been updated, the first since mid 2002.
 >
 > Den
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

"Den" <Den RemoveThis @NoSpamOrNoCornedBeef.unlimited-But-Was-Limited.RIP> wrote in message news:bvmv04$1js$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
 >
 > OK thanks will test with disabled, 2 & 4 and see what happens, I see that
 > this program has just been updated, the first since mid 2002.
 >
Just tried tests but found the default test would after a short time give
a (I assume) pattened crash until I set 384MB setting, I assume that
the extra memory count on boot of 393216K is with possibly some of the
video card memory which is a 32MB one, as L1 Cache is 64K and
L2 cache is Unknown according to Memtest Only a guess on my part.


So as when it reaches 384MB this is when it usually fails regardless
of default, 2 or 4 set.
Setting memory to 384 within program the default, 2 or 4 and also if I set
SDRAM Cycle Length=2 or 3 is all OK.

Latest test of 60 minutes at these settings show no errors, so I assume
it could be possibly mains borne interference, despite filtered power strip.
SDRAM Cycle Length=2
SDRAM Bank Interleave set at 4 bank
PS
Talking of power surges;
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/3457965.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/3457965.stm</a>
Thank goodness for the good old fashioned manual loos.

Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

"Robert Akins" <robert.akins2.DeleteThis@verizon.net> wrote in message news:iHHTb.7231$07.1849@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
 > If you can still find the utility ctspd it will tell you all the specs from
 > the spd on the sticks of memory including interleave.
 >
Thanks for that, according to that program the Crucial 256MB;
(http://www.crucial.com/uk/store/PartSpecs.asp?imodule=CT32M64S4D7E&cat=RAM

Is made by Micron, as is the IBM 128MB stick and both show it
to be 133MHz and CAS 2/3 in fact the only thing to change between
the two is the Micron DIMM type number and size.

Though the 503+ has been on for the last 48 hours without any lockups
and Memtest86+ had not shown any errors when run.
Check in other post (BBC) link.

Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

Actually, 384 MB = 393126 kB. This is because 1 MB = 1024 kB, at least if you're talking about RAM. I think that by
manually setting 384 in the program, you are actually bypassing the bad part of memory.

Try testing the memory one stick at a time, allowing the program to set its own memory. I wager that one of the sticks will
test OK, but the other one will give errors near the end of its size.

By the way, for a K6-2, the L2 cache shows up as "Unknown" because it is located on the motherboard, not on the CPU itself.

--Alex


Den wrote:

 > "Den" <Den.DeleteThis@NoSpamOrNoCornedBeef.unlimited-But-Was-Limited.RIP> wrote in message news:bvmv04$1js$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
  > >
  > > OK thanks will test with disabled, 2 & 4 and see what happens, I see that
  > > this program has just been updated, the first since mid 2002.
  > >
 > Just tried tests but found the default test would after a short time give
 > a (I assume) pattened crash until I set 384MB setting, I assume that
 > the extra memory count on boot of 393216K is with possibly some of the
 > video card memory which is a 32MB one, as L1 Cache is 64K and
 > L2 cache is Unknown according to Memtest Only a guess on my part.
 >
 > So as when it reaches 384MB this is when it usually fails regardless
 > of default, 2 or 4 set.
 > Setting memory to 384 within program the default, 2 or 4 and also if I set
 > SDRAM Cycle Length=2 or 3 is all OK.
 >
 > Latest test of 60 minutes at these settings show no errors, so I assume
 > it could be possibly mains borne interference, despite filtered power strip.
 > SDRAM Cycle Length=2
 > SDRAM Bank Interleave set at 4 bank
 > PS
 > Talking of power surges;
<font color=purple> > <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/3457965.stm</font" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/3457965.stm</font</a>>
 > Thank goodness for the good old fashioned manual loos.
 >
 > Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

"Alex Zorrilla" <apz DeleteThis @zxeng.com> wrote in message news:40214BDB.EAE40F24@zxeng.com...
 > Actually, 384 MB = 393126 kB. This is because 1 MB = 1024 kB, at least if you're talking about RAM. I think that by
 > manually setting 384 in the program, you are actually bypassing the bad part of memory.
 >
 > Try testing the memory one stick at a time, allowing the program to set its own memory. I wager that one of the sticks will
 > test OK, but the other one will give errors near the end of its size.
 >
 > By the way, for a K6-2, the L2 cache shows up as "Unknown" because it is located on the motherboard, not on the CPU itself.
 >
As the program goes straight into testing it is showing every single test
as an error then screen changes to the unreadable display, this is with
both sticks and each one on its own as it reaches around its size.

So I wonder if I can find an early version of Memtest86 or a similar
memory test, by the way the 128 stick was a Crucial not an IBM
as the IBM stick is in this PA-2013 along with the original 128 which
refused to work in the 503+ after 3 or 4 years.

Yes I agree with the L2 cache on the MB, I recall back in 1999 not
being able to get the larger memory option.

Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

In article <bvs1ht$cq5$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>, Den <Den@NoSpamOrNoCorne
dBeef.unlimited-But-Was-Limited.RIP> wrote
 >
 >"Alex Zorrilla" <apz RemoveThis @zxeng.com> wrote in message news:40214BDB.EAE40F24@zxeng.c
 >o
 >m...
  >> Actually, 384 MB = 393126 kB. This is because 1 MB = 1024 kB, at least if
 >you're talking about RAM. I think that by
  >> manually setting 384 in the program, you are actually bypassing the bad part
 >of memory.
  >>
  >> Try testing the memory one stick at a time, allowing the program to set its
 >own memory. I wager that one of the sticks will
  >> test OK, but the other one will give errors near the end of its size.
  >>
  >> By the way, for a K6-2, the L2 cache shows up as "Unknown" because it is
 >located on the motherboard, not on the CPU itself.
  >>
 >As the program goes straight into testing it is showing every single test
 >as an error then screen changes to the unreadable display, this is with
 >both sticks and each one on its own as it reaches around its size.
 >
 >So I wonder if I can find an early version of Memtest86 or a similar
 >memory test,
(snip)
 >
I have versions 2.7(07/01), 2.8(10/01) and 3.0(05/02)
email memtest RemoveThis @carewg.demon.co.uk if you would like a copy.

Cheers
--
Roger Hunt<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

"Roger Hunt"
 > I have versions 2.7(07/01), 2.8(10/01) and 3.0(05/02)
 > email memtest.RemoveThis@carewg.demon.co.uk if you would like a copy.
 >
Thanks Roger but I had found and tried version 2.9 and that crashed before
completing the first screen.

I will test vers 2.9 on this PC which has the original 128 that refused to
work on the 503+ after 3 or 4 years.

Well this PA-2013 passed with flying colours.

While retrying on the 503+ with version 3 but setting option 4 to probe
it appears to be testing OK ? I'll be honest these memory tests are beyond
my understanding, it had three options
1 BIOS-standard
2 BIOS-extended
3 probe (this is the one I picked) (clutching at straws really)
It got as far as pass 67% before any errors started to show.

Den<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

I never did find memtest to be user friendly, and I am fairly
experienced system builder. there has to be a better program ~



Den wrote:
 > "Roger Hunt"
 >
  >>I have versions 2.7(07/01), 2.8(10/01) and 3.0(05/02)
  >>email memtest.TakeThisOut@carewg.demon.co.uk if you would like a copy.
  >>
 >
 > Thanks Roger but I had found and tried version 2.9 and that crashed before
 > completing the first screen.
 >
 > I will test vers 2.9 on this PC which has the original 128 that refused to
 > work on the 503+ after 3 or 4 years.
 >
 > Well this PA-2013 passed with flying colours.
 >
 > While retrying on the 503+ with version 3 but setting option 4 to probe
 > it appears to be testing OK ? I'll be honest these memory tests are beyond
 > my understanding, it had three options
 > 1 BIOS-standard
 > 2 BIOS-extended
 > 3 probe (this is the one I picked) (clutching at straws really)
 > It got as far as pass 67% before any errors started to show.
 >
 > Den
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

If you want a "dumbed down" test, docmem is also free, but much less
thorough, memtest86 has found errors not found by docmem.

I don't see the problem with using memtest86, you make the test
floppy, you setup machine to boot from floppy, you insert floppy and
reboot machine.

--
Best regards,
Kyle
"PC Ninjas" <pcninjas RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DQHwc.14500$AU1.8610@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
| I never did find memtest to be user friendly, and I am fairly
| experienced system builder. there has to be a better program ~
|
|
|
| Den wrote:
| > "Roger Hunt"
| >
| >>I have versions 2.7(07/01), 2.8(10/01) and 3.0(05/02)
| >>email memtest RemoveThis @carewg.demon.co.uk if you would like a copy.
| >>
| >
| > Thanks Roger but I had found and tried version 2.9 and that
crashed before
| > completing the first screen.
| >
| > I will test vers 2.9 on this PC which has the original 128 that
refused to
| > work on the 503+ after 3 or 4 years.
| >
| > Well this PA-2013 passed with flying colours.
| >
| > While retrying on the 503+ with version 3 but setting option 4 to
probe
| > it appears to be testing OK ? I'll be honest these memory tests
are beyond
| > my understanding, it had three options
| > 1 BIOS-standard
| > 2 BIOS-extended
| > 3 probe (this is the one I picked) (clutching at straws
really)
| > It got as far as pass 67% before any errors started to show.
| >
| > Den
| >
| >
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

A small followup, I will agree that invoking specific tests with
memtest86 is not straightforward, though I have succeeded in running
single tests after fiddling with the input commands.

--
Best regards,
Kyle
"Kylesb" <me.RemoveThis@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2ihpo7FngajnU1@uni-berlin.de...
| If you want a "dumbed down" test, docmem is also free, but much less
| thorough, memtest86 has found errors not found by docmem.
|
| I don't see the problem with using memtest86, you make the test
| floppy, you setup machine to boot from floppy, you insert floppy and
| reboot machine.
|
| --
| Best regards,
| Kyle
| "PC Ninjas" <pcninjas.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| news:DQHwc.14500$AU1.8610@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
| | I never did find memtest to be user friendly, and I am fairly
| | experienced system builder. there has to be a better program ~
| |
| |
| |
| | Den wrote:
| | > "Roger Hunt"
| | >
| | >>I have versions 2.7(07/01), 2.8(10/01) and 3.0(05/02)
| | >>email memtest.RemoveThis@carewg.demon.co.uk if you would like a copy.
| | >>
| | >
| | > Thanks Roger but I had found and tried version 2.9 and that
| crashed before
| | > completing the first screen.
| | >
| | > I will test vers 2.9 on this PC which has the original 128 that
| refused to
| | > work on the 503+ after 3 or 4 years.
| | >
| | > Well this PA-2013 passed with flying colours.
| | >
| | > While retrying on the 503+ with version 3 but setting option 4
to
| probe
| | > it appears to be testing OK ? I'll be honest these memory tests
| are beyond
| | > my understanding, it had three options
| | > 1 BIOS-standard
| | > 2 BIOS-extended
| | > 3 probe (this is the one I picked) (clutching at straws
| really)
| | > It got as far as pass 67% before any errors started to show.
| | >
| | > Den
| | >
| | >
|
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups 

yes, no problem running the test but the interpretation is a bit
screwy as I recall although it has been quite a while. maybe I can try a
third time and see how it goes. just that the interface is not so great,
and it takes forever to run ~
 >> Stay informed about: 503+ BIOS settings and random lockups