PC will not boot after upgrading SDRAM

[warspite]

Hi all, newbie here!

I am a little confused with this one. I have a PC running Win XP on 128MB and it has started to run very slowly. After de-fragging and cleaning this that & the other I decided to upgrade SDRAM. So I checked my memory etc with crucial.com and purchased 2x256MB SDRAM. One arrived in the post this morning so I removed the 128MB and replaced it with 256MB. The PC would not boot. I thought perhaps the new SDRAM was either no good or not compatible so I replaced it with the original 128MB. The PC still refused to boot. When I press the power button the HD light flickers very briefly, the fan jolts but does not spin and I hear a few "clicking" noises. Nothing appears on the monitor. When I remove the RAM and boot the PC the fan spins and I get the following sequence of "beeps": beep.... beep beep beep.... beep beep beep.... beep. Then nothing more. Nothing appears on the monitor. I have blown out the RAM slots and ensured that the RAM is seated properly when I have put it in. I have removed the CMOS battery. I am now at a loss!

[Dias de verano]

Did you discharge yourself from static by grounding yourself, turn off the power and remove the power cord before adding/removing the RAM modules?

You will get a beep message if you remove the RAM... the one that means "missing RAM"!

[linuxlover]

Ok, BIOS 101:
No PC will boot without RAM, even with about 512k of L2 cache. When you took it out, it reported a lack of RAM, which is normal. This means that your mobo is partially working. I think that the reason is that you damaged both your RAM modules with ESD. This is why it's important to ground yourself with the frame. Or maybe the new one was defective and you zapped the old one with ESD. RAM is the most finnicky part of the computer, and the biggest indicator of performance.

[patio]

1st it's suprising XP was booting properly on 128M of RAM...
2nd are you sure the new RAM is the correct type for the machine ? ?
Re-seating it and removing if not careful can cause problems as mentioned above with ESD...
Double check what type of RAM the machine will take and try another stick...preferably more than 128M.
Re-boot and see what happens...

[Dias de verano]

1st it's suprising XP was booting properly on 128M of RAM...

It'll run (but not much else) on 64M

[patio]

1st it's suprising XP was booting properly on 128M of RAM...

It'll run (but not much else) on 64M

This is humor....right ? ?

[Broni]

Micro$oft type of humor, I guess:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/upgrading/sysreqs.mspx

[Dias de verano]

Like I said

128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)

[warspite]

Hey guys,

Thanks for all your posts.

I checked type of RAM using the memory checker thingy on the crucial memory website and then purchased  crucial RAM. I also checked when I purchased it that it was suitable/compatible. I am still waiting for 256MB which should arrive tomorrow (Monday). I'll try it again tomorrow and let all of you know!

Thanks again.

[Broni]

128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)

As I said, I thought, they were joking....

[Dias de verano]

I thought you meant that I was joking...

[Broni]

Well, to clarify...I think, that trying to run XP on 128MB of RAM (not to mention 64MB) is a joke, and Micro$oft by displaying info like this, does nothing more, that showing its greediness, lurking people to install XP on unprepared machines.

[Dias de verano]

64 MB was not as tiny in 2001 as it is now.

[patio]

64M was the same in 2001 as it is today...64M.

[Dias de verano]

64M was the same in 2001 as it is today...64M.

You know very well what I mean!

In 2001, 64M was 50% of the RAM of an entry level machine and 25% of a mid level machine.

Now it is about 5% of the entry level spec.