Any need to update video card driver?

[WillyW]

576M of ram installed on it.
AMD K6-2  350MHz

Windows 98 can have problems with RAM over 512 meg. Has this amount of memory always been in there?

No.   Not always.    
The computer is around 7 years old.   It started with 64M, ran that way for a while... forgot now how long that was - maybe a year or more -   then increased it to 320M -  ran with that for years.   Then about 3 months ago,  that additional 256M memory module died.    Got a deal that I couldn't pass up,  so instead of getting just one 256M stick of memory,  I got two.   Installed them both,  just to see how things behaved.   Everything is fine -  I have seen nothing to indicate any memory problems.

Since you just reinstalled it and then had problems, I would hazzard a guess that the answer is no.

You lost me here.   Or you have misunderstood something.

How does just recently reinstalling Win98 related to the amount of ram in the machine?   Please clarify.

"then had problems"  ....   no,  that's not right.     I'm not sure what you are referring to.
If it is the problem with web browsing/too many tabs open -  then maybe you missed where I said,  "It did the same thing before the re-install too, fwiw. "

Try removing enough to get it down to 512 and see if that makes a difference.

A difference in what?   Please specify.
Unfortunately,  ... and it is my fault for participating....  this thread has become a bit branched out.  
Thanks for your patience.

There is really no advantage to more with a Win98 system anyway.

You know -  now that you've mentioned it -  that sounds familiar.   That the max for Win98 is 512M.    I wasn't thinking about it.... I was thinking that the board maxes out at 768M,  so what the heck.... leave it all in there.



If you have time please also comment on my original question too.   Thanks

[GX1_Man]

The gist of it was to reduce the RAM to 512 and reinstall the video card drivers and see if that solves the problem.

Frequently what happens is that Windows was loaded with a lower amount of RAM and when you exceed that amount things keep on working. When you reinstall Win98 with RAM > 512, then you run into the vCache problems promptly if your machine is susceptible to it. You said that the problems really got worse AFTER the reinstall which supports that theory.

Was that all of the questions to answer?

[WillyW]

The gist of it was to reduce the RAM to 512 and reinstall the video card drivers and see if that solves the problem.

Frequently what happens is that Windows was loaded with a lower amount of RAM and when you exceed that amount things keep on working. When you reinstall Win98 with RAM > 512, then you run into the vCache problems promptly if your machine is susceptible to it.

vCache?
What's that... this is news to me....  can you elaborate?

You said that the problems really got worse AFTER the reinstall which supports that theory.

Ok...  here's where you are mixed up.
I didn't say that.

To be clear:  I see no difference in the machine's behavior in this regard from before the reinstall to now.   Further,  no difference in any problem behavior from when it had 320M of ram to when it was increased to 576M, both before and after the reinstall.

Thanks for the tip though.  Next time I have reason to disconnect everything again and open the case,  I'll remove that 64M memory module and store it.
Btw,  since there are three memory slots, when I remove that one, would it be wise to move the remaining two around, so as to fill slots one and two?   I think that the 64M module is in slot one now.

Was that all of the questions to answer?

Actually,  my first question in my first post is the one I wanted to get back to... we kind of got off that track.
I'd asked if there was even any need of using the newer driver that I'd found, versus the original driver that came with the card.
See first post in this thread.

Thanks

[GX1_Man]

http://www.frugalsworld.com/tweaking/vcache.shtml

OK, my misunderstanding on point two.

I think there is no specific advantage to using an "updated" driver which may not be correct versus the driver that came with the card. It really all depends on what the update was supposed to fix. I personally would stick with the stock ATI driver on CD.

[WillyW]

http://www.frugalsworld.com/tweaking/vcache.shtml

Thanks.  I 'll check it out.

OK, my misunderstanding on point two.

No big deal.   I see your posts all over here -  don't know how you keep as much straight as you do.    Thanks for replying/advising/sharing your experience/spending your time.

I think there is no specific advantage to using an "updated" driver which may not be correct versus the driver that came with the card. It really all depends on what the update was supposed to fix. I personally would stick with the stock ATI driver on CD.

Very clear.
Thanks for your opinion on this.


The part we went into about ram in excess of 512 would have been better in another thread.   It is quite interesting, but was muddling the conversation.
Someday, after I've had a chance to remove that 64M module (I'll ask again then about moving the remaining modules around),  - when it is down to 512M as you recommended -  then I'll try opening a bunch of tabs on those websites, see if it still hangs, and get back to you then.    
Thanks again.

[soybean]

If you want to use more than 512MB of memory with Win98, a tweak allegedly alleviates the problem GX1_MAN mentioned.  See for info: Windows 98 & WinME
Memory Management ; pay particular attention to the "THREE EXCEPTIONS".

[WillyW]

If you want to use more than 512MB of memory with Win98, a tweak allegedly alleviates the problem GX1_MAN mentioned.  See for info: Windows 98 & WinME
Memory Management ; pay particular attention to the "THREE EXCEPTIONS".

Yep.
I probably already found that page.   Found quite a few when I looked around, and most of them had essentially the same wording.
I wouldn't have been looking if not for GX1_Man's heads-up.  

I bookmarked:
http://www.dewassoc.com/support/win98/win9x_512memory.htm
and it looks to be giving the same advice as the page you mentioned.
Thanks for passing it along too.

On that page I found is a link to a Microsoft help page:


http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q181966/

This is an excerpt from there:

1. Click Start, and then click Run.  
2. In the Open box, type msconfig, and then click OK.  
3. Click Advanced.  

   ....


Limit Memory to <x> MB:

This setting limits memory usage on your computer to the first <x> MB, where <x> is a number of megabytes. This setting adds the "MaxPhysPage=<nnn>" line to the System.ini file, where <nnn> is a hexidecimal value of the amount of memory to be used. If this setting is too low (16 MB or lower), it may prevent Windows 98 from starting normally.


For now - just for the heck of it - I went ahead and did that.
Now System Properties reports that the machine has 512M of ram.  
(Everest reports 511)

Basically, I don't feel like doing the work right now -  under the desk, disconnecting, etc.  .   It is not that big of a deal,  but I just did it a few times while adding another drive.    So for now,  I tried limiting it to 512 within Win98 -   and haven't seen a bit of difference yet.

I do agree with GX1_Man's method though.   It is the most idiot-proof.       If it ain't in there, then it can't screw up anything.   Especially if having the extra 64M in there is never doing anything beneficial.   It is just a matter of getting around to it.

[soybean]

Well, I agree with that also.  512MB is a lot of RAM for Win 98/98SE.  I have a dual-boot configuration with Win 98SE and Win XP; I have 512MB of RAM.  I can't image that you'll notice any decrease in performance by removing the 64MB module.