XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

[Guest churin]

I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

 

I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured for

single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem with

dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates as

DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed slows

down to DDR333.

 

The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed as

above.

 

Is there any remedy for this?

[Guest Bobby Johnson]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

You need to look at your hardware, not Windows. I have

Vista x64 and XP x64 installed with 8GB of (4 x 2GB) Dual

Channel DDR2 RAM. It was there when I ran the installation

of both systems and it's still there - No problems.

 

I have also had XP Pro (32-bit) in the system checking

something out and it ran fine, but only sees about 3.5GB -

don't remember the exact figure right now.

 

 

churin wrote:

> I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

> system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>

> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

> mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured for

> single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem with

> dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates as

> DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed slows

> down to DDR333.

>

> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

> dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

> right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed as

> above.

>

> Is there any remedy for this?

>

>

[Guest churin]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

The problem is only with this Windows and is not with any other Windows

being older or newer than this particular Windows. So, the problem must

have something to do with this OS.

 

Nevertheless, you indicate that my hardware is to be blamed. Then how

can it be changed to remedy the problem.

 

Bobby Johnson wrote:

> You need to look at your hardware, not Windows. I have Vista x64 and XP

> x64 installed with 8GB of (4 x 2GB) Dual Channel DDR2 RAM. It was there

> when I ran the installation of both systems and it's still there - No

> problems.

>

> I have also had XP Pro (32-bit) in the system checking something out and

> it ran fine, but only sees about 3.5GB - don't remember the exact figure

> right now.

>

>

> churin wrote:

>> I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

>> system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>>

>> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

>> mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured

>> for single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem

>> with dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates

>> as DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed

>> slows down to DDR333.

>>

>> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

>> dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

>> right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed

>> as above.

>>

>> Is there any remedy for this?

>>

>>

[Guest Dennis Pack]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

Churin:

XP x64 addresses ram sectors differently than XP and other operating

systems, which could be the cause. Running Memtest86 may find a bad sector

in the ram. Since XP x64 was in beta I have had 1 stick of ram that didn't

work due to a sector error. Also for dual channel the ram has to be matched

for proper operation. I have at least 6 XP x64 systems running 2 or 4 GB ram

in dual channel configuration without any problems. Have a great day.

 

--

Dennis Pack

XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64 SP1

WHS, Office Professional Plus 2007

"churin" <churin@new.postalias> wrote in message

news:uRsDBRjzIHA.3968@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC system.

>RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>

> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel mode,

> and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured for single

> mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem with dual

> channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates as DDR400 in

> dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed slows down to

> DDR333.

>

> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for dual

> channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle right

> after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed as above.

>

> Is there any remedy for this?

>

>

[Guest Bobby Johnson]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

I don't know what you can do. It is extremely difficult and

time consuming to attempt to troubleshoot anything when you

are not physically there to see exactly what's happening. I

know from experience that when trying to troubleshoot long

distance there is absolutely no guarantee that what is being

said on one side of the conversation is what's happening on

the other side of the conversation.

 

But, as I said before, I have 8GB (4 x 2GB) DDR2 installed

and configured in the dual-channel mode. I installed

Windows XP Professional x64 and Windows Vista Enterprise x64

with ALL 8GB of memory installed and have never encountered

any problems with either system. So, how can there be a

problem with either version of Windows? And, I'm sure I am

not the only person in the world that this works for.

 

The problem is either your hardware and/or how it's

configured. It's possible one or more pieces of hardware

has a flaw that cannot be fixed. Or, you are doing

something wrong - not using the correct drivers, or

something like that.

 

 

 

churin wrote:

> The problem is only with this Windows and is not with any other Windows

> being older or newer than this particular Windows. So, the problem must

> have something to do with this OS.

>

> Nevertheless, you indicate that my hardware is to be blamed. Then how

> can it be changed to remedy the problem.

>

> Bobby Johnson wrote:

>> You need to look at your hardware, not Windows. I have Vista x64 and

>> XP x64 installed with 8GB of (4 x 2GB) Dual Channel DDR2 RAM. It was

>> there when I ran the installation of both systems and it's still there

>> - No problems.

>>

>> I have also had XP Pro (32-bit) in the system checking something out

>> and it ran fine, but only sees about 3.5GB - don't remember the exact

>> figure right now.

>>

>>

>> churin wrote:

>>> I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

>>> system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>>>

>>> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

>>> mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured

>>> for single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no

>>> problem with dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM

>>> operates as DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode

>>> the speed slows down to DDR333.

>>>

>>> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

>>> dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

>>> right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed

>>> as above.

>>>

>>> Is there any remedy for this?

>>>

>>>

[Guest churin]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

Dennis:

I understand it is desirable to get RAM sticks in pair if they are used

for dual channel operation. I did not follow the above and each stick

was obtained at different time although they are the same model. When I

got the second stick I ran Memtest86 for over four hours on Vista x86

with the RAM configured for dual channel mode and no error was reported.

 

You indicate that XPx64 addresses RAM sectors differently than XP and

other OS. Does the "other" OS include Vista x64 or do you mean that

64bit OS differs from 32bit OS in the above regard? Please note that

64bit Vista does not have any problem with the RAM configured for dual

channel operation.

 

Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that cause of the problem is the

RAM which is not well matched. Although the pair works in dual channel

mode for Vista x64, their level of match is probably not sufficient

enough for XP x64.

 

Dennis Pack wrote:

> Churin:

> XP x64 addresses ram sectors differently than XP and other

> operating systems, which could be the cause. Running Memtest86 may find

> a bad sector in the ram. Since XP x64 was in beta I have had 1 stick of

> ram that didn't work due to a sector error. Also for dual channel the

> ram has to be matched for proper operation. I have at least 6 XP x64

> systems running 2 or 4 GB ram in dual channel configuration without any

> problems. Have a great day.

>

[Guest Carlos]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

churin,

Download and run (no installation required) CPU-Z 1.45.

D/L link: http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_145.zip

Go to the memory tab and take note of the timings the bios has assigned to

the memory.

Now go to the SPD tab which lists the manufacturer's recommended timings for

the memory in each slot.

Compare the readings of the "Memory" and "SPD" tabs.

See if there is any difference, maybe you are running one of the sticks

above the specs.

Carlos

 

"churin" wrote:

> Dennis:

> I understand it is desirable to get RAM sticks in pair if they are used

> for dual channel operation. I did not follow the above and each stick

> was obtained at different time although they are the same model. When I

> got the second stick I ran Memtest86 for over four hours on Vista x86

> with the RAM configured for dual channel mode and no error was reported.

>

> You indicate that XPx64 addresses RAM sectors differently than XP and

> other OS. Does the "other" OS include Vista x64 or do you mean that

> 64bit OS differs from 32bit OS in the above regard? Please note that

> 64bit Vista does not have any problem with the RAM configured for dual

> channel operation.

>

> Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that cause of the problem is the

> RAM which is not well matched. Although the pair works in dual channel

> mode for Vista x64, their level of match is probably not sufficient

> enough for XP x64.

>

> Dennis Pack wrote:

> > Churin:

> > XP x64 addresses ram sectors differently than XP and other

> > operating systems, which could be the cause. Running Memtest86 may find

> > a bad sector in the ram. Since XP x64 was in beta I have had 1 stick of

> > ram that didn't work due to a sector error. Also for dual channel the

> > ram has to be matched for proper operation. I have at least 6 XP x64

> > systems running 2 or 4 GB ram in dual channel configuration without any

> > problems. Have a great day.

> >

>

[Guest churin]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

In dual channel mode RAM frequency and its timing displayed on Memory

and SPD are the same as:

200MHz, 3.0-3-3-8

In single channel mode there are two different sets listed:

Memory: 166MHz, 2.5-3-3-7

SPD : 200MHz, 3.0-3-3-8

 

The both modules are the same model and are supposed to be DDR400. The

model is Patriot P5SD2G40036ERB. I have already noticed that the RAM

speed goes down from DDR400 to DDR333 if the RAM is congifured for

single channel mode.

 

Carlos wrote:

> churin,

> Download and run (no installation required) CPU-Z 1.45.

> D/L link: http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_145.zip

> Go to the memory tab and take note of the timings the bios has assigned to

> the memory.

> Now go to the SPD tab which lists the manufacturer's recommended timings for

> the memory in each slot.

> Compare the readings of the "Memory" and "SPD" tabs.

> See if there is any difference, maybe you are running one of the sticks

> above the specs.

> Carlos

>

> "churin" wrote:

>

>> Dennis:

>> I understand it is desirable to get RAM sticks in pair if they are used

>> for dual channel operation. I did not follow the above and each stick

>> was obtained at different time although they are the same model. When I

>> got the second stick I ran Memtest86 for over four hours on Vista x86

>> with the RAM configured for dual channel mode and no error was reported.

>>

>> You indicate that XPx64 addresses RAM sectors differently than XP and

>> other OS. Does the "other" OS include Vista x64 or do you mean that

>> 64bit OS differs from 32bit OS in the above regard? Please note that

>> 64bit Vista does not have any problem with the RAM configured for dual

>> channel operation.

>>

>> Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that cause of the problem is the

>> RAM which is not well matched. Although the pair works in dual channel

>> mode for Vista x64, their level of match is probably not sufficient

>> enough for XP x64.

>>

>> Dennis Pack wrote:

>>> Churin:

>>> XP x64 addresses ram sectors differently than XP and other

>>> operating systems, which could be the cause. Running Memtest86 may find

>>> a bad sector in the ram. Since XP x64 was in beta I have had 1 stick of

>>> ram that didn't work due to a sector error. Also for dual channel the

>>> ram has to be matched for proper operation. I have at least 6 XP x64

>>> systems running 2 or 4 GB ram in dual channel configuration without any

>>> problems. Have a great day.

>>>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

It will work with 4x2GB dual channel as well as 2x. There is nothing

inherent to XP Pro x64 preventing it from working with a great deal more ram

than that.

 

It is a hardware issue, period. The BIOS, dram voltage, dram speed, and

mobo drivers are all things you have to look at. Also, the test reports

from the mobo manufacturer on the specific brand, speed, and latencies of

the ram you purchased. If the ram is not listed in the QVL by the mobo mfg

in the exact configuration you are using then your ram is probably not

compatible. If the mobo mfg hosts user forums those are your best source

of info.

 

I would get the assistance of a qualified technician and follow his advice

on the ram to use in your computer. The day is long past when any of us can

buy components individually strictly on their great specs and expect a good

result.

 

Some of the things

"churin" <churin@new.postalias> wrote in message

news:u6rSFekzIHA.1772@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> The problem is only with this Windows and is not with any other Windows

> being older or newer than this particular Windows. So, the problem must

> have something to do with this OS.

>

> Nevertheless, you indicate that my hardware is to be blamed. Then how can

> it be changed to remedy the problem.

>

> Bobby Johnson wrote:

>> You need to look at your hardware, not Windows. I have Vista x64 and XP

>> x64 installed with 8GB of (4 x 2GB) Dual Channel DDR2 RAM. It was there

>> when I ran the installation of both systems and it's still there - No

>> problems.

>>

>> I have also had XP Pro (32-bit) in the system checking something out and

>> it ran fine, but only sees about 3.5GB - don't remember the exact figure

>> right now.

>>

>>

>> churin wrote:

>>> I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

>>> system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>>>

>>> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

>>> mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured for

>>> single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem with

>>> dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates as

>>> DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed slows

>>> down to DDR333.

>>>

>>> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

>>> dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

>>> right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed as

>>> above.

>>>

>>> Is there any remedy for this?

>>>

>>>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

I also am running XP Pro x64 and Vista Ultimate x64 on 8GB (4 sticks of dual

channel) of PC6400 (Samsung) memory. I stuck to the mobo mfg's QVL and read

the test reports before I bought the mobo or the ram. It takes that these

days to do a DIY box. It wasn't that way three or four years ago, but it

seems to be now.

 

One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say that the

board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not mean

it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800 and only

4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

 

"Bobby Johnson" <rjohnson@aol.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message

news:u5Y$ADlzIHA.5520@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>I don't know what you can do. It is extremely difficult and time consuming

>to attempt to troubleshoot anything when you are not physically there to

>see exactly what's happening. I know from experience that when trying to

>troubleshoot long distance there is absolutely no guarantee that what is

>being said on one side of the conversation is what's happening on the other

>side of the conversation.

>

> But, as I said before, I have 8GB (4 x 2GB) DDR2 installed and configured

> in the dual-channel mode. I installed Windows XP Professional x64 and

> Windows Vista Enterprise x64 with ALL 8GB of memory installed and have

> never encountered any problems with either system. So, how can there be a

> problem with either version of Windows? And, I'm sure I am not the only

> person in the world that this works for.

>

> The problem is either your hardware and/or how it's configured. It's

> possible one or more pieces of hardware has a flaw that cannot be fixed.

> Or, you are doing something wrong - not using the correct drivers, or

> something like that.

>

>

>

> churin wrote:

>> The problem is only with this Windows and is not with any other Windows

>> being older or newer than this particular Windows. So, the problem must

>> have something to do with this OS.

>>

>> Nevertheless, you indicate that my hardware is to be blamed. Then how can

>> it be changed to remedy the problem.

>>

>> Bobby Johnson wrote:

>>> You need to look at your hardware, not Windows. I have Vista x64 and XP

>>> x64 installed with 8GB of (4 x 2GB) Dual Channel DDR2 RAM. It was there

>>> when I ran the installation of both systems and it's still there - No

>>> problems.

>>>

>>> I have also had XP Pro (32-bit) in the system checking something out and

>>> it ran fine, but only sees about 3.5GB - don't remember the exact figure

>>> right now.

>>>

>>>

>>> churin wrote:

>>>> I have W2K, XPx86, XPx64, VISTAx86 and VISTAx64 installed in my PC

>>>> system. RAM consits of two 2GB sticks.

>>>>

>>>> I could install XPx64 only with the RAM configured as single channel

>>>> mode, and after installation, it could boot only with RAM configured

>>>> for single mode *despite* that all other OSes as above have no problem

>>>> with dual channel mode. Another thing noted is that the RAM operates as

>>>> DDR400 in dual channel mode while in single channel mode the speed

>>>> slows down to DDR333.

>>>>

>>>> The problem symptom of booting the XPx64 with the RAM configured for

>>>> dual channel mode is that the boot process goes into rebooting cycle

>>>> right after Windows splash display. Note that the XPx64 was installed

>>>> as above.

>>>>

>>>> Is there any remedy for this?

>>>>

>>>>

[Guest Tony Sperling]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say that the

> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not

mean

> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800 and

only

> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

 

You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

 

I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept the sticks

as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server version?

 

For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory handling

of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not many

more options remain?

 

But there is a reason!

 

 

Tony. . .

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

No, other 64bit OSs can have the same problem. Timings are crucial and the

memory controllers on some of the consumer mobos can't handle the load at

the speeds users want to use. With the higher frequencies the electrical

distances out and back to the further memory slots can be too much. There

are lots of issues that are exacerbated by the 64bit OSs.

 

"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

news:%23kWaEVszIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say that

>> the

>> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not

> mean

>> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800 and

> only

>> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

>

> You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

>

> I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept the

> sticks

> as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server version?

>

> For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory

> handling

> of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not many

> more options remain?

>

> But there is a reason!

>

>

> Tony. . .

>

>

>

[Guest churin]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> No, other 64bit OSs can have the same problem.

 

My Vista x64 does NOT have the problem while my XP x64 does as stated in

my original post at the top of this thread.

 

Timings are crucial and

> the memory controllers on some of the consumer mobos can't handle the

> load at the speeds users want to use. With the higher frequencies the

> electrical distances out and back to the further memory slots can be too

> much. There are lots of issues that are exacerbated by the 64bit OSs.

>

> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

> news:%23kWaEVszIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say

>>> that the

>>> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not

>> mean

>>> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800 and

>> only

>>> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

>>

>> You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

>>

>> I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept the

>> sticks

>> as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server version?

>>

>> For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory

>> handling

>> of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not many

>> more options remain?

>>

>> But there is a reason!

>>

>>

>> Tony. . .

>>

>>

>>

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

But it is not Window's fault. Mobos are just a quirky as other high

performance equipment. I have seen the reverse, where XP64 could handle

memory that the same box would not handle under Vista64. I have pretty much

turned over my hardware procurement to my local computer store and let them

work it out. My last two boxes have worked like a charm as a result.

 

"churin" <churin@new.postalias> wrote in message

news:%23uREcK0zIHA.3920@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>> No, other 64bit OSs can have the same problem.

>

> My Vista x64 does NOT have the problem while my XP x64 does as stated in

> my original post at the top of this thread.

>

> Timings are crucial and

>> the memory controllers on some of the consumer mobos can't handle the

>> load at the speeds users want to use. With the higher frequencies the

>> electrical distances out and back to the further memory slots can be too

>> much. There are lots of issues that are exacerbated by the 64bit OSs.

>>

>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>> news:%23kWaEVszIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>>> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say that

>>>> the

>>>> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not

>>> mean

>>>> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800 and

>>> only

>>>> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

>>>

>>> You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

>>>

>>> I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept the

>>> sticks

>>> as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server version?

>>>

>>> For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory

>>> handling

>>> of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not many

>>> more options remain?

>>>

>>> But there is a reason!

>>>

>>>

>>> Tony. . .

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

[Guest churin]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> But it is not Window's fault.

I am not saying it is or not. I stated that 1)to indicate what you

stated is not necessarily true and 2)as a possible clue to solve my problem.

> I have seen the reverse, where XP64 could handle

> memory that the same box would not handle under Vista64.

That is that old OS is compatible with the hardware but the latest OS

does not. That is more likely to happen than the opposite.

>

> "churin" <churin@new.postalias> wrote in message

> news:%23uREcK0zIHA.3920@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>> No, other 64bit OSs can have the same problem.

>>

>> My Vista x64 does NOT have the problem while my XP x64 does as stated

>> in my original post at the top of this thread.

>>

>> Timings are crucial and

>>> the memory controllers on some of the consumer mobos can't handle the

>>> load at the speeds users want to use. With the higher frequencies

>>> the electrical distances out and back to the further memory slots can

>>> be too much. There are lots of issues that are exacerbated by the

>>> 64bit OSs.

>>>

>>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>>> news:%23kWaEVszIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>>>> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say

>>>>> that the

>>>>> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does not

>>>> mean

>>>>> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or 800

>>>>> and

>>>> only

>>>>> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

>>>>

>>>> You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

>>>>

>>>> I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept

>>>> the sticks

>>>> as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server

>>>> version?

>>>>

>>>> For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory

>>>> handling

>>>> of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not

>>>> many

>>>> more options remain?

>>>>

>>>> But there is a reason!

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Tony. . .

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>

[Guest Bobby Johnson]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

When will you comprehend that the fault is not with Windows

XP x64? It most likely is your hardware. The point about

XP x64 being an offshoot of Server 2003 may well be the key

to your memory problem, but no necessarily either.

Unmatched RAM is definitely one possibility as well as RAM

not specifically recommended by the motherboard manufacturer

as being certified by them.

 

Quit trying to beat a dead horse and move on!

 

 

churin wrote:

> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>> But it is not Window's fault.

> I am not saying it is or not. I stated that 1)to indicate what you

> stated is not necessarily true and 2)as a possible clue to solve my

> problem.

>> I have seen the reverse, where XP64 could handle memory that the same

>> box would not handle under Vista64.

> That is that old OS is compatible with the hardware but the latest OS

> does not. That is more likely to happen than the opposite.

>>

>> "churin" <churin@new.postalias> wrote in message

>> news:%23uREcK0zIHA.3920@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>> No, other 64bit OSs can have the same problem.

>>>

>>> My Vista x64 does NOT have the problem while my XP x64 does as stated

>>> in my original post at the top of this thread.

>>>

>>> Timings are crucial and

>>>> the memory controllers on some of the consumer mobos can't handle

>>>> the load at the speeds users want to use. With the higher

>>>> frequencies the electrical distances out and back to the further

>>>> memory slots can be too much. There are lots of issues that are

>>>> exacerbated by the 64bit OSs.

>>>>

>>>> "Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling@dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message

>>>> news:%23kWaEVszIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>>>>> One point folks miss is that just because the specs on a mobo say

>>>>>> that the

>>>>>> board supports 8GB and that it supports 667/800/1066/1333 ram does

>>>>>> not

>>>>> mean

>>>>>> it supports 8GB of 1333. More likely it supports 8GB at 667 or

>>>>>> 800 and

>>>>> only

>>>>>> 4GB at 1066/1333. It is a mess to figure out on your own.

>>>>>

>>>>> You are right, Colin - it has come to be a mess!

>>>>>

>>>>> I was thinking the reason why the 'other' Windows versions accept

>>>>> the sticks

>>>>> as 'dual-channel' could be XP x64 being derived from the server

>>>>> version?

>>>>>

>>>>> For some time we have mainly attributed such behavior to the memory

>>>>> handling

>>>>> of the 64bit versions, but if Vista thinks it is allright, then not

>>>>> many

>>>>> more options remain?

>>>>>

>>>>> But there is a reason!

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Tony. . .

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>

>>

[Guest janman_dk]

Re: XPx64 does not work with 2GBx2 Dual Chanell

 

My old trusty MSI K8N Diamond runs fine with 4 GB (4 * Corsair 1 GB DDR2 400)

which is the maximum amount that it can handle.

But in single channel.

 

However, back then it was well known, on various forums, that the Athlon 64

could not handle all 4 banks in Dual Channel mode.

When I installed the 4 sticks it defaulted to 333 MHz, but I had already

read this on forums and I changed it in bios to 400.

 

I had previously used a 2 * 512 MB in dual channel 400 without problems. But

needed some more space and bought the 4*1 GB

 

/Jan

 

"churin" wrote:

> In dual channel mode RAM frequency and its timing displayed on Memory

> and SPD are the same as:

> 200MHz, 3.0-3-3-8

> In single channel mode there are two different sets listed:

> Memory: 166MHz, 2.5-3-3-7

> SPD : 200MHz, 3.0-3-3-8

>

> The both modules are the same model and are supposed to be DDR400. The

> model is Patriot P5SD2G40036ERB. I have already noticed that the RAM

> speed goes down from DDR400 to DDR333 if the RAM is congifured for

> single channel mode.

>

> Carlos wrote:

> > churin,

> > Download and run (no installation required) CPU-Z 1.45.

> > D/L link: http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_145.zip

> > Go to the memory tab and take note of the timings the bios has assigned to

> > the memory.

> > Now go to the SPD tab which lists the manufacturer's recommended timings for

> > the memory in each slot.

> > Compare the readings of the "Memory" and "SPD" tabs.

> > See if there is any difference, maybe you are running one of the sticks

> > above the specs.

> > Carlos

> >

> > "churin" wrote:

> >

> >> Dennis:

> >> I understand it is desirable to get RAM sticks in pair if they are used

> >> for dual channel operation. I did not follow the above and each stick

> >> was obtained at different time although they are the same model. When I

> >> got the second stick I ran Memtest86 for over four hours on Vista x86

> >> with the RAM configured for dual channel mode and no error was reported.

> >>

> >> You indicate that XPx64 addresses RAM sectors differently than XP and

> >> other OS. Does the "other" OS include Vista x64 or do you mean that

> >> 64bit OS differs from 32bit OS in the above regard? Please note that

> >> 64bit Vista does not have any problem with the RAM configured for dual

> >> channel operation.

> >>

> >> Nevertheless, I am inclined to believe that cause of the problem is the

> >> RAM which is not well matched. Although the pair works in dual channel

> >> mode for Vista x64, their level of match is probably not sufficient

> >> enough for XP x64.

> >>

> >> Dennis Pack wrote:

> >>> Churin:

> >>> XP x64 addresses ram sectors differently than XP and other

> >>> operating systems, which could be the cause. Running Memtest86 may find

> >>> a bad sector in the ram. Since XP x64 was in beta I have had 1 stick of

> >>> ram that didn't work due to a sector error. Also for dual channel the

> >>> ram has to be matched for proper operation. I have at least 6 XP x64

> >>> systems running 2 or 4 GB ram in dual channel configuration without any

> >>> problems. Have a great day.

> >>>

>