🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <35D16C22.3754@fl.net.au>, P Ashton <ashton@fl.net.au> writes:
> Hi
> 
> I have a 486DX4-100 which has been running Win 95 quite happily with 16M
> of ram. When I upped this to 32M it ran like a dog. Memory tests showed
> that the last 16M was being accessed significantly slower. 
> 
> Anyone got any ideas why this is happening and how I can fix it?
> 
[deleted]

You might have to fiddle around with the BIOS to tell it to
cache the extra memory.  I had a similar UMC board with an
AMD 486/100 on it, and it was also a dog after a memory
upgrade.  The Bios fiddle fixed it up a treat.

dave.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------
David Rubie                           "Your brother's dead.
Macquarie Bank Ltd.                    Keep dancing!"
drubie@macquarie.com.au                (Sean Connery to Kim Basinger,
                                        "Never Say Never Again").

Install a version of windows other than the origonal "A" version (ie
win95b).

Alecto.

P Ashton wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> I have a 486DX4-100 which has been running Win 95 quite happily with 16M
> of ram. When I upped this to 32M it ran like a dog. Memory tests showed
> that the last 16M was being accessed significantly slower.
> 
> Anyone got any ideas why this is happening and how I can fix it?
> 
> the details are:
> 
> cpu: intel DX4-100
> MB:  1433/50UIV, UMC chipset, 256K cache, VESA VLB, AMI BIOS
> Mem: anything above 16M slows the board down to hell (72 or 30 pin
> simms)
> 
> Thanks

thanks for the reply.

Ive tried changing almost every bios setting. What exactly did you
change to get it to work. It seems on mine that every configuration of
memory above 16M runs slow

thanks


David Rubie wrote:
> 
> In article <35D16C22.3754@fl.net.au>, P Ashton <ashton@fl.net.au> writes:
> > Hi
> >
> > I have a 486DX4-100 which has been running Win 95 quite happily with 16M
> > of ram. When I upped this to 32M it ran like a dog. Memory tests showed
> > that the last 16M was being accessed significantly slower.
> >
> > Anyone got any ideas why this is happening and how I can fix it?
> >
> [deleted]
> 
> You might have to fiddle around with the BIOS to tell it to
> cache the extra memory.  I had a similar UMC board with an
> AMD 486/100 on it, and it was also a dog after a memory
> upgrade.  The Bios fiddle fixed it up a treat.
> 
> dave.
> 
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------
> David Rubie                           "Your brother's dead.
> Macquarie Bank Ltd.                    Keep dancing!"
> drubie@macquarie.com.au                (Sean Connery to Kim Basinger,
>                                         "Never Say Never Again").

Another posability is that your motherboard has fake L2 cache.

Alecto.

P Ashton wrote:
> 
> thanks for the reply.
> 
> Ive tried changing almost every bios setting. What exactly did you
> change to get it to work. It seems on mine that every configuration of
> memory above 16M runs slow
> 
> thanks

On Wed, 12 Aug 1998 20:19:14 +1000, P Ashton <ashton@fl.net.au> wrote:

>Hi
>
>I have a 486DX4-100 which has been running Win 95 quite happily with 16M
>of ram. When I upped this to 32M it ran like a dog. Memory tests showed
>that the last 16M was being accessed significantly slower. 
>
>Anyone got any ideas why this is happening and how I can fix it?
>
>the details are:
>
>cpu: intel DX4-100
>MB:  1433/50UIV, UMC chipset, 256K cache, VESA VLB, AMI BIOS
>Mem: anything above 16M slows the board down to hell (72 or 30 pin
>simms)
>
>Thanks

insuficent cache sounds more like you really have 128 or less 
get cacheck4 or better and test the cache to be sure