PDA

View Full Version : A few upgrade glitches


gabe28
01-29-2003, 10:08 PM
I've just upgraded and everything is running pretty smooth but there are a couple issues I can't figure out. First of all, here's my new system specs:

AMD Athlon 2000+ XP
512 MB Ram (Kinston) single stick
Abit KD7-E Motherboard
MSI Geforce 4 4200 ti with 64 MB RAM (running latest nVidia reference drivers)
10 gig hardrive 5400rpm (I know... couldn't afford to upgrade it yet)
350 Watt power supply made by Codegen
19 inch Sonty trinitron
17 inch CTX monitors
Windows 98 SE with all critical updates installed

OK, here's the problems.
1. Sometimes when I power on the system, the fans and lights come on but the computer does not post. The monitors stay black and I don't hear the drives booting. Last time this happened repeatedly until I reset the CMOS with the CMOS jumper. It booted fine after that but of course I had to reset the CPU speed. The temperatures are all well within safe range so I'm not sure why this is happening. Any ideas?

2. My computer does not power down when I shut it off using the Windows shutdown option. The screen goes black but the fans and everything keep running. I have to manually power it off by holding in the power button for several seconds. This, of course, makes me have to go through scandisk everytime I turn on my computer. It's not that big of a deal but I'm worried it could be symtomatic of a bigger problems. Ideas?

Aside from those issues, the computer seems stable.

I know that many of you will say this is most likely due to the fact that I'm using Win98. Quite true, but I just want to sure before I go through the trouble of installing a different OS (I have a registered Win2000 that I'm not using and I think all my current hardware and most of my software will work with it).

webfox
01-29-2003, 10:57 PM
1. You have set the CPU speed higher than the MB will handle.

I've got an AMD Athlon 2200 and figured that I had to set the clock to 167 to get it up to the "promised" 2200 GHz. I found out later that the Athlon 2200 runs at 1800 GHz and that 133 was as high as I could set the MB clock speed.

(This forum deserves credit for explaining it all to me. Thanks guys!)

2. As far as shutting down properly, unless your MB isn't rated to work with Win98, then it should work properly.

Either you have a jumper or cable set incorrectly or else you need to change something in your power controls in your BIOS.

Good luck in fixing your problems. :wip:

gabe28
01-29-2003, 11:06 PM
1. You have set the CPU speed higher than the MB will handle.
I got an AMD Athlon 2200 and figured that I had to set the clock to 167 to get it up to the "promised" 2200 GHz. I found out later that the Athlon 2200 runs at 1800 GHz and that 133 was as high as I could set the MB clock speed.

That's a good guess but I do have my speed set correctly. It's set at 133x12.5 making it 1.67 gigahurtz which is the actual speed of an Athlon 2000+. Plus the temperatures are well with safe limits so I'd say the CPU speed is not the issue here.

2. As far as shutting down properly, unless your MB isn't rated to work with Win98, then it should work properly.

Either you have a jumper or cable set incorrectly or else you need to change something in your power controls in your BIOS.

Yeah, I have a feeling the answer lies somewhere in Bios but I don't know where. It's possible too that I could have reversed the positive-negative wires for my power switch. Could that cause the problem I'm having?

gabe28
01-29-2003, 11:08 PM
Oh, one more thing, my computer does 'restart' just fine. It's only shutting down that seems to give it trouble.

gabe28
01-29-2003, 11:12 PM
well... damnit.... now it's working and I don't know why. I hate that. I mean, I'm glad it's working fine but it makes me nervous not knowing why it wasn't shutting down before. Oh well, I guess that life when you run Windows.

elvis
01-30-2003, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by gabe28
2. My computer does not power down when I shut it off using the Windows shutdown option.

for windows 98, go into your BIOS, and into the power management setup. make sure you have AMP turned ON, and ACPI turned OFF.

windows 2000 and XP need an ACPI compliant BIOS in order to power down a system. Windows 98 on the other hand uses APM to power down a system.

you'll need to reverse this setting if you install windows 2000 or XP, obviously.

gabe28
01-30-2003, 04:43 AM
Hey one more question that's sort of related. I have Windows 2000 (used it a few years ago but gave it up because half my hardware didn't work with it at the time). I'm thinking about going back to it but I need to know if it comes with the internet sharing feature like Windows 98 SE. I share a DSL connection with my wife over our LAN. I also host a web server from my PC with a static IP and I don't know if that would work with one of those dsl-router kits that you can get to share an internet connection. Anyway, does Win2000 have internet sharing? If not, is there a good cheap/free solution I could get to share our connection? Thanks.

elvis
01-30-2003, 05:14 AM
most DSL routers have built in switches and DHCP servers, which means DSL sharing is literally plug and play.

i'd much prefer one of those over microsoft's rubbish ICS system. plus with DSL sharing you're behind a NAT (and some even include basic firewalling) which means extra security for you and your loved ones from the unwashed masses.

gabe28
01-30-2003, 06:05 AM
I run a firewall so I'm not too concerned about security. I've always found Windows Internet sharing capability very easy and trouble free. I'm curious why you say it's rubbish. Anyway, I mostly want to know if Win2000 has that feature? I don't see why I should buy a dsl router kit if I already have a LAN in place that I know is capable of sharing my dsl internet connection.

GregHess
01-30-2003, 03:04 PM
"I run a firewall so I'm not too concerned about security."

A router/hardware firewall is akin to having a bouncer standing outside your house, preventing and limiting access.

A software firewall, such as zone alarm etc, is like having a bouncer standing in your bedroom. The threat is already inside.

If your running windows 98...your system is about as secure as a kitten sitting in a pack of rabid dogs.

Theres a quote robert boothman once said that puts Windows 98 in perspective...

"You shouldn't bitch when something crashes under 98, you should be glad it ran in the first place"

At least its more stable then Windows ME :).

gabe28
01-30-2003, 05:16 PM
.A software firewall, such as zone alarm etc, is like having a bouncer standing in your bedroom. The threat is already inside.
Really? I've alway read that Zone Alarm gave pretty decent protection? Would you elaborate? I been running a web server using Xitima for about a year now and haven't had any break ins yet... but now you've got me nervous....

Theres a quote robert boothman once said that puts Windows 98 in perspective...
"You shouldn't bitch when something crashes under 98, you should be glad it ran in the first place"

LOL!! That's why I want to Install Win2000. Actually, though, my luck with Win98 SE has been pretty good. I did run Win2000 for about 4 months several years ago. At the time though my gaming card was one of those Voodoo 2 add on cards. It didn't work with Win2000. Neither did my scanner, digital camera, CD Burner or my SCSI card. So I had to dual boot in 98 to use any of that stuff. Well, between only having a ten gig hardrive and just being impatient I got tired of the whole dual boot thing quick and went back to Win98 since all my hardware worked with it.

Now I think all my hardware will work with Win2000 though so I figure it's worth trying again. When I WAS running Win2000 I don't think it crashed the entire time I ran it. Not once. Four months and no crashes.... wow....

Gyan
01-30-2003, 06:08 PM
Greg,

:bounce:

much faster on PC now.

webfox
01-30-2003, 06:53 PM
I have the hardware firewall of the router and the software firewall of Zone Alarm running here.

The hardware firewall keeps intrusions out and the sofware firewall keeps internal components from sending out info that I don't approve of. For example, there are a lot of applications that, once installed, send out info from your computer without your knowledge. (Almost nothing should have "server" enabled while running Zone Alarm, unless you really need it to work.)

As long as we're on the topic, let "Generic Host Process for Win32 Services" have internet access, but not server access. It's a shell program that is required for other apps to work over the net. If you disable it, you will lose internet capability from your pc.

Have fun!

elvis
01-30-2003, 09:46 PM
read this thread here:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33155

and see my response to on-pc firewalls like zone alarm. (and once again, i can do nothing but agree with greg).

gabe28
01-31-2003, 01:13 AM
OK, hardware firewalls are better than software ones. I concede that.

Now, can someone just let me know if Win2000 has the Internet Sharing feature that Win98 does?

gabe28
01-31-2003, 01:26 AM
OK, I just did a web search and found out that Windows 2000 DOES have Internet Sharing functionality. Great. Now what I need to know is whether I can use this feature to share my connection with a Win98 maching or if they BOTH need to be Win2000? I'll keep researching it but if anyone know the answer off the top of your head I'd be grateful.

OK... another can of worms to open regarding my upgrade...

I had 256megs of RAM on my old machine. I've heard many times that the maximum RAM Win98 can handle is 512megs. So for this upgrade I got the max 512. Now, after a few days of using my computer, it's seems sort of unstable especially when using memory hungry programs like Photoshop. I get freezes and then the programs can't be quit out of with ctrl-alt-del. It really feels like memory instability. Likely? I'm thinking that upgrading to Win2000 will smooth things out quite a bit. Anyhow, does using this much RAM put undue strain on Windows 98 or is the culprit likely something else?

Thanks.

CGTalk Moderation
01-14-2006, 07:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.