Am I blonde? Can I populate every slot on an ASUS SK8V?

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted to add
another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part numbers were
identical). However, although the system POSTs, Windows (XP Pro SP2) doesn't
like it. The errors ( 0x0000004E: PFN_LIST_CORRUPT; 0x00000050:
PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA and 0x0000000A: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) all
indicate faulty or mismatched RAM. OK, the modules could be faulty, however,
as the manual is ambiguous on the topic (though I would have thought that,
as the board is designed to take up to 4GB that total population was
possible - as, obviously, 4GB could be made up of 4x1GB). The first error
was received when I was attempting to repair the installation - just after
the SATA driver screen.

Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't mess with
the internals of computers and should stick to things they *DO* know about
like the washing up and ironing your shirts (at least that's the impression
I've been getting from some of the support lines I've had to call in recent
years). But I built this system from the best damned parts I could afford at
the time and, now I have a little spare cash, and am doing more in the
graphics dept, I wanted to add a little more RAM. And, FYI, I've never
ironed a shirt in my life. ;o)

So would someone who knows what he's talking about (like Dave) tell me
what's going on? System specs follow: -

Asus SK8V

FX-53

2xWD Raptor (75GB)

1xWD Caviar 300GB (all SATA – the Raptors are in a RAID0 array).

1GB of the aforemention RAM

AMI BIOS (running latest revision)

ATI 9800XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro

Windows XP Pro SP2

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted
to add another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part
numbers were identical). However, although the system POSTs, Windows
(XP Pro SP2) doesn't like it. The errors ( 0x0000004E:
PFN_LIST_CORRUPT; 0x00000050: PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA and 0x0000000A:
IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) all indicate faulty or mismatched
RAM. OK, the modules could be faulty, however, as the manual is
ambiguous on the topic (though I would have thought that, as the
board is designed to take up to 4GB that total population was
possible - as, obviously, 4GB could be made up of 4x1GB). The first
error was received when I was attempting to repair the installation -
just after the SATA driver screen.
Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't
mess with the internals of computers and should stick to things they
*DO* know about like the washing up and ironing your shirts (at least
that's the impression I've been getting from some of the support
lines I've had to call in recent years). But I built this system from
the best damned parts I could afford at the time and, now I have a
little spare cash, and am doing more in the graphics dept, I wanted
to add a little more RAM. And, FYI, I've never ironed a shirt in my
life. ;o)
So would someone who knows what he's talking about (like Dave) tell me
what's going on? System specs follow: -

Asus SK8V

FX-53

2xWD Raptor (75GB)

1xWD Caviar 300GB (all SATA – the Raptors are in a RAID0 array).

1GB of the aforemention RAM

AMI BIOS (running latest revision)

ATI 9800XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro

Windows XP Pro SP2

I hate replying to my own posts but it now works for some bizarre reason.
Here's what I did.

1) Board has yellow and blue slots. Took the old RAM (in blue) out and
replaced it with the new.
2) Tested it. Booted fine.
3) Put the old in the yellow slots (with new still in blue), booted and
got page fault error.
4) Rebooted - went into BIOS, literally did nothing other than page
through the sections and exited.
5) Rebooted and here we are.

Weird. Now if someone could please enlighten me as to why the above worked,
I'd be most grateful.

 

[kony]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted to add
another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part numbers were
identical). However, although the system POSTs, Windows (XP Pro SP2) doesn't
like it. The errors ( 0x0000004E: PFN_LIST_CORRUPT; 0x00000050:
PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA and 0x0000000A: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) all
indicate faulty or mismatched RAM. OK, the modules could be faulty, however,
as the manual is ambiguous on the topic (though I would have thought that,
as the board is designed to take up to 4GB that total population was
possible - as, obviously, 4GB could be made up of 4x1GB). The first error
was received when I was attempting to repair the installation - just after
the SATA driver screen.

Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't mess with
the internals of computers and should stick to things they *DO* know about
like the washing up and ironing your shirts (at least that's the impression
I've been getting from some of the support lines I've had to call in recent
years). But I built this system from the best damned parts I could afford at
the time and, now I have a little spare cash, and am doing more in the
graphics dept, I wanted to add a little more RAM. And, FYI, I've never
ironed a shirt in my life. ;o)

Seems like you're taking them a little too seriously. Take
comments for what they're worth, people will always find an
excuse to pretend they're superior, if it weren't sex it'd
be something, anything else instead if you're not "just
like" them in every way.

So would someone who knows what he's talking about (like Dave) tell me
what's going on? System specs follow: -

Asus SK8V

FX-53

2xWD Raptor (75GB)

1xWD Caviar 300GB (all SATA – the Raptors are in a RAID0 array).

1GB of the aforemention RAM

AMI BIOS (running latest revision)

ATI 9800XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro

Windows XP Pro SP2

I hope you don't mean me, I never know what I'm talking
about and my memory is corrupt.

Some manufacturers are more forthcoming than others about
the true (stable) capacity of any particular motherboard.
Often in the past Asus had mentioned that using all or most
of the slots on a given board wasn't "supported" at the
highest (otherwise) supported memory bus speed. This isn't
necessarily an issue of board quality per se, but typical of
most boards. Other manufacturers with similar issues may've
simply omitted this information and left it to the user to
find out later.

Essentially you have 4 alternatives.

1) Replace the board, inevitably the more time a
manufacturer has to test parts, the better they'll get 'em
running. That's more likely to work with A64 than past
boards with same chipset, but still there's no guarantee you
could simply buy a different board and expect it to work in
same config as the current board, more a situation of being
able to note it in retrospect a couple years from now
through your (or someone else's) trial and error.

2) Try a newer bios. Same as with hardware, firmware gets
better or is tested with newer memories.

3) Try different memory. Just because 1, 2, or even 3 of
same module work ok, that doesn't necessarily mean adding
yet another of same module will remain stable. For all the
talk of using *same* memory I've seen, the truth is that
adding higher quality memory than currently used would
reduce the number of modules having potential for problems,
if keeping same timings used with the (lesser) memory. Even
so, it doesn't resolve the issue with the original memory.

Unfortunately it's not so easy to find users of any given
board that have maxed out their memory slots, and even more
difficult to be certain that any parts they used are
*exactly* the same as what's still available from same
manufacturer, vendor, even with same part numbers. One way
around this is to buy ALL the memory at once from a vendor
that guarantees compatibility and backs it with their return
policy.

4) Try higher memory timings in the bios. It'll be slower,
but that's typical, is what "ought" to happen automatically
when bios is set to "auto", but whether it happens or is
adjusted accordingly, enough, can't always be forseen. This
option is what I'd try first, unless you feel the time and
expense of the memory exchange or purchase price shouldn't
require slowing down the timings, then you might try the
other options instead, but ultimately when using 4 1GB
modules, it's expected that timings will have to be raised
unless they were very conservative already and could've ran
tighter than they were.

FWIW, I've never trusted OCZ, they're a little too shady
IMO.

Whether anything had been corrupted before you tried to do
the repair might be a matter of luck, but at this point you
should reinstall any/all things written since the memory
changes, after confirming stability. I'd try upping the
memory bus a bit, overclocked, to test for a margin of
stability over stock speed and test with memtest86 for over
a day, preferribly two or more with 4GB.... seems like a
long time but that's a lot of memory to test, if you only
test for 1 day you have no assurance you're not getting an
average of an error every 1.01 days. That is, an
uncorrectable error, that it's this bad already with ECC is
a good sign it's nowhere near stable yet.

 

[kony]

I hate replying to my own posts but it now works for some bizarre reason.
Here's what I did.

1) Board has yellow and blue slots. Took the old RAM (in blue) out and
replaced it with the new.
2) Tested it. Booted fine.
3) Put the old in the yellow slots (with new still in blue), booted and
got page fault error.
4) Rebooted - went into BIOS, literally did nothing other than page
through the sections and exited.
5) Rebooted and here we are.

Weird. Now if someone could please enlighten me as to why the above worked,
I'd be most grateful.

Odd, maybe some bug where the bios wasn't adjusting timings.
I'd still run memtest86 though before using the system.

 

[General Schvantzkoph]

I hate replying to my own posts but it now works for some bizarre reason.
Here's what I did.

1) Board has yellow and blue slots. Took the old RAM (in blue) out and
replaced it with the new.
2) Tested it. Booted fine.
3) Put the old in the yellow slots (with new still in blue), booted and
got page fault error.
4) Rebooted - went into BIOS, literally did nothing other than page
through the sections and exited.
5) Rebooted and here we are.

Weird. Now if someone could please enlighten me as to why the above worked,
I'd be most grateful.

The BIOS is responsible for reading the configuration info from the DIMMs
and setting up the DDR controllers. It's possible that the BIOS keeps
around some piece of information in non-volatile memory that it
reinitialized when you entered it. In theory exiting without saving
shouldn't change anything in the configuration memory but that doesn't
mean that your particular BIOS didn't change something. It might be a bug
or it might be a feature, i.e. it checked something when you entered the
BIOS, found a problem and then fixed it no questions asked.

 

[Jon Danniken]

"Miss Perspicacia Tick"

Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't mess with
the internals of computers and should stick to things they *DO* know about
like the washing up and ironing your shirts....

Just learn how to cook and you'll be set.

/ducks

Jon

 

[Juhan Leemet]

Sounds like you did it right. That is what I would have done.

I hate replying to my own posts but it now works for some bizarre
reason. Here's what I did.

1) Board has yellow and blue slots. Took the old RAM (in blue) out
and replaced it with the new.
2) Tested it. Booted fine.
3) Put the old in the yellow slots (with new still in blue), booted
and got page fault error.
4) Rebooted - went into BIOS, literally did nothing other than page
through the sections and exited.
5) Rebooted and here we are.

Weird. Now if someone could please enlighten me as to why the above
worked, I'd be most grateful.

Dunno why you got the (transient?) page fault error. However, the unused
memory slot may have gotten dirty (dust?) and/or corroded over time.
Plugging and unplugging memory modules ends up scuffing the socket
contacts on the memory module contacts, which might have resulted in
cleaning them enough to work again.

A trick technicians have used for cleaning old card edge connectors has
been to use a pencil eraser (soft abrasive) along the edge of the module.
Then carefully cleaning off all debris (do not get it into sockets!). In
your case, I suspect it may have been the socket(s) that needed cleaning.
The most practical way is to insert/remove a module a number of times.

Glad it works for you now. Enjoy!

 

[Chris]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted to
add another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part numbers
were identical). However, although the system POSTs, Windows (XP Pro SP2)
doesn't like it. The errors ( 0x0000004E: PFN_LIST_CORRUPT; 0x00000050:
PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA and 0x0000000A: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) all
indicate faulty or mismatched RAM. OK, the modules could be faulty,
however, as the manual is ambiguous on the topic (though I would have
thought that, as the board is designed to take up to 4GB that total
population was possible - as, obviously, 4GB could be made up of 4x1GB).
The first error was received when I was attempting to repair the
installation - just after the SATA driver screen.

Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't mess
with the internals of computers and should stick to things they *DO* know
about like the washing up and ironing your shirts (at least that's the
impression I've been getting from some of the support lines I've had to
call in recent years). But I built this system from the best damned parts
I could afford at the time and, now I have a little spare cash, and am
doing more in the graphics dept, I wanted to add a little more RAM. And,
FYI, I've never ironed a shirt in my life. ;o)

So would someone who knows what he's talking about (like Dave) tell me
what's going on? System specs follow: -

Asus SK8V

FX-53

2xWD Raptor (75GB)

1xWD Caviar 300GB (all SATA - the Raptors are in a RAID0 array).

1GB of the aforemention RAM

AMI BIOS (running latest revision)

ATI 9800XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro

Windows XP Pro SP2

Well according to ASUS this board does not support registered DIMMS and only
single sided modules if all 4 banks are used, get crucial memory they
guarantee it will work.

--
Chris
Technical director CKCCOMPUSCRIPT
Apple Computers, Intel, Roland audio, ATI, Microsoft, Sun Solaris, Cisco and
Silicone Graphics.
Wholesale distributor and specialist audio visual computers and servers
FREE SUPPORT @,
http://www.ckccomp.plus.com/site/page.HTM
(e-mail address removed)

 

[CBFalconer]

"Miss Perspicacia Tick"


Just learn how to cook and you'll be set.

She'll need to also handle the washing and harassment. Wash and
wear shirts are quite usable these days.

 

[DaveW]

A couple of observations. First, have you tried just installing ONLY the
two new RAM sticks, in place of your current sticks, and seeing if you get
an error on booting. If you do get an error, then install ONE of the new
sticks in slot 1 by itself and see if that gives an error. If not then try
just installing the remaining new stick in slot 1. If the two new sticks
test out OK, then I would say that your motherboard either has timing issues
with four sticks of that particular model of RAM, or the motherboard has
design problems with running all four RAM slots loaded.
You can also run Memtest on sticks to test them as another possibility.
http://www.memtest86.com/
Best wishes.

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Well according to ASUS this board does not support registered DIMMS
and only single sided modules if all 4 banks are used, get crucial
memory they guarantee it will work.

Then you're looking at the specs for the wrong board. It's an FX board and
FX chips (AFAIK) require registered RAM. Suggest you look at the table.
What has every chip number got against it? I rest my case.

 

[John Smith]

Suggest you read pages 2-11 through 2-13 of your MB manual or got to

http://www.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/socket940/sk8v/e1473_sk8v.pdf

You'll need Acrobat Reader to view the manual.

JA

 

[ElJerid]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted to add
another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part numbers were
identical). However, although the system POSTs, Windows (XP Pro SP2) doesn't
like it. The errors ( 0x0000004E: PFN_LIST_CORRUPT; 0x00000050:
PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA and 0x0000000A: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL) all
indicate faulty or mismatched RAM. OK, the modules could be faulty, however,
as the manual is ambiguous on the topic (though I would have thought that,
as the board is designed to take up to 4GB that total population was
possible - as, obviously, 4GB could be made up of 4x1GB). The first error
was received when I was attempting to repair the installation - just after
the SATA driver screen.

Yes, I am female and I know you men all think that women shouldn't mess with
the internals of computers and should stick to things they *DO* know about
like the washing up and ironing your shirts (at least that's the impression
I've been getting from some of the support lines I've had to call in recent
years). But I built this system from the best damned parts I could afford at
the time and, now I have a little spare cash, and am doing more in the
graphics dept, I wanted to add a little more RAM. And, FYI, I've never
ironed a shirt in my life. ;o)

So would someone who knows what he's talking about (like Dave) tell me
what's going on? System specs follow: -

Asus SK8V

FX-53

2xWD Raptor (75GB)

1xWD Caviar 300GB (all SATA - the Raptors are in a RAID0 array).

1GB of the aforemention RAM

AMI BIOS (running latest revision)

ATI 9800XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Pro

Windows XP Pro SP2

Damn ! Next time I have a computer problem, I' ll say I' m a blonde!!!
Never seen so much answers...

 

[Paul Murphy]

I hate replying to my own posts but it now works for some bizarre reason.
Here's what I did.

1) Board has yellow and blue slots. Took the old RAM (in blue) out and
replaced it with the new.
2) Tested it. Booted fine.
3) Put the old in the yellow slots (with new still in blue), booted and
got page fault error.
4) Rebooted - went into BIOS, literally did nothing other than page
through the sections and exited.
5) Rebooted and here we are.

Weird. Now if someone could please enlighten me as to why the above
worked, I'd be most grateful.

Glad you got it working. I'm unsure exactly what going into the bios and
then exiting without saving any changes does specifically but its something
I've picked up in my time as a computer tech (cant remember if I learnt it
on a course or from a workmate) and it's a suggested procedure after any
memory upgrades/changes. Probably something to do with the BIOS being forced
to refresh its system specs. If you'd done that before doing the memory swap
around you'd have probably found it fixed things at that stage too.

Must go now, I have ironing to do ;-)

Paul

 

[John Smithe]

I have 1GB OCZ PC3200 Dual Channel EL DDR EEC registered and I wanted to
add another, so I ordered an indentical kit (I made sure the part
numbers were identical).

Use Everest or CPU-Z to ensure that the SPD settings reported by the eeprom
are same.

http://www.cpuid.com/
CPU-Z

http://www.lavalys.com/products/download.php?pid=1&lang=en&pageid=3
Everest

 

[Miss Perspicacia Tick]

Damn ! Next time I have a computer problem, I' ll say I' m a blonde!!!
Never seen so much answers...

So /many/ answers - many is used with countable items - much with things
that cannot be counted - you wouldn't say "I have put on so many weight"
now, would you?

Consider this: -

Which sounds correct?: -

"I have drunk so many water, yet I am still thirsty"

"I have drunk so much water, yet I am still thirsty"

'Many' and 'much' are the 'opposites' of 'fewer' and 'less' - the correct
opposite of the sentence 'I have never seen so many answers', based on what
I have just told you, would be what?

Oh, I don't know what gender you are but, if you're male, it's blond.

 

[ElJerid]

So /many/ answers - many is used with countable items - much with things
that cannot be counted - you wouldn't say "I have put on so many weight"
now, would you?

Consider this: -

Which sounds correct?: -

"I have drunk so many water, yet I am still thirsty"

"I have drunk so much water, yet I am still thirsty"

'Many' and 'much' are the 'opposites' of 'fewer' and 'less' - the correct
opposite of the sentence 'I have never seen so many answers', based on what
I have just told you, would be what?

Oh, I don't know what gender you are but, if you're male, it's blond.

Thanks for correcting my poor English. In fact, I knew this, but gave not
enough attention to my text. I guess however that if you should be answering
in a French users' group, there should also be some errors to find... In the
meantime, you also made another error. Despite appearances, I' m not blond.
;-)