Installed new RAM, XP not recognizing it all!

D

Data

Hi,

I recently purchased some more memory (RAM) for my PC. My PC had 512MB
already, and I installed an additional 1GB of RAM in the second RAM slot. In
the Bios it says I have 1536MB, and it says in the help and support center, I
have a memory capacity of 1.50 GB. However, in My Computer, System
Information it reads: 2.41GHz, 1.00 GB of RAM, and in PC-Doctor (A program
used for fixing problems) it says:
Total Physical Memory: 1.024 GB
Free Physical Memory: 629MB

I don’t understand why this is happening, as my PC supports up to 1GB of RAM
in each of the two memory slots. Obviously both modules are working and
installed correctly, but the OS is not reading them all. My Compaq Presario
uses Windows XP SP2, and has an NVIDIA graphics card. Also it is a desktop
computer.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
 
P

Paul

Data said:
Hi,

I recently purchased some more memory (RAM) for my PC. My PC had 512MB
already, and I installed an additional 1GB of RAM in the second RAM slot. In
the Bios it says I have 1536MB, and it says in the help and support center, I
have a memory capacity of 1.50 GB. However, in My Computer, System
Information it reads: 2.41GHz, 1.00 GB of RAM, and in PC-Doctor (A program
used for fixing problems) it says:
Total Physical Memory: 1.024 GB
Free Physical Memory: 629MB

I don’t understand why this is happening, as my PC supports up to 1GB of RAM
in each of the two memory slots. Obviously both modules are working and
installed correctly, but the OS is not reading them all. My Compaq Presario
uses Windows XP SP2, and has an NVIDIA graphics card. Also it is a desktop
computer.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Check boot.ini ? Maxmem ?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb963892.aspx

For issue testing like this, I like to keep a second OS handy.
Like Knoppix from knopper.net, or Ubuntu from ubuntu.com . You
can boot either CD, and don't have to install Linux on the hard
drive to use it. A hard drive doesn't even have to be on the
machine, to use one of those CDs.

I boot the alternate OS, and then see if the same symptoms are
present. For example, if I booted Linux, and found 1.5GB memory
free, then I'd know the hardware was working. And I had a settings
issue on WinXP. If Linux only saw 1GB of memory, then I'd suspect
I had a real hardware problem.

Paul
 
D

Data

Thanks, I checked the maxmem and it's empty, and wouldn't exceed 1024MB, so
no solution there. As for switching the sticks around, I'll try tomorrow.
Hope it works!

Thanks again.
 
J

JS

Try running Memtest86+, this runs from a boot disk or CD
and should eliminate or confirm if your ram is bad.
Let it run for as long as you can, 2,4,6,8 or more hours,
if no errors by then your ram is OK.
See: http://www.memtest.org/

JS
 
D

Data

Thanks, I tried the memtest 86+ website, but I don't have a floppy drive, and
the CD option won't work after I download it. Also, I don't believe the RAM
to be faulty, as the original 512MB worked fine before, and the fact that the
capacity of my RAM went up means the new module must be working too. I'm
guessing, XP is only reading the new module now, and not the old one.
Hopefully this will correct itself when I switch the modules around tomorrow.

Thanks for the input.
 
D

Data

Hi again,

I just wanted to inform you, that I ran a computer scan from crucial.com and
it says I have 1536MB of memory (The correct amount). I don't know if this is
significant, but I thought I'd post it.

Thanks.
 
D

Data

Hi,

I just wanted to clarify my previous post. My problem is not yet resolved,
but crucial did report the correct amount in my system. System information on
Windows XP still reports only 1.00GB of RAM. Sorry if my previous post gave
the impression of everything working properly. Tomorrow I will try switching
the modules around if I get the time.

Thanks for all the suggestions.
 
B

Bruce Chambers

Data said:
Hi,

I recently purchased some more memory (RAM) for my PC. My PC had 512MB
already, and I installed an additional 1GB of RAM in the second RAM slot. In
the Bios it says I have 1536MB, and it says in the help and support center, I
have a memory capacity of 1.50 GB. However, in My Computer, System
Information it reads: 2.41GHz, 1.00 GB of RAM, and in PC-Doctor (A program
used for fixing problems) it says:
Total Physical Memory: 1.024 GB
Free Physical Memory: 629MB

I don’t understand why this is happening, as my PC supports up to 1GB of RAM
in each of the two memory slots. Obviously both modules are working and
installed correctly, but the OS is not reading them all. My Compaq Presario
uses Windows XP SP2, and has an NVIDIA graphics card. Also it is a desktop
computer.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


You can't just buy any ole RAM module, stick it in, and expect it to work.

It is absolutely essential that any new RAM module(s) be fully
compatible with both the motherboard and/or any other RAM module(s)
already in the system. Additionally, there are sometimes jumper
switches on older motherboards that need to be reset for new RAM
configurations. Consult your motherboard's manual or the manufacturer's
web site for specific instructions and compatibility requirements.

If you cannot lay your hands upon the computer's manual and the
manufacturer doesn't provide a support web site, you can use these
utilities to help determine the correct type of RAM needed:

SiSoft's Sandra
http://www.sisoftware.co.uk/index.php?dir=&location=sware_dl&lang=en

Belarc Advisor
http://www.belarc.com/free_download.html

Unlimited Possibilities' AIDA32
http://forum.aumha.org/overflow/aida32.zip

Also, Crucial Memory's web site (www.crucial.com) has a database to
help to find the right RAM for your specific make and model computer
and/or motherboard. (Incidentally, Crucial is the only company from
which I ever buy RAM. I've never been disappointed.)


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:


http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
 
D

Data

Hi,

I didn't just buy any ole RAM and stick it in the system. I made sure I had
the correct type (DDR DIMM), and was compatible with the right speed and type
(PC-3200) before I purchased the RAM. I also checked on crucial.com to
make sure I had got the correct type. Also, the fact that it is showing more
RAM than before would have to be due to the fact that the new module is at
least partially working.

I would also like to thank everyone for their help so far.
 
P

Paul

Data said:
Hi,

I didn't just buy any ole RAM and stick it in the system. I made sure I had
the correct type (DDR DIMM), and was compatible with the right speed and type
(PC-3200) before I purchased the RAM. I also checked on crucial.com to
make sure I had got the correct type. Also, the fact that it is showing more
RAM than before would have to be due to the fact that the new module is at
least partially working.

I would also like to thank everyone for their help so far.

The Crucial scanner may have looked at the individual SPD chips on the
DIMMs. So it may not actually be using system level information (from
the OS), but looking at a level that at this point, doesn't matter.

The BIOS does two kinds of checks. The BIOS reads the SPD on
each DIMM, and plans the memory map, timings and clocks, according
to what it finds. But the BIOS also seems to use the old-fashioned
binary search, where it searches for the end of RAM, to figure out
the true size of the stick.

That is how, when a stick with a badly programmed SPD chip is used,
the BIOS still figures out the correct amount of RAM. For example,
if a 512MB DIMM has a 1GB SPD chip, the BIOS can still figure out
the stick is actually 512MB.

I'm trusting in this case, that the BIOS is currently the best
arbiter of what total size is present. The BIOS sets up the
initial address map, so the OS doesn't get a say in it. The
OS can have further restrictions (like MAXMEM), but the OS
shouldn't be able to declare more RAM than is actually
physically present.

With regard to memtest, I think that is still a test you should
pursue. It is the smallest download of an "alternate OS" you can
get, that will give some feedback on how much memory is present.
Unzipping this, should give a ISO9660 file (ending in .iso).

http://www.memtest.org/download/2.01/memtest86+-2.01.iso.zip

If you've downloaded an ISO9660 file from the web site, then you
need a burning program that knows how to move that information
onto the CD. It is *not* a matter of just burning the file to
the CD, with the WinXP built-in burning option. You do not want
to be able to look at the CD in explorer, and see blah.iso sitting
there all by itself. Instead, when proper burning is done, there
might be something like a single README.txt, while the actual
bootable test program is invisible. (The README was put there,
to tell you what is going on, with respect to the file system,
when proper burning is done. There is in fact, no need for a
README or even a file system to be present, but the burnmeister
who made the ISO wanted customers to have a warm fuzzy feeling.)

Readme.txt contents...

"There is no visible file here.

Memtest86+ is located on the bootsector of this CD.

Just boot from this CD and Memtest86+ will launch."

If you see that file on the burned CD, you did it right.

I burned my CD with a copy of Nero. You want any burning
tool that knows what to do with an ISO9660 file. If you
want a free tool, there is Deepburner Free, but this is
one I haven't tried. Check CDFreaks.com or cdrinfo.com for
comments or feedback about this program.

http://www.deepburner.com/?r=products&pr=deepburner&prr=features

When memtest86+ starts, you should see mention of the total detected memory
(as passed to memtest by the BIOS). As far as memtest is concerned,
there is the memory that is testable (what it declares), plus the
reserved memory that it cannot touch. The reserved area should be pretty
small, unless perhaps you have integrated graphics.

http://www.memtest.org/pics/nf2-big.gif

I didn't mention integrated graphics as a possible cause of the missing
memory in your case, because I cannot imagine 512MB allocated to a
built-in graphics function. But maybe you can set it that high in
the BIOS. If you are relying on integrated graphics, you can check
the BIOS and see whether an abnormally large allocation is being
used. But that would likely be reflected in what you see in
memtest, as an abnormally large reserved area.

Just a guess,
Paul
 
B

Bruce Chambers

Data said:
Hi,

I didn't just buy any ole RAM and stick it in the system. I made sure I had
the correct type (DDR DIMM), and was compatible with the right speed and type
(PC-3200) before I purchased the RAM. I also checked on crucial.com to
make sure I had got the correct type.


It would have made things a lot simpler, and saved everyone time, if
you'd bothered to include that crucial information in your original post.

Also, the fact that it is showing more
RAM than before would have to be due to the fact that the new module is at
least partially working.


Yes, and "partially working" is a sign of incompatible, mis-installed,
or defective RAM.

So now you just need to ensure that the RAM is installed correctly, and
any BIOS and/or motherboard jumper settings are correct. Consult the
motherboard's manual or the web site of its manufacturer for this
information.

I believe someone else has already advised you to use MemTest86 to
determine whether or not the new module is defective.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:


http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
 
D

Data

I switched the RAM slots today and the problem disappeared, amazingly. Thanks
so much Jerry. Everything is fine now. I may also run memtest to make sure,
but as far as I know the whole 1.5GB is now being detected by XP.

I would also like to sincerley thank everyone who posted in this thread for
their help and recommendations.

Thanks so much.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Windows 7 Setting up Wake on LAN 3
XP only shows 2GB RAM 17
Rank 1 and Rank 2 RAM chips 5
Windows XP does not recognize memory upgrade 14
New RAM problem... 0
MEASURING RAM PERFORMANCE? 13
RAM 9
RAM installation not confirmed 7

Top