| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 36131 | 2003-08-01 03:13:00 | RAM upgrade from hell | robo (205) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 164357 | 2003-08-01 08:22:00 | Can't see any mention of ram type or ECC in Bios menu, so it isn't looking good. robo. |
robo (205) | ||
| 164358 | 2003-08-01 08:55:00 | You really need to check your motherboard manual to see what type of RAM you want. My feeling is that you may be able to take the 512Mb ECC RAM back and swap it for NON ECC RAM. As far as I know, Kingston RAM is expensive and very good. Personally I just buy Generic type stuff as it's cheaper. I poke it into the computer and see if it boots. If it does then I run Memtest off a DOS disk before any O/S gets installed. If the RAM passes the memory test then I install the O/S and SiSoft Sandra and do the burn in. If it doesn't pass that then I think again. Assuming you are not using the computer as a business sort of effort then the Consumer Guarantee Act should apply for a return and replacement. After all, it doesn't work for you. Off the top of my head I'm sure that Kingston have a non ECC model but I will check that and post later tonight. Just my thoughts and I hope this helps. |
Elephant (599) | ||
| 164359 | 2003-08-01 09:32:00 | Dude Don't worry, they do, they have heaps of types, just not in stock if I want non-ECC, etc,etc. I'll be fine now that I know what's going on. Neither of my desktops can handle non-ecc, robo. |
robo (205) | ||
| 164360 | 2003-08-03 04:00:00 | When I ugraded by adding another 512 I ordered the right memory and DocMemory found no problem with it but both Win2000 and Red Hat 9 did not like the two together which slacked me off as was hoping to have 768. I would deffinately say that the EEC memory is probably not compatable with your MB | mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||