Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
RAM Disaster!  
User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1841 times:

I noticed that I was only using 712MB RAM out of 1.23GB. So I opened the pc, unplugged it and put my antistatic wrist stap thingy on. I pulled out both peices 1x 1GB 1x 256MB and placed them back.

I hear a 2 second beeeep every 5 or so seconds. No life from the moniter or anything else.

AHH! I cry and turn it back on. Beeep  Sad

I try and take the 256 out. Beeeep !!!

I take the 1GB out and put 256 Back - Loads, slowly but loads  Sad

Ok weird I say...

I put the 1GB back ... Beeeep!

What is happening I have played musical chairs with my peices and swapped them around more than a footballs team formation!
I doubt this is static damage because I had my band on tightly and attached to the metal casing around the side with the computer disscontected psyically from the mains?!

Anyone come up with a magical key code !! Please!

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGo3Team From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3267 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

Ditch the 1GB and purchase another. They do go bad.


Yay Pudding!
User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11953 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Thread starter):
RAM Disaster!



Thom@s



"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13095 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1825 times:

Are you sure your computer or it's motherboard can use that volume of RAM? Maybe you are using the wrong type or a mismatch of size or type of RAM? You should check your computer's or motherboards manual or go online as to them and check it out.

User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1810 times:

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Thread starter):
I noticed that I was only using 712MB RAM out of 1.23GB

The first thought I have is WTF?

But... How did you determine you were 'only' using 712?


User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1799 times:

I have had it for couple of months and I have a 1Gb and a 256Mb

Thanks for the pic by the way  Smile Need cheering up

I saw the 712 or what ever RAM because my games were a little slower and I checked by right clicking on my computer


User currently offlineWSOY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1791 times:

What's your mainboard (motherboard)?

User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1779 times:

Asus MX- ******

Its been fine for months until tonight

The RAM was from crucial. Am I likley to get a refund lol worth a try  Smile


User currently offlineWSOY From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Well if you first noticed a sudden decrease in capacity, and then the death on your arms so to say, you may have a piece that's entitled to a warranty replacement.

User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Yea! I'll try, after all what have I got to loose?

Famus last words  Smile


User currently offlineThom@s From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 11953 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1739 times:

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 9):
Yea! I'll try, after all what have I got to loose?

Famus last words

By who, someone about to be shot by the spelling and grammar police?  

Thom@s

[Edited 2007-05-08 23:07:57]


"If guns don't kill people, people kill people - does that mean toasters don't toast toast, toast toast toast?"
User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1727 times:

Oh! I am having a broadband problem I spoke to Virgin and were getting a new one Saturday. As long as we don't get charged for "lying" I did the Google spellcheck and it didn't register sorry!

User currently offlineFLYtoEGCC From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 947 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1663 times:

Quote:
So I opened the pc, unplugged it and put my antistatic wrist stap thingy on.

Sorry if this is slightly insulting your intelligence, but when you unplugged your computer you didn't then connect the anti-static strap to the case, did you? If so, it would have been useless because the case itself wouldn't have been earthed. In which case, when you pulled the sticks of RAM out, you could have static-damaged them even if there was nothing wrong with them previously. I normally connect my anti-static strap to something metal like a radiator, or the case itself but with the lead plugged into the wall socket with the switch off.

Does your motherboard have an on-board graphics display adaptor? From what you say, if you've got 1.23GB of RAM but the system is only showing 712MB, it sounds like you might have an on-board 512MB graphics adaptor and therefore the 712MB reading will be quite correct - this is effectively what remains after the system has "used" 512MB for the display adaptor. As an example, I have a laptop with 512MB RAM but an integrated 128MB display adaptor and when I look under system properties the amount of RAM is listed as 384MB. The same principle may well apply to your system.

Some newer motherboards seem to require a fair old shove to get the RAM seated properly, the slots can be quite tight. It sounds plausible that you may have removed the RAM in good condition, put it back in and either static-damaged it or not seated it properly. Either way, you could try and get a replacement from Crucial - a reputable company like that shouldn't give you too many problems.



Come fly with me, let's fly, let's fly away...
User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Quoting FLYtoEGCC (Reply 12):
Some newer motherboards seem to require a fair old shove to get the RAM seated properly, the slots can be quite tight. It sounds plausible that you may have removed the RAM in good condition, put it back in and either static-damaged it or not seated it properly. Either way, you could try and get a replacement from Crucial - a reputable company like that shouldn't give you too many problems.

It's actually fairly hard to statically damage the RAM --- I doubt you did that. The biggest problem is not properly installing the Rams (or doing something stupid like putting them in backwards. The Sockets are keyed, some of them have clips and some times the RAMS come down at an angle. I would say get a good light and look at the RAMS carefully to make sure they are in proper. If you can find someone who has pushed RAMS into the socket before use them as maybe you are just not using the right force/technique. Sometimes people who don't install RAMS too often don't do it properly, mostly because they are afraid of damaging the socket, or they think the RAM goes in a different way than it does.

You might want to first try installing the 1GB one and see if you can get that to work.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21442 posts, RR: 53
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Quoting FLYtoEGCC (Reply 12):
Sorry if this is slightly insulting your intelligence, but when you unplugged your computer you didn't then connect the anti-static strap to the case, did you? If so, it would have been useless because the case itself wouldn't have been earthed. In which case, when you pulled the sticks of RAM out, you could have static-damaged them even if there was nothing wrong with them previously. I normally connect my anti-static strap to something metal like a radiator, or the case itself but with the lead plugged into the wall socket with the switch off.

You're making a mistake yourself if you're connecting the strap to something other than the reference potential of the device you're trying to protect.

The only thing relevant here is whether your body has the same potential as the computer and the RAM modules - it is almost completely irrelevant whether anything is actually in contact with earth.

Connecting the strap to a radiator and having the computer "floating" or connected to a different potential actually increases the risk of you frying the chips!


User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1643 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 14):
You're making a mistake yourself if you're connecting the strap to something other than the reference potential of the device you're trying to protect.

Klaus is correct. It is easy to be careless when you are working with other peoples money, but I have installed hundreds of RAM modules at work and I never use the strap, and I have never damaged a RAM. Don't tell my boss though.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21442 posts, RR: 53
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1635 times:

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 15):
It is easy to be careless when you are working with other peoples money, but I have installed hundreds of RAM modules at work and I never use the strap, and I have never damaged a RAM. Don't tell my boss though.

I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

But you need to be very much aware of the issue and very consistent in proper procedures, such as always making sure potential equalization is taken care of, even and especially when interrupting your work. Permanent awareness of the risks is a must, including good self-observation in even minor details while handling delicate electronics.


User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1614 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 16):
I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

Come on Klaus, your making it out for something its not....not your usual anal self.

Proper procedure is grounding yourself strap or not. anyways, its either a bad memory or combination on the mb or mb itself.

does it work fine with the old memory and is the old cpu/mb/os newer than win 98... if so, return the freekin bastard memory.

Also you may be able to download a program that will test each individual item, although i take them with a grain of salt...they generally will tell narrow down the issue nicely


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21442 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Quoting RichPhitzwell (Reply 18):
Proper procedure is grounding yourself strap or not.

No. That is exactly wrong!

As with many other things, semi-knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge at all!

Grounding yourself and then handling non-grounded equipment will significantly increase the risk of potential differences being equalized exactly when you're touching the device in question and when it can cause the greatest damage.

The objective is to minimize potential differences between yourself and the computer, regardless whether that common potential is equal to ground (preferred) or not (requiring additional caution, but normally not a problem).


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1600 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 16):
I don't even own one and have never damaged anything.

I am just hoping that Klaus is right on this!! That this computer works suggests he might be. Big grin And when was he wrong the last time? Big grin  Big grin


User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1598 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 19):
The objective is to minimize potential differences between yourself and the computer

Klaus, dont even start on this one. your body can hold far greater charge than the memory ever can. I was actually agreeing with you at first but if you choose to take the direction that you are taking then you are just fighting for no other reason than to fight.


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1583 times:

First and only RAM rule, learned from experience.

DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

If and when I upgrade RAM, I get new chips from the same manufacturer and remove the old one. Avoids possible future hassles.


User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1576 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

there are ways around this, but they are a biatch...so I completly agree with you on type and hell even size.


User currently offlineJamesbaldwyn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1574 times:

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 22):
DON'T MIX AND MATCH!

I have never had any OTHER problems lol

I'm running now on the orginal 2x 256 MB I lukily found in my draw.


User currently offlineRichPhitzwell From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1566 times:

Quoting Jamesbaldwyn (Reply 24):
I have never had any OTHER problems lol

I could give you a list of issues... the problem is that if you had 100 machines all identical 30 will have issues while the other 70 will be fine with mixing.

Thats actually pretty close to the statistics with large operations, again ways around it but it still occurs.

Edited..I think im actually confirming your post.

[Edited 2007-05-09 09:03:20]

25 Post contains images FLYtoEGCC : You learn something new every day... cheers, Klaus! (Although I'm yet to fry anything electronic the way I've been doing it... but fair point! )
26 AirbusA346 : I have been told just to touch the case. Simple really, no need to spend £6 on a strap. Tom.
27 Post contains images KaiGywer : Neither do I. I usually sit on my carpeted floor changing computer parts
28 Post contains images Klaus : I could tell you... but then I'd have to zap your memory if I did...!    You're confusing related but separate issues. The amount of charge depends
29 RichPhitzwell : First your confusing issues In this case grounding yourself to the case is proper procedure and properly grounding the case is proper procedure. What
30 Post contains images Jamesbaldwyn : ITS WORKING!!! I don't know what happened but I tried it today and its working like normal ?! Computers ay ? Who'd av em ! Yup join the club I normall
31 Post contains images ORFflyer : I work for a contractor that installs and maintains the IT networks on the ships of the US Military Sealift Command. (over 135 ships) We have over 45
32 RichPhitzwell : and the case is grounded therefore your grounded. Edited, those tiles are gounded and your supposed to wear a shoe strap that grounds you to those ti
33 ORFflyer : According to the install manufacture, the shoe straps are not necessary. The grounding of the tiles is accomplished via a grid work of copper banding
34 David L : Honourably? But, seriously, all I've ever done is equalise any potential difference by touching the chassis first and I've never... Nah, I'm not goin
35 Post contains links and images WSOY : You've got a fluke part. It really needs to be replaced. ------- On overview to ESD procedures can be found here How and why does the charge build up
36 Post contains images Klaus : No, I'm not. If you're getting rude with others, at least be correct about the substance! What are you on about? Only grounding yourself without taki
37 Post contains images Jamesbaldwyn : Talk about a debate!! Hot stuff Story of my life I am getting a new motherboard and processer etc so I will get new RAM too
38 Klaus : Maybe... maybe not... in many cases corroded or mechanically defective sockets or secondary influences can cause such effects. But I certainly would
39 RichPhitzwell : Yup, for humor purposes and to make a small point.. Yup and I was agreeing with you initially, but when you jumped on me in a non professional manor
40 WSOY : The textbooks don't seem to agree well with you, nevertheless. Feel free to produce a quote. ------- I'm agreeing here. The "bottom of the barrel" wi
41 RichPhitzwell : Since we kinda went off topic but not really. I agree with everything as long as you ground the case as well by either touching it or not. And this is
42 Post contains images Klaus : Gladly accepted and any lingering offense erased. Engineering textbooks almost always ignore effects which are normally too small to be noticed, such
43 WSOY : I meant textbooks covering the theory of electrostatics. Let's briefly recall what you wrote: That does not sound to me like a thing "too small to be
44 RichPhitzwell : Disclaimer, I dont have time to really think this through so please, please correct and or clarify my points Almost the same basic idea, but think of
45 Klaus : Pretty much, yeah. But I think the remaining disagreement is not about that aspect. It's more about the question whether the size of a water tank wit
46 RichPhitzwell : I believe you are correct, when initially filling a dam, they monitor closely to insure the rise in water level is not too drastic or the damn could
47 WSOY : Does this also apply to the "the capacitor's mass effects its charge" bit as well? Could a brief look on the theory before you set off writing from m
48 Klaus : Yes. With a good conductor as electrode material the effect would be extremely small relative to the surface effects and the one of the dielectric, b
49 WSOY : Yes, thank you but I was asking if that was your personal memorized physics, or the one in general use, since you've not yet been able to produce the
50 Klaus : I haven't invented anything. It's an aspect I haven't found much in the online quotable sources, but this is how it should work: Any conductor enables
51 N231YE : All this stuff about pontential, electricity, and an aviation website...I thought this video might be of interest to some people:
52 WSOY : I think there's a reason why it's so hard to find -- have you considered the possibility you could be wrong? Feel free to quote a printed textbook if
53 Post contains links and images Klaus : Cool video... or better yet, hot video...! Sure, as you can easily check yourself above. No, it's definitely not as simple as that. Vacuum is actuall
54 WSOY : Klaus, you may have left a book unread. Charge carriers do not abhor vacuum. One practical example is the electronic valve a.k.a vacuum tube we see i
55 Klaus : That's a misunderstanding. a) Charge carriers (usually electrons and protons) are indeed substantial, hence not present in vacuum by definition. b) Y
56 WSOY : So true. But why do you post this stuff which is irrelevant to your original claim which was I believe "a more massive capacitor will hold more charg
57 Klaus : I was still responding to your incorrect claim from above: Nonsense. The essential issue with any kind of measurement is to exclude extraneous influe
58 Post contains images WSOY : Klaus, let's return to the subject when you have the prototype of a weight scale based on the capacitor principle ready(absolutely no moving parts). Y
59 Klaus : a) Current scales are already solid state with little or no additional benefit to be had. b) You still seem to be oblivious to the issue of isolating
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Are You A Disaster In The Kitchen? posted Sun Apr 1 2007 00:07:47 by BMIFlyer
Vista Upgrade Disaster. posted Thu Mar 8 2007 23:32:56 by TedTAce
Zune: What A Disaster posted Wed Dec 27 2006 06:45:28 by Aa757first
Dodge Ram SRT-10 Questions posted Fri Dec 8 2006 00:17:34 by Delta767300ER
Disaster In The Making: Reality TV posted Thu Dec 7 2006 16:10:49 by MDorBust
Iraq Invasion A Disaster: Blair posted Sat Nov 18 2006 13:35:12 by NAV20
Envirenmental Disaster In Lebanon And Syria... posted Sat Jul 29 2006 18:02:39 by Beaucaire
Firefox, The RAM Hog posted Sat Jan 21 2006 14:29:50 by Aloges
Harbin Water Disaster China's 'Chernobal'? posted Sat Nov 26 2005 14:24:38 by LTBEWR
Risk Of Natural Disaster Where You Live? posted Tue Oct 25 2005 16:04:31 by HAJFlyer