A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Motherboards » Gigabyte Motherboards
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is Intel 440 Chipset Compatible with XP Pro?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 14th 03, 08:21 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is Intel 440 Chipset Compatible with XP Pro?


I have a 440BX with Win XP Pro on it, and I've never seen the type of errors
you are talking about.

If you get a brand new drive, make sure you use it as your main drive
because it's going to be way faster than your old drive. Use Norton Ghost's
DiskToDisk option to make a clone copy of the old drive onto the new drive.


"guy2003" wrote in message
...
I recently upgraded my old Pentium II 450 machine from NT4 to XP Pro.
I don't seem to be able to get rid of that annoying "Limited Virtual
Memory, etc." indication at log on.

According to Q316528 from Microsoft, I may need to download the Intel
Application Accelerator. However, Intel doesn't currently provide
one for the 440 Chipset Family (actually, I don't know if they ever
did).

If they did, does anyone know where I could find an old archived
version?

My hard drive was initially partitioned into C & D, and I have only
941 MB free space avaialable on C where my applications reside, and
2.94 GB free on D.

I was wondering if an additional "slave" hard drive would solve this.

Prior to this, I followed the instructions on Q315270 also discussing
another root cause for this Limited Virtual Memory problem -- but
without succes there either.

Finally, I have 384 MB of RAM.

Any help would be very much appreciated here. Thanks in advance.




  #2  
Old August 14th 03, 08:26 PM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


You'd think that sort of thing would be built right into the OS wouldn't
you. But we're talking Microsoft here...


"Yves Thomas" wrote in message
om...
Forgive me if this is elementary.

Can one move an application from one drive to another without first
deleting that application & re-installing it in the desired drive?

For example, could one just take the directory where an application's
files are located and moving that entire directory to a new drive?

Does something need to be changed in the registry so that the
operating system know to go to that new directory when that
application is invoked?

Thanks.

Tim wrote
Another option is to move large applications from C to D.

I have limited space on one machine on C - so I have a program files

folder
on E as well with MS Office, and many other things. It has been like

that
for years.

If you run your machine below its memory limits most of the time, having
another swap file or placing it on D furrther down the physical drive

will
not make much of a difference to performance. The swap file gets used

when
memory becomes oversubscribed. Under normal circumstances (IE where you

are
using less actual memory than the machine has) the swap file will get

little
if any work. If you frequently run, and have concurrently active
applications which oversubscribe memory (IE are larger than will

actually
fit) your swap file will get a lot of IO's. The best way to solve that
problem is with more memory - a faster CPU will help slightly, but more
memory...... lots more. Take a look at Task Manager (right click on the

task
bar to bring it up) under Performance and look at Physical, Peak, and

Total
numbers while working to get an idea of how you Do use memory - any

peaks
over or near (physical - 64MB) or so = swapping. This is a very rough
guestimate and depends on the services you are running and many other
factors.

If you want to get right into this, you could go into Admin tools and

fireup
the Performance Monitor. In there are many metrics you can view while

the
machine is running which will show memory, swap file usage, CPU, IO's

etc
etc etc. PerfMon places a *small* load on the system: what you see is

close
to what is happening.

The usual(and ideal) these days on windows systems, under normal usage

is to
have more than enough memory for all your applications to be present in

main
memory resulting in no swapping at all worth looking at.

I would:

Move apps to D and free as much space on C as possible.
Empty all temp directories,
Shoot your IE Browser cache,
Empty the recycler...
Delete obsolete files...
Move the swap file to D
reboot so the new swap file is in use.
Defrag C as completely as possible.
Move the swap file back - if you wish.

- Tim




"daytripper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:03:29 GMT, guy2003

wrote:

I recently upgraded my old Pentium II 450 machine from NT4 to XP Pro.
I don't seem to be able to get rid of that annoying "Limited Virtual
Memory, etc." indication at log on.

According to Q316528 from Microsoft, I may need to download the Intel
Application Accelerator. However, Intel doesn't currently provide
one for the 440 Chipset Family (actually, I don't know if they ever
did).

If they did, does anyone know where I could find an old archived
version?

My hard drive was initially partitioned into C & D, and I have only
941 MB free space avaialable on C where my applications reside, and
2.94 GB free on D.

I was wondering if an additional "slave" hard drive would solve this.

Prior to this, I followed the instructions on Q315270 also discussing
another root cause for this Limited Virtual Memory problem -- but
without succes there either.

Finally, I have 384 MB of RAM.

Any help would be very much appreciated here. Thanks in advance.

fwiw, I have three ASUS P3B-F 440BX boards here running XP Pro, no IAA

and
no
problems.

You could get a little more life out of your system with a larger

disk,
but in
the meantime, try putting a second swap file on your D partition. It

won't
be
the fastest solution but it might keep Windows from bitching...

/daytripper



  #3  
Old August 15th 03, 01:51 PM
chrisv
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 05:26:51 +1000, "John"
wrote:

You'd think that sort of thing would be built right into the OS wouldn't
you. But we're talking Microsoft here...


135 lines for that. Huh.

  #4  
Old August 16th 03, 12:46 AM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Context


"chrisv" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 05:26:51 +1000, "John"
wrote:


135 lines for that. Huh.

You'd think that sort of thing would be built right into the OS wouldn't
you. But we're talking Microsoft here...



"Yves Thomas" wrote in message
om...
Forgive me if this is elementary.

Can one move an application from one drive to another without first
deleting that application & re-installing it in the desired drive?

For example, could one just take the directory where an application's
files are located and moving that entire directory to a new drive?

Does something need to be changed in the registry so that the
operating system know to go to that new directory when that
application is invoked?

Thanks.

Tim wrote
Another option is to move large applications from C to D.

I have limited space on one machine on C - so I have a program files

folder
on E as well with MS Office, and many other things. It has been like

that
for years.

If you run your machine below its memory limits most of the time, having
another swap file or placing it on D furrther down the physical drive

will
not make much of a difference to performance. The swap file gets used

when
memory becomes oversubscribed. Under normal circumstances (IE where you

are
using less actual memory than the machine has) the swap file will get

little
if any work. If you frequently run, and have concurrently active
applications which oversubscribe memory (IE are larger than will

actually
fit) your swap file will get a lot of IO's. The best way to solve that
problem is with more memory - a faster CPU will help slightly, but more
memory...... lots more. Take a look at Task Manager (right click on the

task
bar to bring it up) under Performance and look at Physical, Peak, and

Total
numbers while working to get an idea of how you Do use memory - any

peaks
over or near (physical - 64MB) or so = swapping. This is a very rough
guestimate and depends on the services you are running and many other
factors.

If you want to get right into this, you could go into Admin tools and

fireup
the Performance Monitor. In there are many metrics you can view while

the
machine is running which will show memory, swap file usage, CPU, IO's

etc
etc etc. PerfMon places a *small* load on the system: what you see is

close
to what is happening.

The usual(and ideal) these days on windows systems, under normal usage

is to
have more than enough memory for all your applications to be present in

main
memory resulting in no swapping at all worth looking at.

I would:

Move apps to D and free as much space on C as possible.
Empty all temp directories,
Shoot your IE Browser cache,
Empty the recycler...
Delete obsolete files...
Move the swap file to D
reboot so the new swap file is in use.
Defrag C as completely as possible.
Move the swap file back - if you wish.

- Tim




"daytripper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:03:29 GMT, guy2003

wrote:

I recently upgraded my old Pentium II 450 machine from NT4 to XP Pro.
I don't seem to be able to get rid of that annoying "Limited Virtual
Memory, etc." indication at log on.

According to Q316528 from Microsoft, I may need to download the Intel
Application Accelerator. However, Intel doesn't currently provide
one for the 440 Chipset Family (actually, I don't know if they ever
did).

If they did, does anyone know where I could find an old archived
version?

My hard drive was initially partitioned into C & D, and I have only
941 MB free space avaialable on C where my applications reside, and
2.94 GB free on D.

I was wondering if an additional "slave" hard drive would solve this.

Prior to this, I followed the instructions on Q315270 also discussing
another root cause for this Limited Virtual Memory problem -- but
without succes there either.

Finally, I have 384 MB of RAM.

Any help would be very much appreciated here. Thanks in advance.

fwiw, I have three ASUS P3B-F 440BX boards here running XP Pro, no IAA

and
no
problems.

You could get a little more life out of your system with a larger

disk,
but in
the meantime, try putting a second swap file on your D partition. It

won't
be
the fastest solution but it might keep Windows from bitching...

/daytripper





  #5  
Old August 16th 03, 03:34 AM
daytripper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:46:30 +1000, "John" wrote:

"chrisv" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 05:26:51 +1000, "John"
wrote:


135 lines for that. Huh.



Context


149 lines for that. Huh.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel chipset software Richard Dower Homebuilt PC's 0 January 3rd 05 02:04 AM
Intel chipsets are the most stable? Grumble Homebuilt PC's 101 October 26th 04 02:53 AM
915 and 925 intel chipset boards Jeff Asus Motherboards 2 September 30th 04 09:15 AM
Asus P4C800-E Deluxe 875p Chipset (Intel or Asus INF) Paul Asus Motherboards 1 June 14th 04 01:27 PM
No Intel Application accelerator for non-raid 865PE chipset owners? tk Asus Motherboards 1 June 11th 04 04:30 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.