Can Windows 98 Be Made to Work with 2GB RAM

[Bondiablo]

I'm thinking of adding some RAM to my system. I still need to use 98 for a work program that won't run on XP (I dual boot 98 & XP). I know win98 has trouble with more than 512MB but there is a work around. I saw one site that said it may not be possible with more than 1GB. Has anyone here successfully used 98 with 2GB of RAM in their system?

[JimboS]

I may be wrong, but I don't understand what your saying!
Ram is Ram the more the better...Win98 should do fine???
Besides , it not so much the operating system as it is the motherboard and BIOS..
Can they handle the extra RAM..
The operating system could care in the least....

[redwudz]

Just a general comment is that XP doesn't usually work any better with 2GB of RAM than it would with 1GB or even 512MB. It really depends on what you are doing with it. PhotoShop and a few CAM/CAD programs can use it for temp storage of files. Video processing has very little use for massive amounts of RAM.

If you check when you are encoding, you will see XP normally uses less than 400MB RAM. Vista may be able to use it, depends on the program. XP64 doesn't even seem to make use of extra RAM for video usage. Maybe there is a video encoder that can use it, but I haven't seen one. Editors aren't much different. It would depend on how they work with the files.

But that's not your question. Someone that still uses W98 should be able to give you a specific answer.

[Abbadon]

If my memory serves me right, Windows 98 will not recognise the extra ram, only 256 mgs, but it is going to work just fine, but you can't use the extra ram.

[JimboS]

I totally agree with REDWUDZ !!!
I have an older Compac with "only" 512meg Ram and win XP...
It does Video processing just fine, using Pinnacle Studio....
Of course I shut down unnesessary programs before doing video..
My motherboard says 512meg is all she can handle...
So be it..
It works fine with no problems..

[Bondiablo]

Here's the microsoft article that addresses the issue for anyone who's curious. 256mb is the max for win95 and 98 and 512mb is the max for win98se, which is what i use. It seems like limiting windows to 512MB or less should work regardless how much is actually installed but like I said I saw one article that claimed more than 1GB may not work even with the work around so I was just wondering if anyone had used more successfully.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q253912/

[JerryB]

hi,
curious why do you need to add that much ram for win98? or are you using a multboor system and you need the ram for the OS's? There very very few native win98 programs that can benefit having that much ram... in fact I can only think of maybe a older versionof photshop or maybe a cad program or multimedia program.... but otherwise there not performance advantage with that much ram for win98...

now the issue with the 1 gig limitation for win98 is well documented.. and in fact yo can start maybe experiencing issues at the 750 meg level... but it all depends on your hardware configuration and bios..... now there is M$ fix in the M$ teck article on this, I think it's been given already, .. but from past expereience it a hit or miss thing if it works..... what a lot of people did.... was to make a "ram drive" or another name a virtual disk drive with the extra ram!! .. something that was very common back in the days of MSdos...!! in this way they would load there files in the ram drive and work off of this instead of the hard drive.. ram drive was a lot faster than those old hard drives...!

I'm thinking of adding some RAM to my system. I still need to use 98 for a work program that won't run on 2000 or XP. I know win98 has trouble with more than 512MB but there is a work around. I saw one site that said it may not be possible with more than 1GB. Has anyone here successfully used 98 with 2GB of RAM in their system?

[Faustus]

98 does sometimes have actual issues with to much RAM. I don't know how much the "work around" is good for.

If you don't mind my asking. WHY do you still need 98?

[Super Warrior]

Move up to Windows XP already. I don't know why you'd need 2GBs, but at least WinXP would be more likely to recognize it.

I doubt Win98 would even recognize and make use of, any more than 1GB at the MOST.

[fLYtRap]

hi,
curious why do you need to add that much ram for win98? or are you using a multboor system and you need the ram for the OS's? There very very few native win98 programs that can benefit having that much ram... in fact I can only think of maybe a older versionof photshop or maybe a cad program or multimedia program.... but otherwise there not performance advantage with that much ram for win98...

Troubleshooting would be much easier if intresting in responding people would read entire thread.

I still need to use 98 for a work program that won't run on XP (I dual boot 98 & XP)

This means that Bondiablo have a particullar software that doesn't run under XP thats why he is forced to use 98 just for that 1 program. Otherwise he uses XP, changing boot options as he need it.
Anyways I am in the same situation (I was). I had ME on one drive and XP on another drive exacly for the same reason. However I found better solution and I moved ME onto my laptop. This is good option if you can install the program on another drive.
Memory is responsible for how many programs you can run at the same time.
Try to put maximum memory for your computer and see if it will allow 98 to boot. If you are able to boot, but 98 doesn't recognize full memory amount, however it does work I wouldn't worry about anything else.

[NiteLite]

Yes there is a work around. Sorry I dont have a link but basically you assign 512 to the Win98SE OS only, then other programs are free to use whatever you have added or needed but you must make sure the OS only sees 512mb.
And can people please allow others to choose to work with what they like.
I have a Win98Se system and love it.
When it comes to clean up programs like Spybot and running anti-vir checks the speed is so much faster than my XP-Home experiences.
And HD defraging (using ME defrag on 98se ) blows XP away with speed.
To be fair XP-Pro may be different. I know that XP is very bloated compaired to 98SE and that may be a factor in the speed issues. But one can also find a good website to help with closing or deleting lots of bloatware that comes with XP-Home.
But anyway when 98SE does what you need why give Gates $140. to update to XP when one neither likes or needs it.
I'm sure one day both will be replaced with better, faster, (maybe), and all around likeability features. But for now I still like the feel of 98SE over XP-Home and I dont feel like an idiot or totally out of the loop because of that choice.
My neighbor sometime back went from ME to XP-Home and hated it but after I found a link for him to spend the afternoon disabling processes and deleting un-needed junk he increased overall speed and now likes it but not to the point of feeling he is now using a superior OS compared to 98SE or ME.

Anyway there is a way, Bondiablo.
Maybe google can help find the site that I found sometime back. Should have bookmarked it. Oh well...

And please, please do not consider my post about using 98SE as directed to ANYONE. It's just a general expression of why some still like different OS's.
There are so many OS's to choose from I congratulate everyone for experimenting with new or different operating systems.
Regards,
NL

[Faustus]

Well then he should...

Dump 98 install. Add lots of RAM. Run Virtual PC or its ilk since they are free now. Be done with old and busted OS.

[TBoneit]

According to some of the replies here anyone using old versions should stop even though they then can not run needed programs?

I have customers still running Windows 3.1, Why? They have expensive equipment that the software to run it doesn't run under any newer windows. Should they just junk big bucks equipment that works? Software can not be updated to Xp ready, manufacturer OOB or thousands of dollars for new version.

Old and busted OS? Why because it boots faster and needs less powerfull hardware? If it is so old and busted why can it coexist with an XP install and Xp will let you choose which OS to run. That doesn't sound like MS thinks it is busted.

Back on topic I have set up Win98 with 1 GB ram using the workarounds from the Microsoft website. I don't have the links anymore, sorry. I seem to recall in that case I had to pull all but 512 Mb, do the workarounds and then add the rest of the memory back in.

The problem as I understand it is memory over 512Mb which was a lot of memory back in 1998 maps into the same memory addresses that the hardware uses.

[CrayonEater]

Win98SE is an awsome OS - IMO, the best Microsoft came up with, considering everything. It's just limited, but I can do almost anything on it you can do on XP, except for some games. I say this as an unwilling XP user.

[Bjs]

Flytrap : "Memory is responsible for how many programs you can run at the same time".

No ... its not run ... you should have said "up and loaded" into memmory where they become ready for access .

-------------------

Fix ... took me less than 5 seconds in google to pull this :

You can work around this problem - essentially limiting the amount of memory
that the vcache driver can use - by adding a line or two to your
<windir>system.ini file, as follows:

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=262144

The value of MaxFileCache must be smaller than 512MB and is expressed in
KBytes. The example value shown above allows the vcache driver to use up to
256MB of memory for file caching.

Make this change to system.ini, reboot Win98, and you shoot be good to go. The
only thing you lose is the maximum file cache capacity...

This helps where 2 gig of mem is fitted ... xp is fine ... but win98 suffers blue screen , crash's , ect , ect ...

Simple .

You could also try

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=524000

Thats the max ...

And consider if onboard video chipset "reduce the BIOS setting for AGP aperture down to 64MB" ... for win98 , go down to 16mb .

------------------------

I hate ram drives ... there crap .

[fLYtRap]

I have customers still running Windows 3.1, Why? They have expensive equipment that the software to run it doesn't run under any newer windows. Should they just junk big bucks equipment that works? Software can not be updated to Xp ready, manufacturer OOB or thousands of dollars for new version.

A guy came to me with a totaly damaged laptop, everything was watter-damaged, complete junk. And he asked me if I could replace the motherboard? I said why don't you just buy a new laptop? He said that he have a program on his hard drive and doesn't have original install discs for it and the software is unavailable for download. So he is stuck with that laptop, because he uses that program on a regular basics.
Another example from me. I have a camcorder that doesn't run under XP, only under ME. I was looking for upgraded driver or software, but they don't have it, so what am I supposed to do? Buy a new camera for $800.00 I rather to use it under ME OS, make sense does it

[SCDVD]

I still need to use 98 for a work program that won't run on XP (I dual boot 98 & XP).

Windows XP has a way to run a program in Win 98 compatiblity mode. This may take care of your problem in a more fundamental way. All you need to do to set any given program to compatiblity mode for an earlier version of Windows is to right click the program Icon, Select "Properties" and click on the "Compatiblity" tab and select the version of Windows that you want that program to run under. There is a very good chance that this will take care of your problem - worth a try.

[fLYtRap]

I still need to use 98 for a work program that won't run on XP (I dual boot 98 & XP).

Windows XP has a way to run a program in Win 98 compatiblity mode. This may take care of your problem in a more fundamental way. All you need to do to set any given program to compatiblity mode for an earlier version of Windows is to right click the program Icon, Select "Properties" and click on the "Compatiblity" tab and select the version of Windows that you want that program to run under. There is a very good chance that this will take care of your problem - worth a try.

This may work for some programs, but in general it will not. I was trying to do that with my camcorder, but unfortunatelly the driver for this software can't be installed properlly under XP, so whether I choose to run this program un der ME within XP it will not run because of the driver. If I could get updated driver for this camcorder I could just run it under XP.

[Bondiablo]

Fix ... took me less than 5 seconds in google to pull this :

Congratulations. In 5 seconds you managed to find the answer I already knew. Which is why I specifically asked about 2GB because I saw some mention that the vcache change would only solve the problem up to 1GB of RAM.

[Bondiablo]

Compatiblilty mode doesn't work. It's an old program that runs in DOS mode, requires a key attached to the printer port and you have to choose a video driver from limited selection within the programs system settings. Basically a pain in the ass to get it running under the best conditions. I did try Virtual PC though and after playing around with different settings for a while finally got it working so, that might actually be a good solution. I'll have to try it for a while to be sure. I don't know, I could just get 1GB of RAM but 2GB only costs about 50% more and 2GB might be nice for 3D rendering in CAD on XP. Thanks to the people who tried to help and actually read the question.