Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mr.mark who wrote (6392)	10/22/1999 10:18:00 PM
From: Doug Coughlan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110583

I upgraded my computer this past week and it turned into quite a headache. I ordered an Intel Celeron 500 mhz processor from Buy.Com over the internet. Buy.Com is a reputable firm with minimal complaints from previous users. The processor arrived sealed just as you would expect from Intel with everything looking proper. After installing the processor in a new tower along with new ram and a new motherboard I was ready to enjoy my upgrade. The first night things performed as expected. The next day the computer crashed and from that point on I couldn't get back to the desk top. I brought the computer to a local tech shop where after some trial and error it was determined that I had received a "re marked processor." The tech guy wasn't sure what speed the processor was but it wasn't a 500 mhz. He showed me that how on close examination you could see the chip was bogus. If you look at the side of the processor with the pins, there is a square within a square located inside of the pins. The perimeter of the inside square of a bogus chip has a slightly irregular look. It also has very small marks which look as though they could be minute air bubbles. I was shown several good processors and this same perimeter was perfectly smooth with a straight edge. It was the opinion of the tech guy that in all probability Buy.Com was unaware of the problem. He also told me that the re marking of chips has become a real problem for the industry. The bottom line is just because you buy an Intel processor in a sealed box examine the chip closely with someone who will recognize a bogus chip before you install it.

To: mr.mark who wrote (6392)	10/27/1999 4:49:00 PM
From: Tom Trader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110583

Hi Mark -- my delay in responding was caused by an ironic set of circumstances. I had just about completed a detailed response to your post several days ago informing you that crashes had become infrequent and that mem turbo was working exceptionally well and as soon as I completed the response and was ready to hit the "submit" button, the darn system crashed. This is the honest truth! Anyway, these is where things stand: crashes have become few and far between though they still do occur on average once a day -- which is a huge improvement from the 4-6 crashes a day that I was experiencing. Yesterday, was a bad day -- I think that it was caused by my adjusting the settings on the program to the levels that have been suggested in the instructions. For whatever reason, those sort of low levels are not beneficial to my system. I find it necessary to maintain the threshold for running the program at close to 1/4 of my installed RAM and when it replenishes it -- the target level is about 1/3 of the total RAM. Using these levels, my system seems to fare a lot better. The fact that mem turbo has helped as much as it has suggests that I either need more RAM -- I presently have 128K -- or else, and this is more likely, the RAM that I have may be defective. This was suggested some time back by someone as being the culprit. I think that it is unlikely to be a case of needing more RAM because a friend runs just about the same programs that I do with 96K RAM and has no problems. Anyway, that is where things stand; in summary, I view mem turbo as having been a great help in stabilizing my system though it is probably a temporary fix and I will need to address the more basic problem soon. As I mentioned, it is my intention to add a third monitor and am waiting for the advent of the next version of NT which will I understand will support multiple monitors. My regards

To: mr.mark who wrote (6392)	10/27/1999 7:25:00 PM
From: c.horn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110583

Thanks mr.mark... I think you gave me the answer I was looking for in that PM... For the board: What we were discussing was the installation of two monitors.. I needed to know what hardware to get. What I know now is I need a second Vid-Card.. Or a dual-monitor Vid-Card but those are kind of pricy..I have a Masonic motherboard that has 4 slots each.. So I have plenty of room to install more stuff..<ggg> What I'm running as a Vid-Card now is an "S3 Virge (DX/GX)385 PCI" Win98 has native multimonitor support. You can install multiple single video cards and Win98 provides the multimonitor support. The trick here is to find the compatible cards. Does any one know what's compatible with the S3?? Or should I just get 2 new cards.. The S3 has been good to me.. It's great for gaming.. Thanks much; C