Major Win2k problems! !!EVERYONE PLEASE READ THIS!!

[Silent-IQ 0]

Ok, here is my situation:

 

Me and my buddy are trying to build a computer and install win2k on it, but there is no way we can get it to work.

 

Computer specs are:

 

FCPGA Pentium 3 600Mhz Coppermine 133Mhz bus

Microstar 6905 FCPGA converter board

Microstar 6199 mobo (newest version of bios)

256Mb PC133 (this is not noname mem)

ATI 3D charger 8Mb AGP

Intel Ether Express PRO 10/100Mbit

SB PCI128

 

We tested the system with several cpus, one FCPGA 600 and 667 Mhz coppermine and one Slot1 600 Mhz coppermine. All 3 cpus are running on 133Mhz bus. We got problems with NT 4 and Win2k. Where should i start, NT4 want start att all after installation, it crashes at the blue screen startup with a memory dump, win2k is even worse, it randomly crashes, sometimes at the stratup, sometimes when we try to log in, and if it doesn crash there, we try to see how stable it is by running 20 winamps at the same time...well after 30 sec we get a bluescreen and the computer restarts, we cant see what is says on the bluescreen. We get random crashes even at installation of win2k with NTFS PARTIOTION errors and random lockups.

We tested everything, and everything, and there is no way we can get the thing working, we think that there is a major bug within the P3 coppermines, but we dont know how many more ppl have the same problems as we have here.

 

Do you have the same problem or do you know the solution to this major ****up?

[Bursar 0]

You also don't mention what RAM you have. I assume that the DIMMS are capable of running at 133MHz.

 

If not, get some 133MHz RAM and try it again.

 

I also agree with the above statement. Running 20 copies of WinAmp is not a very good way to test system stability.

 

Chances are that it would crash just about any system.

 

Try doing things one at a time. If you make a hwole load of changes, you have no idea which change had which effect.

[euankirkhope 0]

Are you stupid or what?

 

If the system is unstable running 20 winamps is the most non-sensical, non-logical lame-ass idea I have ever heard off. It comes right next to "the cup holder had broken".

 

You are taking the piss aren't you?

 

Sorry about that but it has be said.

 

Logical system trobleshooting goes like this.

 

remove unecessary devices. IE sound card. Net card

 

turn off bios enhancements: AGP 2x, UDMA, bios shadowing or anything that may serve to "enhance system performance"

 

load up in safe mode.

 

read the event log to see if/what's happening

 

Get the system running with minimal spec.

 

Install drivers or check to see whether existing drivers have enabled the functionality that you are tring to enable. Ie bus master drivers for UDMA 33/66 (66 is often a problem area, and in winnt udma must be disabled until the drivers have been installed manually after installing the OS. If not the drive will be corrupt in the first boot). This is most likely your problem area.

 

After stability is established add one device at a time to retain some degree of control, and fallback if something nasty happens.

[SHS 0]

To me it sound memory timeing

try this 3-3-3 must of the time you can go 3-2-3

[Silent-IQ 0]

For god sake guys,

first, i am not stupid.

second, i am working with this **** for 8 years now and build about 3 computers/day

got that?

We tested every posible configuration with bios settings and win2k setting and there is nothing that can make the system stable, and testing with 20 winamps is maybe not a very good idea but it works for the most of time, and the problems is not only the system stability but the installation too.

We cant even install win2k on the computer, it locks its self under ´the fisrt part of the installation. Now thats not normal.

 

Got anything else to say?

 

P.S and as i already told you, we tryed every posible configuration with bios settings and win2k settings and still no proggress. We even tested with several other computers with same hardware, no sollution.

What the hell is wrong than? Could say Hardware failure but than all 10 mobos are ****ed or all 10 cpus...that cant be the case..there must be a sollution or there is a failure in production.

[Bursar 0]

For having been doing this kind of thing for 8 years, you don't seem to have grapsed many of the basics.

 

If you ask for help because you have hardware problems, you need to list your entire system spec.

 

There have been some good suggestions so far, with DMA transfer rates and memory timing.

 

So rather than just whining about how good you think are at this stuff, start trying some of the suggestions and post the results.

 

People are going to need some feedback in order to try to help you narrow the problem down.

 

Remember that the people here are helping you because they want to. Not because it's their jobs or they're getting paid for it.

 

If you insult people, you are likely to be met with a resounding wall of silence next time you need help.

 

[This message has been edited by Bursar (edited 02 June 2000).]

[Alex_w 0]

I have noticed faulty memory can be a big issue with windows 2000, probably due largely to the fact it uses a lot of ram, running windows 95/98 on my computer with some slightly faulty ram, it really was not obvious that the ram was faulty you just expect bugs and crashing with those, but with windows 2000 setup ran wierdly to say the least and when it was installed regular blue screens kept happening, i had been using win 98 fine on 64mb of ram but added an extra 64 to upgrade to windwos 2000 with good performance, i found out a lot later that it was the ram that was bad, really win 98 didnt particularly crash much with the bad ram but windows 2000 did at least every couple of hours, id say that ram is good thing to check carefully.

[euankirkhope 0]

Lots of options:

 

Does the convertor introduce timing errors in any way what so ever? >> underclock cpu to something silly and see.

 

PC133 memory is only a rough boundary as far as some specifications can go (it ait't IEEE like is it!) So reduce to the system bus speed to check whether the memory is on the wrong side of the Mobos favoured dram latency.

 

I can't say this enough. Always install NT4 with udma disabled or the HD will be corrupt on the first boot. For win2k it also happens but only when the controller is unknown (new chipset) or the bios mistakes udma 33 for 66 (which award bios often suffer from).

 

You have the latest bios. Is is for the correct revision and Mobo type there are 2, the standard 6199 and the 6199VA. Which do you have?, and is the right bios. Its an easy mistake the manufacturer, or you can make.

 

Does the latest bios revision add routines solely designed to prevent confilcts/errors on specific hardware combinations that you do not have? Does this introduce a negative imapact to you system? Thus, so you need the latest bios?

 

 

Do you have the latest via patches? www.viatech.com/drivers

no via board works without them (and often afterwards as well!)

 

Disable unnecessary devices until the base system is stable. Thus disable/remove Lan and Sound.

 

Don't install apps like winamp.

 

Beos is cool

 

USB with MS OS's is and always will be a no no situation. Use a PS2/serial mouse keyboard for now until the system is stable/or you sell it.

 

ACPI is crap and always will be (which is why I have a serial I/O card installed) so install win2k in standard PC mode for ultra safety. Thats one bug fix MS doesn't need a patch for.

 

I wrote lots more but win2k crashed (third time today) due to the fast fat system driver, can't say why.

 

disable Bios speed enhancements, and set "reset configuration" to enabled. to refresh the ESCD and pnp configuration tables. This includes AGP, UDMA, Caches, Shadowing, agp aperture to min (disables agp system enhancements), set timing options to slow. But leave cpu caches as we want the PC to boot sometinme this side of the millenium.

 

More may come.

[CUViper 0]

well said bursar...

 

We've had people like you before, Silent-IQ. If you're so damn smart, then what do you need our help for? And if you're going to treat us like we are somehow responsible for giving you the answer, then go elsewhere.

 

SHS said check the memory timings, and I agree. I had some problems similar to yours, and when I set the memory timings to 3-3-3, all the problems disappeared. If you've already tried this, just say so.... no need to be an ass about it. You say you have tried 'everything', but if that is the case, what the hell do you expect us to do?

 

There is no "major bug" in the coppermines.... I am running one fine right now, and I'm sure others here are too.

[ledzeppel 0]

yeah, I have a solution for ya!

 

GO GET AN INTEL CHIPSET! And you know what, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT WORKS EVERY TIME! HA!

 

 

hehehe...sorry

[Greggy 0]

Verify your CPU(s), RAM and display card(s) etc by installing them on a PC that you KNOW is good (perhaps one of your friends has a PC you could borrow) and make sure they run perfectly.

 

From what you guys have said I'd have a guess that its the motherboard. I don't like VIA boards.... never did..... never will.

 

CuMine 550E @ 733/133, Abit BF6, 256Mb PC133, CL GeForce SDR (5.22 Det's), WD 13Gb IDE, Intel PRO 100 NIC, Win 2000 Pro etc

[Damien 0]

You really shouldn't have any problems with a Via motherboard, as long as it's set up correctly. I've used several with win 2K, no problems at all once everything is configured.

 

You should try:

 

1. Completly reformatting the hard drive.

 

2. Installing the bare minimum to get your computer to boot with the minimum set of vital features i.e drive controller, graphics card, memory, cd rom and floppy.

 

3. Go into your bios and load up the defaults - if there's an option to load the fail-safe settings then definately try these.

 

4. Try downclocking your memory speed to 100mhz or even 66 - this should show you whether or not this is a memory timing issue, also set all memory settings to their most conservative values.

 

5. If you have different components to hand i.e graphics card, memory chip - even another mother board - try these instead - you could have a faulty motherboard - unlikely but possible.

 

6. If you still have no joy, try booting in safe mode (F8 as Windows 2000 starts up)

 

7. If you want to test system stability, I'd suggest running something resource intensive such as Quake 3 for a few hours to see if anything locks up.

 

8. As a last resort try significantly underclocking your processor - this will at least show you whether or not it's a heat issue.

[sapiens74 0]

Just wanna respond to the gentleman that referred you to the intel based mobo solution. Which intel platform do you refer to....the one that was recalled or the one that uses RDRAM....the only 2 INTEL based platforms Aval to run at 133. Not much of a choice now is it

 

[This message has been edited by sapiens26 (edited 02 June 2000).]

[BladeRunner 0]

Well although Intel have issued a full recall on the 820/DIMM combo, many MB manufacturers say it isn't a serious issue.

Asus & Gigabyte for example say that after many tests the problem appeared in very few of their MB's.

Although the boards are no longer 'officially' available the issue of course has been blown out of all proportion.

And anyway, all 820/DIMM owners are getting a free upgrade to 820/RamBus.

Then we have the 815 on the horizon, it might be a small set-back, but not a major one.

The Intel based MB's are still going to be the more stable/easy to set-up.

I've only ever owned one non-Intel chipset (An old ALI I believe) and never again.

[Damien 0]

Tried to delete multiple posts - unfortunately I can't apparently!

 

[This message has been edited by Damien (edited 03 June 2000).]

[Damien 0]

I'm not so sure, if you read the latest reviews on the Abit KA7, I think you'll find that it's the easiest Athlon motherboard to set up - simply a matter of plugging in the processor etc. and going on your way. The Athlon has needed a good stable platform for a long time, and it seems to me that the Via KX133 chipset has at last provided this.

 

You may argue about this, but I have an Abit KA7, which is running very happily in my system - what's even better is the fact that my Athlon 800 knocks the socks of Intel Pentiums running at the same speed.

 

Intel needs some serious competition. At last, I think it finally has it.

[euankirkhope 0]

hey! who are these people copying my posts From now on I'm putting a copyright symbol in my signiture. For now © will do until I can figure out the UBB, or Html code.

 

Intel chipsets are just as Kack as other manufactures. Its just that due to the power and monopoly the bugs have their workarounds hardwired into microsoft OS's. It ain't "wintel" for no reason.

 

Just look at the Bugfix options that linux make availabe for both CPU and Chipsets for the kernel compililation. Some nasty bugs there.

 

Look at what I squeeze into my via mobo, and most of it works most of the time:

 

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

System Spec:

FIC VA-503+ 1.1b bios JE438

CPU Current Limiter Disabled

AMD K6-2 550 (300 when I talk to FIC tech support)

128Mb SSi PC100

STB Velocity 4400 16Mb PAL TV-Out

Hauppauge Wintv

Realtek 8029 LAN

Creative ES1371 (PCI64v)

56.6K (AkA 44k) ISA Modem

Creative 48mx CDROM

Memorex TriMaxx200(DVD/CDR/CDRW, 6,4,24)

Maxtor 91301U3 13Gb

LS120

and com and lpt i/o conflict error during bios startup.

Hardware fault caused by win2k beta3 and dodgy bios, now irrepairable.

 

All info © me unless not so.

[tylau 0]

missing a bit majority..

[sapiens74 0]

You know intel wouldn't have recalled the boards if it wasnt an issue. Companies like Intel don't do that until its the last resort. Times are changing get with the program. Never let personal bias get in way of a sound decision. What is the best most stable platform in the market for your needs. More and more people agree the Athlon everyday. I installed Win2000 without any problems at all with a KA7 and Athlon 750. Runs faster and more stable then the majority of Intel based systems. Ask 3fdx if 2 years ago they'd be the 3rd best video card maker. Things change in the computer industry like no other. It's time for Intel to start setting the standard again instead of trying to keep up with it. I wouldnt buy and Intel based solution...no because of biased toward AMD or Via but because its simply no the best offered. Thats my 2 cents but when Intel makes the best overall platform again I'll support them like i always have and Buy into...till then well they'd have to impress me with something other then Rdram

 

Thats my 2 cents worth now back to EVERQUEST

[ledzeppel 0]

Partially agree...but Intel STILL makes the best chipset. i440BX. PERIOD. This should be the end of the thread. I'm blown-out on this issue.

[ledzeppel 0]

i440BX@133...go read tom's or anand's sites about this. It is the best. Better, faster than i840 RDRAM setups. I know cuz I use it everyday. And if you people want to justify those VIA systems vs the BIG DOG BX, you'll get murdered in benchmarks.

[Greggy 0]

I couldn't agree more...

 

My Abit BF6 (440BX) even runs 150MHz FSB (CuMine 550E @ 825/150) with no problems...

 

I choose to leave it at 133MHz FSB (733/133) as I am 3D card limited at 1024x768x32 anyway and I can leave the case on without temps getting too high.

 

I also have many friends using Intel BX motheboards which are permanently running 133FSB or higher (including AOpen AX6BC's, Abit BX6r2's, Abit BE6-2's ASUS P3B-F's etc).

 

To me right now, ATA66 and 4x AGP are romance items that stand in the shadow of the pure grunt of the Intel BX's memory performance.

 

When VIA (or whoever) bring out a better board I'll switch, but for now its Intel 440BX all the way.

[sapiens74 0]

If it takes overclocking an older chipset without sych features as AGP 4x, Pc133 support or ATA 66 support to meet current standards then i don't want it. The chances of everyone hitting those FSB to even get that kinda performance are slim

[ledzeppel 0]

Not true, my friend...if you got a newer Asus (CUBX) or Abit (BE6II) or Aopen motherboard, they'll have the ATA66 onboard, you won't get AGP 4x, but does it really matter? NO! With todays video cards, they have at least 32 meg on-board. Plus, with those newer motherboards they have a PCI divider of 4 so you can run those PCI devices at 33 MHz with a 133 MHz FSB. THE ONLY thing to worry about is the AGP bus, it's limited to 2/3 or 89 MHz, but with today's video cards, manufactures are building them much better and solid and can handle the higher AGP bus. Nvidia people have nothing to worry about.