I have the following setup:
MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
that. Here is the story so far:
-I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where the
BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front my
my data drives).
-Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
-Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
-Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
-Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
compatible with my system.
-Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
-Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
-I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
see each drive.
-After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back and
cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
memory, life is good.
-My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
it's ok to run 8GB.
-I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything, including
the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the same
BSOD!
-(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine. I
reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my intuition,
but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I remove
the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
hub doesn't work either.
-I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
(including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now with
the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot function,
so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it works!
-I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with more
than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage device
with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had no
problems.
Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply frustrating
that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the reason
to have Vista.
I have the following setup:
MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
that. Here is the story so far:
-I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where the
BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front my
my data drives).
-Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
-Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
-Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
-Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
compatible with my system.
-Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
-Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
-I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
see each drive.
-After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back and
cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
memory, life is good.
-My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
it's ok to run 8GB.
-I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything, including
the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the same
BSOD!
-(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine. I
reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my intuition,
but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I remove
the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
hub doesn't work either.
-I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
(including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now with
the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot function,
so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it works!
-I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with more
than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage device
with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had no
problems.
Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply frustrating
that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the reason
to have Vista.
admit is. you really just wanted to boast about your computer? you don't
have any problems with vista and your system ram.
"darklex" <darklex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:407925A1-F6FA-455C-BCA1-519219C306B7@microsoft.com...
> Hi
>
> I have the following setup:
> MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
> Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
> 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
> MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
> WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
> Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
> Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
> 3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
> Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
> Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
>
> I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
> configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
> research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
> that. Here is the story so far:
>
> -I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
> boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where
> the
> BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front
> my
> my data drives).
> -Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
> -Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
> -Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
> -Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
> I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
> compatible with my system.
> -Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
> Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
> -Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
> Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
> -I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
> course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
> booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
> see each drive.
> -After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back
> and
> cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
> memory, life is good.
> -My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
> storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
> immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
> built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
> it's ok to run 8GB.
> -I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything,
> including
> the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the
> same
> BSOD!
> -(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
> under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine.
> I
> reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my
> intuition,
> but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I
> remove
> the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
> myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
> hub doesn't work either.
> -I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
> (including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now
> with
> the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot
> function,
> so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it
> works!
> -I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
> will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
> means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
>
> So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with
> more
> than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
> storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
> devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage
> device
> with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
> removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
>
> The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
> machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had
> no
> problems.
>
> Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
> 8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply
> frustrating
> that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the
> reason
> to have Vista.
>
> thx
> dl
>
Ha ha! I wish. If I'd wanted to just do that I would have put the specs in
a .sig and posted some commented about how great it was to have all the RAM.
dl
"Greg" wrote:
> admit is. you really just wanted to boast about your computer? you don't
> have any problems with vista and your system ram.
>
> "darklex" <darklex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:407925A1-F6FA-455C-BCA1-519219C306B7@microsoft.com...
> > Hi
> >
> > I have the following setup:
> > MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
> > Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
> > 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
> > MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
> > PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
> > WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
> > Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
> > Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
> > 3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
> > Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
> > Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
> >
> > I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
> > configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
> > research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
> > that. Here is the story so far:
> >
> > -I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
> > boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where
> > the
> > BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front
> > my
> > my data drives).
> > -Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
> > -Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
> > -Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
> > -Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
> > I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
> > compatible with my system.
> > -Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
> > Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
> > -Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
> > Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
> > -I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
> > course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
> > booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
> > see each drive.
> > -After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back
> > and
> > cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
> > memory, life is good.
> > -My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
> > storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
> > immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
> > built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
> > it's ok to run 8GB.
> > -I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything,
> > including
> > the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the
> > same
> > BSOD!
> > -(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
> > under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine.
> > I
> > reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my
> > intuition,
> > but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I
> > remove
> > the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
> > myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
> > hub doesn't work either.
> > -I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
> > (including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now
> > with
> > the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot
> > function,
> > so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it
> > works!
> > -I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
> > will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
> > means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
> >
> > So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with
> > more
> > than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
> > storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
> > devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage
> > device
> > with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
> > removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
> >
> > The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
> > machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had
> > no
> > problems.
> >
> > Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
> > 8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply
> > frustrating
> > that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the
> > reason
> > to have Vista.
> >
> > thx
> > dl
> >
>
>
>
"darklex" <darklex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:407925A1-F6FA-455C-BCA1-519219C306B7@microsoft.com...
> 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
That could be your problem. MSI has told me that 800 MHz RAM can only be
used up to
4GB reliably. To use more than 4GB, you might have to use 667MHz or lower
with that motherboard.
I thought one of the key selling points of a 64bit OS was that it could
address more than 4GB? I recall XP64 made a big deal of that.
I read recently that RAM manufacturers were complaining about slower than
expected Vista uptake since it led to lower RAM sales. I assumed they must
have meant upgrades >4gb, otherwise people would just continue to use XP.
dl
"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
> Windows Vista design parameters can accommodate up to 4GB RAM.
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows - Shell/User
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Â*-----
>
> "darklex" wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I have the following setup:
> MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
> Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
> 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
> MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
> WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
> Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
> Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
> 3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
> Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
> Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
>
> I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
> configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
> research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
> that. Here is the story so far:
>
> -I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
> boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where the
> BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front my
> my data drives).
> -Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
> -Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
> -Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
> -Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
> I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
> compatible with my system.
> -Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
> Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
> -Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
> Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
> -I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
> course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
> booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
> see each drive.
> -After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back and
> cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
> memory, life is good.
> -My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
> storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
> immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
> built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
> it's ok to run 8GB.
> -I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything, including
> the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the same
> BSOD!
> -(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
> under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine. I
> reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my intuition,
> but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I remove
> the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
> myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
> hub doesn't work either.
> -I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
> (including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now with
> the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot function,
> so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it works!
> -I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
> will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
> means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
>
> So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with more
> than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
> storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
> devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage device
> with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
> removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
>
> The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
> machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had no
> problems.
>
> Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
> 8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply frustrating
> that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the reason
> to have Vista.
>
> thx
> dl
>
I'll have to try that next time I have a BSOD occur.
I'll let you know how I get on.
thx
dl
"Tom Lake" wrote:
>
> "darklex" <darklex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:407925A1-F6FA-455C-BCA1-519219C306B7@microsoft.com...
>
> > 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
>
> That could be your problem. MSI has told me that 800 MHz RAM can only be
> used up to
> 4GB reliably. To use more than 4GB, you might have to use 667MHz or lower
> with that motherboard.
>
> Tom Lake
>
>
>
"darklex" <darklex@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote ...
> I thought one of the key selling points of a 64bit OS was that it could
> address more than 4GB? I recall XP64 made a big deal of that.
You're right - one of the key selling points of a 64bit OS *is* that it
could address more than 4GB.
"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:
> Windows Vista design parameters can accommodate up to 4GB RAM.
And I have to respectfully disagree with Carey here: "Windows Vista design
parameters can accommodate up to 4GB RAM" is just wrong. 64-bit operating
systems can use virtual memory addresses up to 8TB in size; but x64 XP (and
I believe Vista is the same) are designed for a maximum of 128 GB of RAM.
See (for example): http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...5/mem-mgmt.doc
However, taking advantage of the full 4GB-8GB of physical RAM requires a
co-ordinated effort by operating system, chipset and BIOS. It would be true
to say that most current chipsets and BIOSs have design parameters which can
accommodate up to 4GB RAM, max. Fortunately, the MSI PN6 is able to use 8GB
of physical RAM, altough it may only report 7GB in practice (see page 2-8 of
the motherboard's manual). So in broad terms, yes: your system should work
okay.
Why you are getting STOP errors, will depend on exactly which STOP (aka
"BSOD") you are getting. You say "Vista BSODs with the standard error,
0x00007 etc etc" - there are actually more than 50 different STOP 0xhhhhhhhh
errors! None is "standard". More details about the exact error you're seeing
would help diagnose the exact nature of the problem. Does Windows Error
Reporting send the information about your crashes to Microsoft, after you
reboot? Online Crash Analysis (OCA, see http://oca.microsoft.com) is
probably the easisest way to get a detailed analysis of the crash. Or you
could open a Service Request with Microsoft PSS.
While your troubleshooting has confirmed there's definitely some kind of
problem on your system, it is not caused by any fundamental inability of x64
Vista to handle > 2GB or 4GB of RAM (well, apart from the 929777 issue ...
and there may be similar new bugs, waiting in the wings). It could just as
easily be something that requires a BIOS update, or the like.
Hi, a friend was having a similar problem with a 4gb configuration, his
system was using 4 sticks of DDR2 8500, he fixed it by providing more voltage
to the chipset, in this case the northbridge. Try and add more voltage, just
make sure its either actively cooled or watercooled, and dont go all the way
up to its max voltage, u dont want to burn it.
"darklex" wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have the following setup:
> MSI P6N Diamond motherboard
> Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Quad core CPU
> 8GB RAM: 4 x 2GB Mushkin 800 mHz DDR2
> MSI NX8800 Ultra OC video card
> PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W PSU
> WD Raptor 74GB 10K SATA HD (used as boot drive)
> Hitachi Deskstar 1TB
> Lite-On Blu-Ray burner
> 3 x Seagate Barracuda 750GB SATA HDs
> Silverstone TJ07-S full tower case
> Dell 3007 30" monitor with USB hub
>
> I am having trouble getting Vista to run on my system with a full memory
> configuration, despite the fact that XP32 installs just fine. Having done
> research I knew that it can help to have <3gb installed, so I started with
> that. Here is the story so far:
>
> -I only have 1 x 2GB stick in the machine and unplug all drives except for
> boot and BD drive. (I do this so I don't get bizarre drive letters where the
> BD ends up being the last letter and the CompactFlash drives are in front my
> my data drives).
> -Install XP32 on the first partition of my 74gb boot, no problems
> -Install Vista Ultimate 64 on the second partition, also no problems
> -Install all drivers in XP32 and Vista. So far so good.
> -Download the plethora of updates for Vista. KB929777 is not one of them.
> I download it anyway and install it, it says that this update is not
> compatible with my system.
> -Install 8gb and test each install. XP32 only sees 3, but that's fine.
> Vista sees 8GB - yes!!!
> -Connect 1 additional HD and try both systems again. XP32 boots fine.
> Vista BSODs with the standard error, 0x00007 etc etc.
> -I remove the 6GB from my moboard, and retry. Vista runs fine. XP32 of
> course does as well. I connect the other drives in a piecemeal fashion,
> booting each OS individually after each connection and checking that I can
> see each drive.
> -After all drives are connected and I've tested them, I put the 6GB back and
> cross my fingers. I boot Vista and success!! I see the drives, I see my
> memory, life is good.
> -My intuition at this point is that if Vista with full memory sees a new
> storage device upon boot before it's had a chance to fully load itself it
> immediately vomits, while if it only has 2gb it's fine. If it has already
> built a picture of its devices from before that it doesn't do this, hence
> it's ok to run 8GB.
> -I close the case, shove it under my desk, and connect everything, including
> the USB hub in my monitor. I boot into Vista and sure enough it has the same
> BSOD!
> -(I start to get a bit annoyed at this point...) I remove the machine from
> under the desk, open it up, yank the 6GB out, reboot. Vista works fine. I
> reinstall the 6GB, figuring it was going to be as before as per my intuition,
> but it still BSODs. I disconnect the hub but it continues to fail. I remove
> the 6gb again and it's fine. I connect the hub and it's fine. I satisfy
> myself that the hub and 8gb don't like each other, and now 8gb without the
> hub doesn't work either.
> -I decide to try something different. I have all of my drives connected
> (including the hub) and reinstall Vista (with only 2GB). Of course now with
> the new drive letters this install of Vista destroys the dual boot function,
> so I lose my XP32... After Vista installs I slap in the 6GB, and it works!
> -I now have to reinstall XP32 fully with all drives connected and then I
> will (yet again!) reinstall Vista in order to get my dual boot back. That
> means I will have installed Vista at least 5 times during this process.
>
> So this is where I currently stand. I have ascertained that Vista with more
> than 2GB just can't handle a new storage device being added. Adding a
> storage device and then booting Vista somehow updates the table of storage
> devices, which means you can then add more memory. Adding a storage device
> with 8GB definitely blows up the system, from which you may recover by
> removing the memory and maybe you won't, as with the hub.
>
> The 929777 hotfix does not seem to do anything. I have not overclocked my
> machine in any way, and I've run Prime95 on it while in XP32 and have had no
> problems.
>
> Has anyone else been able to get Vista64 running stably on a machine with
> 8GB? I bought Vista in order to run more memory and it's deeply frustrating
> that I can only get it to run reliably with 2GB - it kills much of the reason
> to have Vista.
>
> thx
> dl
>
That certainly seemed to help!! I am now running only 4gb (as per prior
post that you can only run 4gb at 800, otherwise it's 667), and have upped
the voltage to 2.2v and seem to be doing ok.
Thanks to everyone for their responses, I really appreciate it!
dl
"friky19" wrote:
> Hi, a friend was having a similar problem with a 4gb configuration, his
> system was using 4 sticks of DDR2 8500, he fixed it by providing more voltage
> to the chipset, in this case the northbridge. Try and add more voltage, just
> make sure its either actively cooled or watercooled, and dont go all the way
> up to its max voltage, u dont want to burn it.
> > >
Vista Problem with 8GB 
Linear Mode
