# Memory issue?



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Ok, yesterday, using Puppy Linux, suddenly both Firefox and Thunderbird immediately crash shortly after loading. 

Booted into XP and explorer.exe wouldnt load. After three or four tries got it to load and then the Mozilla based browsers either wouldnt load or crashed. Old Opera 12 would load (low ram requirements), but crash after around 10 minutes. Even tried IE and it wouldnt load at all. Even Kmeleon which is light weight browser wouldnt load.

So been beating my head against wall getting wifi connection working with ancient laptop running Puppy off a live cd. Found out one of usb ports on laptop is faulty... Plugging the wifi adapter into a non-functional usb port.....

So my brain is pretty fuzzy from dealing with diabetes and not up to any great diagnostics. Suggestions on getting my desktop working again? Obviously has to be a hardware problem since similar symptoms with both XP and Puppy. And would seem like maybe memory stick went bad, though could be motherboard or suppose even processor. This is an old single core processor and both XP and Puppy are 32bit versions.

Also this old laptop has minimal memory but is running Puppy from live cd, in ram memory, without a hitch and I am using a modern version of Firefox. This afternoon will do install of Puppy to usb hard drive so I can get Thunderbird and all going again using laptop (its a cheapy no name laptop off ebay, missing internal harddrive and related pieces). Can install Puppy to flash but its not as stable as to usb hard drive.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Memtest86 ? Free, should tell you what you need.

http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-memory-testing-utility.htm


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Think I am through for the day anyway. I vaguely remember memory tester software on 3rd party dos diagnostic disks.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

Yep, same program. I've got a couple around here somewhere of floppies. Back around 1998 I had need of it a few times.


----------



## backwoodsman7 (Mar 22, 2007)

Good chance it's a memory problem. It's really unusual for memory to go bad unless it took some static electricity damage at some point from careless handling. Sometimes that will kill it right away, and sometimes it'll work for a while and then die. So, before touching memory, be sure you're aware of correct static precautions.

If the computer has more than one memory module, and will run with one removed, try removing one at a time to see if the problem still occurs, and narrow down which module is bad.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

It could be memory but it could also be heat, particularly this time of year. You say it's a used laptop. When I renovate a used laptop off of eBay there are two things I always do; 1) install a fresh CMOS battery, and 2) remove the processor fan & heat sink to clean dust from the heat sink. I usually find them clogged with dust. A heat sink clogged with dust can make the system run slow, throw errors (blue screens and kernel panics), and even damage components.

Reaching the fan & heat sink can be a problem. HP makes it convenient, but other laptop makers make it a nightmare.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

No, not laptop with problem, its my desktop. And the memory hasnt been touched since I added a stick when I bought the thing used few years ago. I am moving slow these days. Am using an old $10 laptop running Puppy installed on usb hard drive. Been tweaking that. Finally have Firefox and Thunderbird installed and working pretty well. So internet and email taken care of. Now I can work on diagnosing desktop and getting it functional again without any pressure. I rarely use XP but there are couple windows only programs that I need to be able to run. The desktop is more powerful computer (such as it is) than the laptop.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> No, not laptop with problem, its my desktop.


The dust bunny check will be even easier with a desktop. Pay particular attention to the processor heat sink, and sometimes the video processor heat sink. Make sure the fans are turning.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Great, now if I could only get the cobwebs out of my brain.....


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Problem solved. I finally forced myself to download memtest86 and ran it. Yeppers, errors galore. Opened up box and there were four sticks ram, two matched and said HP on them, those were originals. Pulled the other two and ran test again. No errors. So now computer runs faster/better on 1GB ram than it did on 2GB. Puppy never had problem with 1GB when I got the computer. I added extra for XP. Looked on ebay and I can get matched set used 1GB sticks under $10. Thats probably way I will go. Though also looked and can get similar spec used desktop for around $25 to $30 shipped. People are nuts giving hundreds when most just use them for basic internet. Two of my old laptops I got for around $10 each shipped. Laptops ship cheaper.... Oh memtest also mentioned this is 2 core processor in desktop. Guess I had just assumed it was one core cause it came with HP 32bit version of XPpro. So can try 64bit version Puppy on it if I get in the mood. Did force me to get one of the old laptops updated. Only reason I have the things, they were cheap and I used to take laptop to library to download stuff on their fast wifi connection. Now they are just sort of theoretical backup computers. Have powered usb hub ordered for the one I was using as one functional usb2 port doesnt really cut it in modern times.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Ya memory when you have the correct machine can be very cheap. The best thing for any computer is to go to the max the way many OS use so much of it now.
Even this Mac came with 2 gigs and one year later went to the max on RAM all the way to 8 gigs. That was and is the cheapest I have ever bumped memory up that much and for only 43 bucks with shipping. YEAH.
And this 6 year old iMac is just as fast as it was when new.
But I always put in the newest version of the OS also, want to always keep up to date on everything that way.,


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

$6.49 replacement memory on its way. But in meantime, having discovered I have two core processor, I found a copy of FatDog64, an older unofficial 64-bit version of Puppy Linux. I must downloaded it couple years ago, last time I was at library with their superfast unmetered wifi... Anyways, wanted to see if there was significant difference with 64-bit operating system so ran it as a live cd. It was indeed noticably faster. If I have to ever do a fresh reinstall of Puppy on this desktop, will go with 64-bit. Not enough difference to go through the hassle of fresh install until I need it. I tend not to upgrade unless something has screwed up and I have to reinstall anyway, or I need newer version to use some specific software or hardware that wont work on older version.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HermitJohn said:


> $6.49 replacement memory on its way. But in meantime, having discovered I have two core processor, I found a copy of FatDog64, an older unofficial 64-bit version of Puppy Linux. I must downloaded it couple years ago, last time I was at library with their superfast unmetered wifi... Anyways, wanted to see if there was significant difference with 64-bit operating system so ran it as a live cd. It was indeed noticably faster. If I have to ever do a fresh reinstall of Puppy on this desktop, will go with 64-bit. Not enough difference to go through the hassle of fresh install until I need it. I tend not to upgrade unless something has screwed up and I have to reinstall anyway, or I need newer version to use some specific software or hardware that wont work on older version.


Benchmark tests show that processor improvement in using a 64-bit operating system is modest, in the neighborhood of a 20% improvement. The real advantage to going to 64-bit is memory access. 32-bit operating systems are usually limited to 4 GB, and individual 32-bit applications are limited to less that 2GB. In a 64-bit operating system running 64-bit applications you can use as much memory as your computer will take.

The disadvantage to 64-bit is that it normally requires more memory to do the same tasks.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

All I know is that the 64 bit Puppy was noticably faster than the 32 bit Puppy. Both happily running with 1 GB RAM and neither what I would call slow. And I cant really imagine the 64 bit version running any faster as internet and email computer with more RAM. Its windows that wants crazy amounts memory and what I hear, XP is pretty tame compared to newer versions of windows that are really memory hungry. I wouldnt bother replacing that second GB RAM, except I occasionally need to use XP to run some offline software. It likes 2 GB, noticably slower with 1 GB.


----------

