Conference noted::ibmpc-95

    I suppose an electrical short in a SIMM could affect the MB
    circuitry driving the memory.
    
    Keep in mind that any files written while the bad memory was in the
    system were in memory before they hit the disk. So there's some
    possibility that your problems are with corrupted files, not a
    damaged motherboard. (I'd probably consider that a higher
    probability, but I've only got gut reactions to go on.)

    The XMS errors from HIMEM, the fact I can't run diagnostics from
    floppy, etc. are reasons why I feel my motherboard may be damaged.
    
    I'm open to anything, however.
    
    -Andy

I have heard seen but never experienced issues when the 
speed of the simms is greater or less than that required.
ie: According to PC mag [or was it PC computing??] if
the MB says "70ns" you had best use 70ns. 80ns and 60ns
could cause problems. The slower case seems obvious,
the faster case is apparently due to refresh not being
done fast enough. If it were not a PC I'd be sceptical.
:^)

    An asumption.......CMOS set corectly,ns are the same on all
    simms,original simms were put back in original slots,original
    simms were also tested okay,motherboard can handle total amount
    of memory in the configuration that was stated,memory slots are
    free of debris,dust,etc,Simms are seated correctly?
    

    > An asumption.......CMOS set corectly
    
    Yes.  Each time after changing memory configuration I go into cmos,
    view what it sees, save changes and exit.
    
    > ns are the same on all simms
    
    Yes.  And problem occurs with even one simm.
    
    > original simms were put back in original slots
    
    Yes & No.  Original simms put back into original slots, though order
    may have been reversed (we're talking two simms).  Regardless, problem
    occurs even with one.
    
    > original simms were also tested okay
    
    Yes, I covered this in my original note.  I tested the original simms
    in a system here at work.  I'm not about to put the new simms in a
    system here -- may cause problems here as well.
    
    >motherboard can handle total amount of memory in the configuration 
    >that was stated
    
    Yes.  Motherboard can handle 64mb memory.
    
    >memory slots are free of debris,dust,etc
    
    Yes.
    
    >Simms are seated correctly?
    
    Yes.
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    -Andy

As .4 implied, I would look carefully at the SIMM sockets, especially the
little wire or plastic piece that latches the SIMM in place.  Also examine the
pins on the SIMMs and on the sockets carefully to see that there is nothing
bent (in the socket) or covering or shorting pins (both).

My experience is that motherboards are VERY resiliant to, eh, misadventures :-)
Not to say that it is impossible for it to have a problem.

Burns

    Thanks for the feedback.  Actually, I have done quite alot of checking
    out the simms and simm sockets.  I have found nothing that, visually,
    appears out of the norm.  
    
    I am primarily concerned with the possibility that the memory I
    purchased may be responsible for the problems I am now dealing
    with.  I appreciate the suggestions -- it helps to review what has
    been done to ensure I have not overlooked anything.
    
    Thanks again,
    
    -Andy

    I doubt that the new memory caused the problem. I suspect a connection
    loosened up somewhere while you had the box open. I'd check and reseat
    everything including the cables and the CPU.
    
    /Rich

    re: .0
    
    Just on a lark:  check the memory wait state in the memory CMOS
    settings.  For fun, set it to the maximum wait state setting (I think
    it is "2 WS" on my 486).  See if the problem persists.
    
    -- Russ

    Well, I have since found that the diagnostics run (and pass) if I first
    boot to the command prompt from my hard drive, then run the diagnostic
    from floppy.  So it does not appear to have been a hardware failure
    after all.
    
    Of course, it did trash my Windows 95 software, though... <sign>
    
    -Andy

    Well, the saga continues.  I checked my system Sunday to look for new
    email and found it locked up solid.  Tried to reboot and started
    getting the now infamous "Drivespace Alarm #16" error.  Rebooted and
    tried to come up in Safe Mode and started getting the the same
    "HIMEM.SYS has detected unreliable XMS memory" error again.
    
    I rebooted again, ran QAPlus/Pro and went through 3+ rounds of testing
    memory -- no errors.  Rebooted and got the same thing.
    
    I have Win95 on my Drive D as well (different disk).  Tried booting 
    this and got the same XMS errors.  So, I'm getting really baffled...
    
    -Andy