CF-29 Everyone told me not to do it!

:confused2: Are my posts making it all the way to Ireland? Perhaps I need to increase the power of my Broadband Internet connection... :laugh:

 

You must upgrade to 4G!!! LOL

 

I am sorry. :cry: . Your posts do.

I read this thread on me Iphone while watting for my brother to come out of the doctors.

I have done a test on my CF-29 with linux and it has give me the address of the ram and they are coming from the first slot of (onboard) ram up to 128MB (Arial said the the graphics can only support 129MB of ram in his first POST) is use for the graphices and the 2GB we add is been used for the system (OS)

 

Nah, just kidding!

The older Mk1-3 employs the 855GM chipset, which despite supporting 2GB of DDR1, appears limited to 64MB for UMA for graphics. So, I'm waiting on someone with an older CF-29 to "jump off the cliff" with me!

 

Aha!! So I see my quote made it to Atlanta as well

Azrial, keep up with the fiddling. It will help someone somehow.

Ron in SG

 

Az-

First off -who told you NOT to do it? *LOOKS AROUND THE FORUM*

We told you the same thing we always do when someone asks this question - we don't know for sure, this is what the Mfr says, we wouldn't go & BUY a larger RAM module than they call for cuz, well.... they DESIGNED IT & they generally know. If you have one lying around, go ahead & TRY IT.

That said... good discovery! I do recommend running it AT LEAST 12 hours burn in before calling a RAM module GOOD. This allows for the processor/RAM to get nice & warm, and it also gives interleave & CAS Latency issues a chance to manifest.

Remember that you may not get an accurate test anyways, as this machine uses shared RAM for video which you CANNOT TURN OFF. This tends to interfere with programs like MemTest sometimes.

Personally, I'd have misgivings about using ANY Memory configuration where BIOS and OS do NOT accurately report the amount of actual physical RAM; I've NEVER heard of a BIOS TURNING OFF a portion of RAM in a case like this, and if your OS doesn't KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH RAM it has to work in, then it doesn't know where to place the registers in memory space to differentiate between RAM addresses and HDD addresses. Remember, to the CPU it's ALL part of the same MAP.

mnem
Geek spoken here.

 

This thread kind of reminds me of the guy who actually invented Dynamite BEFORE Alfred Nobel did....

You just never knew his name because he was working in his shop... And when he found the right formula...

He blew himself up...

I agree with Mnem's recommendations. I recall people stuffing 512MB sticks of RAM into CF-28s even though Panny said they could only add 256MB.... It works but I've also had people who suddenly started getting BSODs a few months after adding the stick... They put in 256MB and everything was fine.

With that said.... I just bought two 2GB sticks of Crucial and intend on playing around with them.... Hopefully I won't blow myself up like Dwayne Regroblecky... The REAL inventor of dynamite.

 

Hey, I named no names...

Oh, I understand, but as a long time connoisseur of YesterTech, I know something about this. Years ago when I managed to bump the RAM on my NCR Globalist 486 over the published specs I was so excited that I called NCR and got through for some crazy reason to one of the Engineers that designed it. He told me that the reason that they never published that the NCR would work with 128MB of RAM was that no one knew when the PC was introduced as the larger memory chips I was using had not been built at the time, and no one needed such a huge amount of RAM for Win95!

He also said that there was no percentage in testing and certifying this elderly product for the increased RAM as they were in the business to sell new machines, not to help update old ones.

It was a simple lesson perhaps, but then again I am a simple guy and it stuck with me. Things change in unexpected ways in electronics. After all Bill Gates said that we would never have a use for more then 640K in a PC!

The CF29 Mk4 was introduced in 2005, the Mk5 was April 2006, I think. The oldest reference I could find to the 2GB DDR2 SODIMM was also April 2006, perhaps this is the only reason that Panasonic did not certify it as capable of running it. But of course, I don't know, this is just an attempt to see into the murky past with the aid of a pair of strong Beer Goggles.

Yes, I had over a week on mine, when I tore it down for a major (to me) upgrade.

I have run both MemTest86+ and the Native Windows7 RAM test a dozen times. So far, so good, and I know that it could fail at any time! However, the same could be said for any stick of RAM.

Here is where I posted a picture of my notebook to show memory usage. As you can see, the OS sees it all, it only uses 2GB.

Plus the 128MB for video that seems the max utilized by UMA. I have not figured out if this is the design max of the Graphics Processor, or is in the BIOS? I suspect the former.

The BIOs only reports 2GB of RAM of the 2.25 in the computer. But perhaps that is a limitation of the BIOs program?

 

Yeah, I couldn't help but think it was somehow funny, to someone...

 

Pssst - Az -

When I said run it at least 12 hours, I meant run MemTest at least 12 hours...

mnem
Burn, baby burn...

 

Well, I did run it over night until after Breakfast, and desert, with my girlfriend... I found no errors when I got around to checking.

 

Oh heck.... I thought he meant with it in a backpack while on the treadmill or out running.... Mnem... Thanks for clarifying.... Clear as mother's milk now!

Azrial... I can't give you any more rep as I've already maxed out for you! Great Job!

j/k

 

Did I just get B!tch-slapped by a pig with Bob Barker's teeth?

mnem
Well, dip me in salsa & call me a Burrito...

 

Jesus... Yet another moment when a J&C nearly came out my nose.

Mnem... You really should do stand-up! You could have the stage name of "Bobby Byte" or something like that... But you are also wicked smart! It's a good thing your folks invested early for those corks in your ears!

< Carol & Meryl will now show you what is behind Door #2 !!! >

 

Now now, enough with the alcohol abuse. We don't want Jack getting bruised; might have to call the Walker Brothers to tune you up...

mnem
Yay! I get to play PLINKO!!!

 

Ok, Ok, Ok, listen! I was perusing a 1994 Intel GMA900 Graphics Processor Sales Brief and noticed that it is capable of supporting "224MB maximum video memory." That would make use of all the memory in the machine.

So, I looked at the GMA900 Video White Paper at chapter 2.52 it reaffirmed that, stating that Intel Dynamic Video Memory Technology 3.0 (DVMT3.0) was used to control how much system memory was allocated to video, including options to allow "fixed" or "DVMT" mode. I assume that these options are done in the BIO's before it is complied? Or is it strictly a function of the driver?

Here is what I was reading:

 

Its hard to find, but under W7 you look here:

Start/All programs/Accessories/system tools/system information/Components/Display

Look for Adapter Ram size

Alex

 

Az -

That there document... it's like someone tried to make 2 copies from 1 and they both got smushed together into 1 document. It makes my brain hurt to try and read it!

Please post a single copy of the article such that we can read without mental anguish...

mnem
Explode my brain, Explode he will my brain, he will...

 

Yeah, noticed when I posted, I did not! Sorry I am, in Yoda talk.

I was rooting around for the " Intel® 915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Intel® Dynamic Video Memory Technology (DVMT) 3.0 White Paper" referenced at the bottom of the article when I found that on-line text version of the article I only have in a graphically saved .pdf.

I got it off a hardware site in Turkey, if you like I will be happy to send you the two .PDF papers via email.

 

Az -

Naaahhh... I was suggesting that you edit your post with a single copy of that text so that people reading it later wouldn't get a headache from it.

As I recall, it was the DVMTechnology that was at the root of Vista's incompatibility with the Aero Interface; Intel made it so the hardware managed the memory in question based on CPU usage, yet the OS DEMANDS FULL CONTROL through the Hardware Abstraction Layer.

This was at the heart of the infamous 915 Chipset Limitation that had EVERYONE up in arms; Mfrs were selling PCs as "Vista-Ready" when in fact the 915 Chipset video is incompatible on a hardware level with Longhorn. (The core OS process under Vista & 7)

Intel and Microsoft's argument that you CAN run Vista (and Win7) on the 915 chipset in CLASSIC MODE (Turn off the Aero interface - essentially Windows XP) didn't carry much water with consumers.

It was only the fact that the legislative process in this country is so rabidly pro-corporation since the Bush administration that has prevented a HUGE class-action lawsuit. The rest of the world has no such reservations; the EU and a dozen other nations have done so and levied stiff fines against both for what they saw as collusion and market-fixing.

Later versions of the 9xx chipset have the hardware such that a HAL-compliant OS can turn this alleged FEATURE off.

I find it hard to believe Intel didn't know about the issue while flooding the market with 915 chipset boards for almost 4 years JUST BEFORE the release of Vista; when Longhorn was in development since 2001, and the core OS had been defined as early as 2003.

mnem<~~~ Allergic to Bull5h!t ~~~<<<

 

My last post was supposed to give the link to the hardware site in Turkey, instead it may read like I was trying to come off like a jerk to someone that was trying to help me and that was certainly not my intent!

The link is in the passage below, as I do not see to be able to get it to cut and paste correctly!

FOR any interested:

 

So what our intrepid piglet was trying to say is:

Intel 915G/GV/910GL Specifications
Third-generation Graphics Core
• 256-bit graphics core
• 8/16/32 bpp
• Up to 8.5 GB/sec memory bandwidth
• 1.3 GP/sec and 1.3 GT/sec fill rate
• 224MB maximum video memory
• 2048x1536 at 85 Hz maximum resolution
• Dynamic Display Modes for flat-panel and wide-screen support
• Operating systems supported: Microsoft Windows* XP,
Windows 2000, Linux-compatible (Xfree86 source available)
High-performance 3D
• Up to 4 pixels per clock rendering
• Microsoft DirectX* 9 Hardware Acceleration Features:
• Pixel Shader 2.0
• Volumetric Textures
• Shadow Maps
• Slope Scale Depth Bias
• Two-Sided Stencil
• Microsoft DirectX* 9 Vertex Shader 2.0 and Transform and
Lighting supported in software through highly optimized
Processor Specific Geometry Pipeline (PSGP)
• DirectX Texture Decompression
• OpenGL* 1.4 support
Advanced Display Technology
• 400 MHz DAC frequency for up to 2048x1526 resolution
for both analog and digital displays
• Two Serial Digital Video Out (SDVO) ports for flat-panel
monitors and/or TV-out support via Advanced Digital
Display 2 (ADD2) cards
• Multiple display types (LVDS, DVI-I, DVI-D, HDTV, TV-out,
CRT) for dual monitor capabilities
• Hardware motion compensation support for DVD playback
• HDTV 720p and 1080i display resolution support
• 16x9 Aspect Ratio for wide screen displays
High Quality Media Support
• Up and Down Scaling of Video Content
• High Definition Content Decode
• 5x3 Overlay Filtering
• Hardware Motion Compensation support for DVD playback

Intel® Dynamic Video Memory Technology 3.0
Intel GMA 900 utilizes a shared memory architecture – system memory is used for both graphics
and system usages. Instead of using dedicated local memory, like the majority of discrete cards
today, a portion of the system memory is allocated for video memory. Intel Dynamic Video
Memory Technology 3.0 (DVMT 3.0) allows additional memory to be allocated for graphics
usage based on application need. Once the application is closed, the memory that was allocated
for graphics usage is then released and made available for system use. Dynamically allocating
memory for graphics use ensures a sold balance between system and graphics performance.
DVMT 3.0 allows up to 224 MB of system memory to be either shared amongst the OS,
applications and graphics display or solely dedicated to graphics. Also included in the
enhancements are options to select “Fixed” mode, “DVMT” mode or “Fixed + DVMT” mode,
dependent upon the total graphics memory configuration. “Fixed” mode is non-contiguous pagelocked
memory allocated during driver initialization to provide a static amount of memory.
“DVMT” mode is memory that is dynamically allocated based on memory requests made by
application and are release back to the system once the requesting application has been
terminated. “Fixed + DVMT” mode, allows the combination of both “Fixed” and “DVMT” type
driver allocation methods, used to guarantee a minimum amount of memory but give the
flexibility of “DVMT” allocation scheme and performance enhancement. These mode options
will ensure that a certain minimum amount of memory will always be dedicated to graphics. Also
included is the option to select “Maximum DVMT” mode which allows up to 224 MB of memory
to be allocated for graphics. Below is a list of the different memory configurations that are
available. For more detailed information on DVMT 3.0, please refer to the Intel®
915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Intel® Dynamic Video Memory Technology (DVMT) 3.0 White
Paper.



NOTES:
1. When the “Maximum DVMT” option is selected for System Memory less than or equal to 511 MB, the
Maximum Graphics Memory reported will be 160 MB.
2. When the “Maximum DVMT” option is selected for System Memory greater than or equal to 512 MB, the
Maximum Graphics Memory reported will be 224 MB


mnem
*Kix ornery foreign website in the 'nads*

 

Boy that is drier than a California forest in August, Mnem please don't breathe on it......

 

Well... I tried the 2GB stick into an MK4 DDR2 machine... I was able to boot into the BIOS and it only showed 1.5GB RAM... So I didn't even try to boot it... If the BIOS doesn't see it.... I don't want to go there.

Mnem... You are without a doubt one of the smartest dudes on the Internet... Let alone here.... But "Our intrepid piglet" is pretty damn smart too! (And has a lot of cool stuff!) I've had many conversations with him over the past few weeks... He's been around, you know? (Pacino Line) He's pretty dang smart too. He just doesn't have the dwagon breath!

But I love the way he says that, "He doesn't know enough about it to NOT do it" (Then manages to spit out all the specs about a given chipset.) Yeah... Right.... Doesn't know....

I think this is a thread of Diamond Knowledge meets Brass Balls.

Maybe Gold Balls... Brass makes your skin turns green!

 

Rick

Report back on on-board ram size on the mk-4's that you tried


Alex

 

I didn't try to boot... But it only showed 1.5GB in the BIOS... .I really didn't want to go further if the BIOS didn't see it. I'll try booting one tomorrow though.... I'm not hopeful. I never thought I would want an MK4/5 with 256 onboard RAM... I usually steer clear of those.

But I would like to see Azrial's RAM in action over a 6 month period... I knew people who upped the CF-28 and it became unstable over time... Maybe W7 and the CF-29 is different.

 

Thanks for the kind words, but seriously... Guys do not listen to Rick! I assure you I am every bit as dumb as I claim to be!

Really, even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then!

I did find the dusty old Intel® 915G/GV/910GL Express Chipset Intel® Dynamic Video Memory Technology (DVMT) 3.0 White Paper and hope it will tell me how the chipset is instructed how much RAM it may use for video and if this is something that we can change. I would be happy to share this exciting tome if there are any that would like to help me GROK this!

As I have suggested, the real Red Badge of Courage goes to the person that figures out which trace to cut to disable 256MB of on-board system RAM so that others with 512MB of on-board video memory may benefit from this... after waiting 6 months of course to see if I die a horrible, yet well deserved, death when mine goes up in a ball of out-of-spec fire!

 

Heh -

Like Az, I know just enough to know how little I really know; but like anything; if you try it and it WORKS, then who cares?

I'd happily run that ToughBook with every byte of RAM I could stick in it just to see if it blarfed; though I prolly wouldn't SELL it to someone else that way unless I'd used it trouble-free for years.

Wahey!

mnem
I blame the teeth.

 

If someone has a layout diagram from the mainboard, I would try to unsoldering R73, which is the line from the 13.bit of the addressbus from the internal RAM. But I had not found R73 on the board with my eyes....

 

I recieved the 2gb ram today
As expected as my cf-29 has 512mb of on-board ram it will not work
I updated the cf-29 FAQ to reflect the confirmed results



Alex

 

This is a nice piece of work! Now, I wonder if anyone will have the nerve to try it! I admit I am glad that I did not have to do it this way!

Wow sorry to hear that it did not work for you. We are in full agreement that the 256MB boards are the critical requirement in this.

I guess that the jury is still out on the Mk1-3. One additional hitch may be in how the graphic controllers, Intel 855GM (Mks1-3) vs Intel 915GMS (Mks 4&5) maps UAM memory. I am still on my quest to figure out how that is controlled.

Wow, I made the FAQ! And my Dad said I would never amount to anything!

 

I can confirm that the MK5 with 256 Mb wil take the crucial 2GB

Derick

 

I just received my 2gb crucial memory (Amazon, $42.77). It seems to work fine in my mk4 256mb unit CF-29L3LGZBM

 

If this 2GB RAM mod works ONLY for CF-29 MK4/MK5 with motherboards having only 256MB on-board RAM, then it is impossible to have a CF-29 MK4/MK5 with touchscreen and 2GB RAM mod, as all the touchscreen equipped CF-29 MK4/MK5 had 512MB on-board RAM...oh well

 

I swept a touchscreen from a MK3, so now i have 2 frankenstein toughbooks

 

Unless you are brave/insane enough to disable half your Momboard mounted RAM... No one has been so far and I can't, I have a CF-29N with a factory 256MB RAM board.

Otherwise, I assure you that I fully qualify...

 

I did the touchscreen transplant too. Was surprisingly easy. I was just going to swap the whole mk3 display, but it is noticeably dimmer. So I just swapped the front bezels which included the touchscreen. Now I have a bright touchscreen!

 

Mine was bright enough, so it was easy

 

It'd be great if someone verified the quirks on the Intel 855GM equipped CF-29 MK1-3, and whether this 2GB mod could ever work on them, as other Toughbooks (such as the CF-34MK7) used that chipset too

 

I am sure that someone will come along sooner or later with a Mk1-3 that wants to test the capability of their machine. Until then I am encouraged to see the successes posted by several of our members above.

For the programmer types that might be interested:

0xFEB00000-0xFEB7FFFF Mobile Intel(R) 915GM/GMS,910GML Express Chipset Family OK
0xB4000000-0xB4003FFF Marvell Yukon 88E8053 PCI-E Gigabit Ethernet Controller OK
0xB4000000-0xB4003FFF Intel(R) 82801FB/FBM PCI Express Root Port - 2660 OK
0x80000000-0xFEBFFFFF PCI bus OK
0xFED40000-0xFED44FFF PCI bus OK
0xFED40000-0xFED44FFF Motherboard resources OK
0xB8000000-0xB800FFFF Atheros AR5006X Wireless Network Adapter OK
0xB8000000-0xB800FFFF Intel(R) 82801 PCI Bridge - 2448 OK
0xE0000000-0xEFFFFFFF Motherboard resources OK
0xF0000000-0xF0003FFF Motherboard resources OK
0xF0004000-0xF0004FFF Motherboard resources OK
0xF0005000-0xF0005FFF Motherboard resources OK
0xF0008000-0xF000BFFF Motherboard resources OK
0xFED20000-0xFED3FFFF Motherboard resources OK
0xFED45000-0xFED8FFFF Motherboard resources OK
0xB0040000-0xB00403FF Intel(R) 82801FB/FBM USB2 Enhanced Host Controller - 265C OK
0xD0000000-0xD3FFFFFF Intel(R) 82801FB/FBM PCI Express Root Port - 2660 OK
0xFF000000-0xFFFFFFFF Intel(R) 82802 Firmware Hub Device OK
0xB0080000-0xB00FFFFF Mobile Intel(R) 915GM/GMS,910GML Express Chipset Family OK
0xC0000000-0xCFFFFFFF Mobile Intel(R) 915GM/GMS,910GML Express Chipset Family OK
0xB0000000-0xB003FFFF Mobile Intel(R) 915GM/GMS,910GML Express Chipset Family OK
0xB8010000-0xB8010FFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB80FF000-0xB80FFFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB80FE000-0xB80FEFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xFEBFF000-0xFEBFFFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB8011000-0xB8011FFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB80FD000-0xB80FDFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB80FC000-0xB80FCFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xFEBFE000-0xFEBFEFFF Ricoh R/RL/5C476(II) or Compatible CardBus Controller OK
0xB0040800-0xB00409FF SigmaTel C-Major Audio OK
0xB0040400-0xB00404FF SigmaTel C-Major Audio OK
0xB8012000-0xB80120FF SDA Standard Compliant SD Host Controller OK
0xA0000-0xBFFFF PCI bus OK
0xA0000-0xBFFFF Mobile Intel(R) 915GM/GMS,910GML Express Chipset Family OK
0xCF200-0xCF7FF Motherboard resources OK
0xD0800-0xD3FFF Motherboard resources OK
0xD4000-0xD7FFF PCI bus OK
0xD8000-0xDBFFF PCI bus OK
0xDC000-0xDFFFF PCI bus OK

 

I have never seen 2GB 200pin ddr ram
If this ram exists, I would bet that it's expensive



Alex

 

Come to think of it, I don't think 2GB 200 pin DDR RAM even exists. I have been searching for it, and Crucial, MemoryTen, and even eBay don't have it.

 

http://www.govgroup.com/getac_2gb_ddr_sdram_memory_module_a_ram2000-1188040-prd1.htm

Might hurt the pocket book

 

just want to ad mt 2pence...
got some nice cheap RAM from ebay - http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....63322&_sacat=See-All-Categories&_fvi=1&_rdc=1

and it works fine in my Mk5-N with 256mb onboard

 

It sure would be nice to know who makes this memory. Still to pay about $91.00 + s/h and it might not work .But if it did work I think their sales might go up. I remember a time when I paid $150.00 for 512mb
Blair

 

Anyone every seen a cf-29 with 1GB onboard memory?

 

More reading for you... They never made one.

 

They must have I have not one but two. I had to look at it twice. It has 1GB on the board here is the models

Cf-29NTSGZBM Shows 1GB Bios and there a empty slot on bottom.

 

Are you certain you're not looking at an empty Mini-PCI slot there, dewed?

mnem<~~~Retread-Dwagon~~~<<<

 

Hmm, that's the second model to come up with an S for the hdd and ram which doesn't show up in the configurator. Maybe a special order with 1gb onboard?

Glen