organ_shifter

Welcome to the boards klonecs. Enjoy your stay. That's a very nice upload you have there. OOL always puts out great results.

Exactly true Voltageman. The memory is hindering the FSB and affecting the CPU. Increasing the multiplier or FSB will get the system back to 866MHz, but the memory won't stand a chance. Speaking from my experience with older CPU's in combination with a motherboard which doesn't allow you to modify the FSB/Multiplier values, the RAM sticks has always done it for me. The PC100 stick of RAM is causing the system to run at 100 x 6.5 = 650MHz. In this situation it's 99.38 x 6.5 = 645.97MHz (645.99MHz on Tim's board). As Basic stated, I've played around with a memory jumper before, and it was located between the PCI slots. It could even be close to the DIMM sockets. Once Tim gets the system to accept two PC133 sticks of RAM, the motherboard will automatically clock the FSB accordingly which, in turn, will allow the CPU to operate at a frequency of 133 x 6.5 = 864.5MHz (possibly 133.3 x 6.5 = 866.45MHz on Tim's board).

Well done as always.

I didn't notice that. Good eye PHP. The memory stick in Slot 1 is crippling the stick in Slot 2 forcing it to run at PC100. Slot 1 : 256MB (PC100) Slot 1 Manufacturer : Hyundai Electronics Slot 2 : 256MB (PC133) Slot 2 Manufacturer : Noname

Either the FSB or CPU multiplier is set too low. If you motherboard allows it, increasing one of them should fix the problem.

Damn girl! It's like that? However you get your speed (I don't care because we don't judge people around here), it's blazing hot!

Basically, you get drivers for everything that's not functioning. ATI Chipset & Display Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3430&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7 Realtek Audio Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3432&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7 CPU Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3431&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7 Broadcom 802.11b+g Wireless Lan Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3437&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7 Modem Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3435&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7 RealTek LAN Driver http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?recordid=3439&formid=3394&website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&words=all&keywords=&areaid=7

I took a look and came up with the following results. I believe that your model would fall under the 3100 series. If this is correct, you should be able to use the drivers from the link below. Select your product line: Notebook - Aspire 3100 Click search, download the drivers. http://www.acerpanam.com/synapse/forms/portal20.cfm?website=AcerPanAm.com/us&siteid=7293&areaid=7&formid=3394#results Hope it helps. Let me know.

Who you gonna call? Ghostbusters! Album - Ghostbusters: Original Soundtrack Album Artist - Ray Parker Jr. Song - Ghostbusters Year - 1984 Note: If the song isn't ok as an attachment, remove it for me waterRTBH. (you know, with all of the copyright laws)

You are very welcome my friend. Anytime.

Oh ok. I misread your comment here.

10MB service will be available to you next month through Charter right? And like you said, Verizon Fios is an option as well. Tweaking won't get you 10megs on a 5meg package. Enjoy the speeds you have now and hold tight. Faster service is very close for you. Have you tried Van's tweaks to get the most out of your connection? http://www.testmy.net/forum/t-2097 http://www.testmy.net/forum/t-1013

I'm a long time enthusiast of cable connections. My methods are software/hardware based and result in very powerful results. Check your PM for more info...if we continue, lets keep it PM.

Thxz VB . I won't be happy until I get your speeds though. The test you linked me to is faster. Normally, it takes me anywhere from 50 - 60 seconds to complete a 12Mb upload test. Only took 45 seconds this time. :::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 2203 Kbps about 2.2 Mbps (tested with 12159 kB) Upload Speed is:: 269 kB/s Tested From:: http://s2.testmy.net Test Time:: 2006/09/09 - 7:18am Bottom Line:: 38X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 3.81 sec Tested from a 12159 kB file and took 45.22464 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 430.84 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-W5DEBNFTR User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; FDM) [!] Here is the link to the 12MB test which I normally test from: http://www.testmy.net/tools/test/u_load.php?ni=1&tt=1&s=12160&st=st&ta=&top=&align=center& This is with a SB4200 which is known to suffer at higher speeds. The download still sucks with this modem, but the upload is pretty good. A SB5100 would give me all my download along with a much faster upload.

:::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 2006 Kbps about 2.01 Mbps (tested with 5983 kB) Upload Speed is:: 245 kB/s Tested From:: http://s2.testmy.net Test Time:: 2006/09/09 - 12:01am Bottom Line:: 35X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 4.18 sec Tested from a 5983 kB file and took 24.43488 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 383.37 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-NLCFGYHOA User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; FDM) [!] Does the following server have a 12MB/20MB upload test? I believe I can get more out of my upload. Server 2 (secondary server) (upload test) (testmy.net flat-file mirror, hosted on 'testmy.net server 2') Hosted in Downtown Dallas, TX - United States [uNLIMITED BANDWIDTH]

The price I paid wasn't nearly as good as yours. Best Buy charged me $219.99 + Tax. I loved the speakers big time. Movies, music and games sounded fantastic. I just couldn't accept the price. Upon searching for reviews (which were all good), I found out how much money I could have saved by purchasing the exact same setup through Newegg. The Z-5300e's were $179.99 (Mar. '05) . I was like damn! Best Buy seriously gets over on people! Pissed off (but happy as well), I returned the system and got my money back. Shopped Newegg for 5.1 setups and found the Z-5500's for $277.99. For only $58 more than what I previously paid, I picked them up.

:::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 1934 Kbps about 1.93 Mbps (tested with 12159 kB) Upload Speed is:: 236 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/09/04 - 4:08pm Bottom Line:: 34X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 4.34 sec Tested from a 12159 kB file and took 51.51072 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 364.9 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-IUBFQ7815 User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; FDM) [!]

Yeah "C", those are very very nice. That price is way hot. I had that exact same setup at one time and they were awesome. Enjoy!

Read the review at the following link. http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=296

Happy Birthday Shug7272 Can't view this greeting? [url="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"]Download Flash Player ![/url] What would we do without you Shug? You are always around to brighten up everyone's day and keep us laughing our socks off. Cheers to you man! -ShIfTeR-

Using it, loving it, keeping it. Highly recommended to IE6 users.

:::.. Upload Stats ..::: Upload Connection is:: 1631 Kbps about 1.63 Mbps (tested with 12159 kB) Upload Speed is:: 199 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/07/27 - 8:07am Bottom Line:: 28X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 5.15 sec Tested from a 12159 kB file and took 61.08 seconds to complete Upload Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 280.19 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-H9Y0J71GS User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2; FDM) [!]

Yeah dlewis23, Vista has completely different boot loader than XP. You can't just simply edit the "boot.ini" file anymore. You'll need to run "BCDEDIT.exe" from a command prompt (see pic) to edit the boot options. Run it as "BCDEDIT.exe /?" to get the full details on how to command it properly. Other thoughts: Startup and Recovery still works for changing the boot order, but because the "Edit" button is no longer there, users can't remove or change any of the boot listings unless he/she uses BCDEDIT.exe.

A friend of mine has a 24" Sony Trinitron GDM-FW900 PC monitor and a Sony Bravia KDL-46S2000 television which supports 1080i (a VGA hook up is on the back as well). I must say that the Xbox360 looks fantastic on the TV through the use of the component cables, but due to the over-scan (zooming), certain parts of the interface/games were being cut out of view. Searching for a different alternative was a must... He and I went out to EB Games to purchase an Xbox 360 VGA HD/AV Cable. He picked it up used for $9.99 (obviously some one didn't know what they had and returned it). Leaving the store, we could hear two employees talking amongst themselves about the purchase, "That guy just got a steal. That was the only used VGA cable in the store, and I'm surprised someone brought it back." A decision was made to run the Xbox360 through his GDM-FW900, and it turned out to be a great move. GRAW was the game of choice, and it blew us away on the monitor. Everything was visible and the detail was unbelievable. It produced a sharper display than the component cables on the KDL-46S2000, but the maximum resolution we could select was 1360x768. Unfortunately, at that time, the VGA cable could not unlock 1920x1080 (1080p) or anything close to it on the monitor or TV, but it looked awesome. Maybe it can now though. Basically, before the recent updates, the Xbox 360 VGA HD/AV Cable would not be able to crank out higher resolutions than your component connection in terms of display size. However, if the new features will now support the higher resolutions through VGA, that's the best way to go IMO. The detail is unmatched. It's rumored that when the Xbox 360 outputs 1080i using the HD component cable, it only does the old 540p-upconvert-to-1080i trick as opposed to true 1080i.