Update: CPUz under winXP SP3 reports dual channel is active. So what's up with win98SE?

Win98 just isn't reporting it correctly.

Try a RAM benchmark with one stick vs two.

The OS has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not dual channel is working/enabled. It is a function of the motherboard/memory controller.

General rule: if a tool reports something at odds with other observations, suspect the tool first.

Jennifer.Diamonds wrote on 2023-03-21, 03:45:

Update: CPUz under winXP SP3 reports dual channel is active. So what's up with win98SE?

I expect it's nothing to do with W98SE. Firstly are you using the same version of CPUZ on 98SE and XP?

Looking at the CPUZ report the Intel 82865PE Chipset Processor to I/O Memory Interface (8086-2576-00000000-02) is at the end rather than just after the Intel 82865PE Chipset Processor to I/O Controller which means CPUZ must have enabled it. Given this on 98SE what happens when you run CPUZ for a second time? I suspect it may well report dual on the 2nd run, does it?

red-ray wrote on 2023-03-21, 12:38:

Jennifer.Diamonds wrote on 2023-03-21, 03:45:

Update: CPUz under winXP SP3 reports dual channel is active. So what's up with win98SE?

I expect it's nothing to do with W98SE. Firstly are you using the same version of CPUZ on 98SE and XP?

Looking at the CPUZ report the Intel 82865PE Chipset Processor to I/O Memory Interface (8086-2576-00000000-02) is at the end rather than just after the Intel 82865PE Chipset Processor to I/O Controller which means CPUZ must have enabled it. Given this on 98SE what happens when you run CPUZ for a second time? I suspect it may well report dual on the 2nd run, does it?

Different versions of CPUz are being used because of compatibility issues between versions
98SE- 1.03
XPSP3- 2.05
I've run it multiple times, results are the same
After lots of benchmarks, I believe that CPUz-1.03 is broken in some way

Jennifer.Diamonds wrote on 2023-03-22, 06:18:

Different versions of CPUz are being used because of compatibility issues between versions 98SE- 1.03 XPSP3- 2.05 I've run it mu […]
Show full quote

Different versions of CPUz are being used because of compatibility issues between versions
98SE- 1.03
XPSP3- 2.05
I've run it multiple times, results are the same
After lots of benchmarks, I believe that CPUz-1.03 is broken in some way

Oh, when I tried 1.03 on my 865PE XP SP3 system (MSI MS-6742 (865P Neo)) it reported Dual which is why I thought the 2nd rum might. What does 1.03 report on your XP system?

Either was you could/should report the bug so Need help to improve the support of 486/586/686 class CPUs in CPU-Z

Jennifer.Diamonds wrote on 2023-03-22, 06:18:

98SE- 1.03

I have been wondering why CPUZ 1.03 failed to report Dual-Channel on your system, but did on mine and wonder if it's down to liner vs. tiled. Both my systems are linear and if yours is tiled this would explain things.

The CPUZ save does not report linear/tiled, but my SIV utility should, but only on XP (not on 98SE), so you could check. As it's setup by the BIOS it should be the same for XP and 98SE.