Gizmos Freeware Reviews  

Go Back   Gizmo's Freeware Forum > Freeware Forum > General Computer Support

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14. Apr 2015, 08:33 PM   #41 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remah View Post
  • A memory upgrade becomes more important if the system has integrated graphics (built into the motherboard) which shares the main memory. This reduces the memory available to Windows. In this case, a low-end 1GHz CPU is usually accompanied by low-end integrated graphics (such as Intel HD) rather than a dedicated graphics card with its own dedicated video memory.
Well that's precisely so in this case. If you look at the Speccy report which Melita included with this post you will see it's an AMD C-50. (BTW, the report is in a zip file).

Melita, I am pretty puzzled about this computer. I have a few questions.
  1. Where did you get this computer? I ask because something makes me feel it wasn't released in the North American market.
  2. Your Speccy report says your RAM is a 2GB Kingston PC3-10700 (667 MHz) part No. ACR256X64D3S1333C9 yet I couldn't find it on Kingston's site. Your laptop model isn't listed there either. I couldn't find anything for PC3-10700 RAM on Amazon either. For that matter, I couldn't find RAM for your laptop on Amazon.
  3. What may be even more important is my research tells me your laptop should be using low voltage RAM (i.e. 1.35V), however, your Speccy report says your RAM is 1.5V. You shouldn't really use higher voltage RAM than specified.
  4. I think your laptop may be capable of using faster RAM than what is installed. We already know you don't have much RAM but there's no reason why that RAM should be slower than specified.
I'm not expert, but all the same, I'd like to clarify the above. Could you shed any light? Did anyone ever change your RAM? A computer repair shop maybe? Actually, I'm not really sure what would happen if your RAM was swapped with a slower module but I am just trying to cover all bases.

[Edit]
Should you run multiple AV scans and find anything, make sure you quarantine instead of delete until such time you can tell for sure it's malware. Deleting files that turns out to be false positives could land you in trouble.

Last edited by Joe A.TT; 14. Apr 2015 at 08:49 PM.
Joe A.TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 05:29 AM   #42 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,741
Default

Thanks for pointing out the specs. I forgot they were there.

I don't think that it is a problem:
  • It is easier to find the manufacturer's system information at Acer if we had the Serial Number ID (SNID)as searching by model doesn't provide the specs.
  • I normally just search using the part number. Kingston ACR256X64D3S1333C9 is available on many sites. "PC3-10700" is probably a typo and should be "PC3-10600".
  • 1.5V RAM can often run in a 1.35V socket. If it doesn't it then it usually doesn't make it through the POST. It is probably the shipped RAM anyway - see next comment.
  • The installed RAM module is above the specification supported by the CPU/GPU/motherboard. It is DDR3-1333 (PC3-10600) when it only needs to be DDR3-1066 or DDR3L-1066 (PC3-8500) as per CPUWorld and other specs I found. The variants are the 1.5V DDR3 and 1.35V DDR3L - the L means low voltage
__________________
Better to light a candle ... than to curse the darkness.
Remah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 09:47 AM   #43 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 1,174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remah View Post
"PC3-10700" is probably a typo and should be "PC3-10600"
I believe this is a bug in Speccy as I've also seen it report PC3-10600 RAM as PC3-10700.

As you say, the best way to get accurate PC specs is to use the SNID number in a search of the manufacturers website. For Melita's benefit the relevant number can usually be found on a sticker on the underside of the laptop or sometimes inside the battery compartment.
Sope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 03:10 PM   #44 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,028
Default

@Remah,
Thank you for sharing your knowledge.

@Sope,
Thanks for corroborating about the 10700/10600 bug. I'll add it to my list of known Speccy bugs.
Joe A.TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 07:31 PM   #45 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default

Hello Joe,

Thank you for taking all the trouble!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe A.TT View Post
Melita, I am pretty puzzled about this computer. I have a few questions.[LIST=1][*]Where did you get this computer? I ask because something makes me feel it wasn't released in the North American market.[*]Your Speccy report says your RAM is a 2GB Kingston PC3-10700 (667 MHz) part No. ACR256X64D3S1333C9 yet I couldn't find it on Kingston's site. Your laptop model isn't listed there either. I couldn't find anything for PC3-10700 RAM on Amazon either. For that matter, I couldn't find RAM for your laptop on Amazon.[*]What may be even more important is my research tells me your laptop should be using low voltage RAM (i.e. 1.35V), however, your Speccy report says your RAM is 1.5V. You shouldn't really use higher voltage RAM than specified.[*]I think your laptop may be capable of using faster RAM than what is installed. We already know you don't have much RAM but there's no reason why that RAM should be slower than specified.
This was bought in Canada from a reputed North American seller. It is registered with Acer and I had got in touch with them sometime ago using the credentials. I think the Speccy information may be wrong. I don't remember the name 'Kingston' when I last read the specifications at Acer website, some time back. Here is what you need to check on it:

PRODUCT MODEL: AS5250-C52G32Mikk
SERIAL NUMBER / SNID: LXRJY020301273A04A1601

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe A.TT View Post
Did anyone ever change your RAM? A computer repair shop maybe?
Never been to a repair man.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe A.TT View Post
Should you run multiple AV scans and find anything, make sure you quarantine instead of delete until such time you can tell for sure it's malware. Deleting files that turns out to be false positives could land you in trouble.
Thank you for the reminder

Regards,
__________________
Melita
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 08:24 PM   #46 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remah View Post
I'm thinking that a likely cause of this problem is an update program
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remah View Post
[URL="this one"]this one
I am trying to post this link here but it is not working. What I am referring to here is the very last link at the bottom right of your post which says "this one". Well, I got the actual link so here it is: https://social.technet.microsoft.com...&prof=required
This last link in your post confirmed your suspicions. At the same time it shed completely new light on my problem. I read every individual post in this Microsoft forum thread. Now I am more optimistic that a solution may be found. It is comforting to know that thousands (or even more!), of others are having the identical problem. It is a very long Thread, still active with half a dozen new posts daily.
Here are a few short extracts:

"We just found out the reason it's using so much memory now and not three months ago. It's because three months ago we changed our wsus server to a 2012R2 instead of a 2003, this updated the WU client to version 7.6.7600.320 which apparently uses much more RAM"

"My niece has a laptop with 2 GB of RAM running under Windows 7 x64. Her laptop has also become unresponsive after the Windows Update client updated to 7.6.7600.320. The svchost would sometimes consume as much as 1.5 GB of RAM which would render her laptop unusable. She has disabled Windows Updates. Is there a fix available? Thanks"

"We have over 30 different laptop at our repair shop right now all running into this issue. The all started havening this is issue after SP1 was installed on them and the update manager updated. We have resorted to manually installing update off network. This fixes it for now but the issue still persists cause it lock up 1.8-3.5 GB RAM just when checking for updates. After locating the updates and during download and install it goes down to less than 700MB"

"For the moment the only workaround is to disable Windows Update, I don't like this but the alternative is a unusable laptop"

"What the heck is Microsoft doing? Do they really REALLY think we are going to get Windows 10 when they aren't even capable of fixing this piece of .... of a massive problem? They are letting - well - millions of users ? alone with this"

"Just to let everyone know we have some machines with Windows 7 enterprise version with 4GB of RAM with the same issue"


This is just a few samples. Thousands are having the identical problem. I have fixed Windows to "Never Check for Updates" Since then I downloaded a 1GB movie in 22 mts. and watched it on VLC player without any hick-up (CPU about 30%, Total Physical memory about 800MB - average usage).

It is a pleasure to use the computer since I blocked updates! svchost is peacefully there at under 70,000KB

Thank you,
__________________
Melita

Last edited by Melita-s; 15. Apr 2015 at 08:38 PM. Reason: for corrections
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 08:51 PM   #47 (permalink)
Super Moderator
 
Anupam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: India
Posts: 15,276
Default

If the problem is with Windows Update, rather than disabling it, change it to "Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them".

I am guessing that Windows Update was earlier set to download and update automatically. But, with the setting above, it will check for updates, and then inform you. Then, you can update at your own convenience. That way, you will not be without updates, and it won't interfere with the OS activity too.

This is what I do on my system.

Disabling Windows Update altogether is not the solution. It's good to keep your Windows system patched with the latest updates.
__________________
Anupam
Anupam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 08:56 PM   #48 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bo.elam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melita-s View Post
"For the moment the only workaround is to disable Windows Update, I don't like this but the alternative is a unusable laptop"

"Never Check for Updates"
Melita, disabling Windows updates is not a bad workaround. In fact, I think for people that come to security forums and are usually aware about what Microsoft is patching or fixing when they release their updates is probably best to set WU to Never check for updates. And then, after reading about the updates before and after they come out, do them manually.

I usually take my time doing Windows updates. The result is that I never have problems with updates. Sometimes I start doing them a few days after they get released, sometime I do them in bunches and sometimes, I might take weeks before I do an update that seems to create problems for many users. It all depends but for me, works good doing updates this way.

Bo
bo.elam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 09:54 PM   #49 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melita-s View Post
It is a pleasure to use the computer since I blocked updates! svchost is peacefully there at under 70,000KB
Glad you found the root cause at least. I see you have been trying to solve this mystery for a long time. Thankfully, your persistence and Remah's experience got you there in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anupam View Post
If the problem is with Windows Update, rather than disabling it, change it to "Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them".
Anupam, one of the posts Melita quoted from says the issue only happens when checking for updates. If that is really so then setting WU like you recommend won't help.
Joe A.TT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15. Apr 2015, 09:55 PM   #50 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Melita-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anupam View Post
If the problem is with Windows Update, rather than disabling it, change it to "Check for updates but let me choose whether to download and install them".
Thank you Anupam, I had it set this way, but it doesn't work the way they want us to believe. They are just playing games with us. It doesn't stop Windows from searching for updates for half an hour at a time, often twice a day, making the computer unusable for that duration. They are also quite sneaky. There is a statement on the Windows Update page of Win 7, the very last line under 'Change settings', which says "Windows update might update itself automatically first when checking for other updates". This is exactly what they do after you have set it as you recommend above. They update what they want and make you believe that you are in control!

That is why, in that link Remah was kind enough to find for me, people are blocking Windows Update outright to circumvent the problem Microsoft has created.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bo.elam View Post
Melita, disabling Windows updates is not a bad workaround. In fact, I think for people that come to security forums and are usually aware about what Microsoft is patching or fixing when they release their updates is probably best to set WU to Never check for updates. And then, after reading about the updates before and after they come out, do them manually.

I usually take my time doing Windows updates. The result is that I never have problems with updates. Sometimes I start doing them a few days after they get released, sometime I do them in bunches and sometimes, I might take weeks before I do an update that seems to create problems for many users. It all depends but for me, works good doing updates this way.

Bo
Thank you Bo, you can see that I am in agreement with your philosophy in this matter. I am that way about all things that are 'Internet' In one of the posts from that Microsoft link, that I have quoted in my last post, you will find this statement "We have resorted to manually installing update off network". Could you explain how this is done? I would certainly like to be able to do the updating on my own without letting Microsoft run amok with my computer.

The worst thing that ever happened to www is the monopoly Microsoft has in Operating Systems. What a shame there are no serious competitors. We could have shown our middle finger to Microsoft. There is still hope with Linux!

Kind regards,
__________________
Melita

Last edited by Melita-s; 15. Apr 2015 at 10:00 PM. Reason: to edit content
Melita-s is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.