<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>G'day people,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>For everyone who put in their 2 cents over the last
few days - thanks. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Here is what I have found out: I am actually going
to go with some Mushkin modules (They have some good specials at the moment)...
you might want to check them out: <A
href="http://www.mushkin.com">www.mushkin.com</A> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Basically the consensus is that Intel server boards
are VERY picky about the SPD speed settings on the module EEPROM. (Moreso when
the CPU is a PII 100FSB.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So after having asked the bloke about
some PC133 ECC Reg. modules on special... he has offered to simply
re-program them from PC133 CAS3 to PC100 CAS2.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This has suggested to me that the chips on a faster
memory module have no problem running slower (133->100) and having their
access times increased (CAS3->CAS2) and that the major issues
on motherboard compatability are actually based on two things:</FONT></DIV>
<OL>
<LI><FONT face=Arial size=2>Chip Density being supported by your
motherboard.</FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=Arial size=2>The SPD setting in the EEPROM being supported by
motherboard/CPU combination.</FONT> </LI></OL>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hopefully this info. gives you guys a bit of
an intellectual buzz,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Guv.</FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>