Leaderboard

Start Mypal 68, open Process Hacker, right-click on the mypal.exe file and left-click on its Properties! Select then the Memory tab and check the base address range from 0x60000000 to 0x6f000000! If, for example, no other DLL file has the base address 0x60000000 and behind it is enough free address space for the DLL files to be rebased, then of course you can also start with the base address 0x60000000 for rebasing the DLL file series.

Yep, Process Hacker has been my friend for many, many years. It is always running in the background automatically after system start. I also check the free spots with sufficient space by using the Memory tab.

Unfortunately, the idea is not to do what the system does, as without manually rebasing the RAM consumption of Mypal 68 is much higher. The system doesn't seem to automatically assign an optimal base address in terms of RAM usage. So, it is better to manually find a range where the RAM consumption is minimal and all is still working. And the range from 0x60000000 to 0x6f000000 really seems to be a suitable one for DLL files that do not belong to the system.

It's with all DX9 games that I play (not just one) . Vista works fine with the same driver versions , XP64 has like 30-45% slower framerate. No wonder , 'cause it shows PCI-e 1.0 only...

So as mine and Ucyborg's . It shows ordinary PCI-e (1.0). Something's wrong with the detection of PCI-e in XP64 . I'm gettiing poor performance in games .

@asdf2345 , what does your Nvidia CPL say about PCI-e version with this GTX980 ? Forgot to say , I've tested not only with GTX980 , but with Titan too , it's all the same . At first one member suggested that it could be something wrong with my mobo , but looks like the mobo is just fine , as you can see, at least three members , now including you , have reported the similar readings.

My installation is a clean SP2 (slipstreamed with Nlite) with a minimum of really needed updates. VC redist , framework , DirectX , fix for HD Audio, etc. Like I said , the programme shows that PCIe gen.2 is actually used , but not to the maximum . Maybe it's the mobo that doesn't like XP , you're right. I will try to reinstall again in some days and get back with the results . This week will be busy. About the upgrade , I'm afraid it's not possible since no other motherboard will fit this housing. About Fujitsu Siemens , they are quite OK in my opinion , yes they do not support OC , but the PC feels snappy enough (at least with Vista) and I like the OLD school BIOS . Windows 7 and XP64 are slow with that PC , like really slow. Like 2x times . Maybe it was designed to run Vista only. I can understand about Win7 being slow , because it actually is slower than Vista on any PC. But about XP64 it is weird , you're right.

I isolated it to my add-ons.

Counter question. Why does the libase tool automatically select the base address 0x6af00000 for xul.dll, which is exactly in the range from 0x60000000 to 0x6f000000? In any case, this recommendation did not originally come from me, but from an article I found after a research via Google. Here is the decisive section as a quote: This section can be found here: https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/35829/Modify-the-Base-Addresses-for-a-DLL-Files-Series And as you see, @UCyborg also seems to prefer addresses inside this range for his DLL file series: And I have also had good experiences with this base address range for DLL files. Cheers, AstroSkipper

Fixed.

They're listed. (My view will be styled different than your view.)

I found this, maybe helpfull? ; Filename: ssigd.inf [...] [......] [Manufacturer] %Intel%=Intel.Mfg ;=============================================================================== [Intel.Mfg] %Intel% %i810% = ssigd_wht, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_7121 %Intel% %i810DC% = ssigd_wht, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_7123 %Intel% %i810E% = ssigd_wht, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_7125 %Intel% %i815% = ssigd_wht, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1132 %Intel% %i830m% = ssigd_alm, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3577 %Intel% %i835% = ssigd_alm, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_357B %Intel% %i845% = ssigd_alm, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2562 %Intel% %i855% = ssigd_alm, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_3582 %Intel% %i865% = ssigd_alm, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2572 %Intel% %i915GD0% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2582 %Intel% %i915GD1% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2782 %Intel% %i915AL0% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2592 %Intel% %i915AL1% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2792 %Intel% %i945LP0% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2772 %Intel% %i945LP1% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_2776 %Intel% %i945CT0% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27A2 %Intel% %i945CT1% = ssigd_nap, PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_27A6 [....] [Strings] ;---------------------------------------------------------------------- ; Localizable Strings ;---------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel="Intel Corporation" DiskDesc="Embedded Installation" i810="810 Embedded Graphics Controller" i810DC="810DC Embedded Graphics Controller" i810E="810E Embedded Graphics Controller" i815="815 Embedded Graphics Controller" i830m="830M Embedded Graphics Controller" i835="835 Embedded Graphics Controller" i845="845 Embedded Graphics Controller" i855="855 Embedded Graphics Controller" i865="865 Embedded Graphics Controller" i915GD0="915G/915GV/910GL Embedded Graphics Controller Function 0" i915GD1="915G/915GV/910GL Embedded Graphics Controller Function 1" i915AL0="915GM/915GMS/910GML Embedded Graphics Controller Function 0" i915AL1="915GM/915GMS/910GML Embedded Graphics Controller Function 1" i945LP0="945G Embedded Graphics Controller Function 0" i945LP1="945G Embedded Graphics Controller Function 1" i945CT0="945GM Embedded Graphics Controller Function 0" i945CT1="945GM Embedded Graphics Controller Function 1" [....]

You can find all Intel Device IDs here: https://admin.pci-ids.ucw.cz/read/PC/8086

I think that might be a bit of a big ask, why don't you ask him yourself?

@AstroSkipper I have just created WinRAR SFX Repack for 3DMark06. It installs silently and key is automatically added into registry. So you got full version without any additional steps. https://mega.nz/file/c2UylCKB#aNtZJ2hIqniYJiLaL1wQNK6vbI6h1tgLwcopsLJyJXY

And about this "test" : these are the weaker cards , much weaker than GTX 980. So PCI 1.1 is enough in this case. GTX980 is like 80% faster than GTX680. Don't forget about the onboard VRAM . 8GB vs 2GB . See the screenshot by asdf2345. https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-980-vs-Nvidia-GTX-680/2576vs3148

First off , I'm not the only one who is "mistaken" , scroll back and you will see the same issue has been reported by uCyborg and asdf2345 . Their Nvidia CPL also shows PCI-e ver. 1.0. Second : why would you even mention Kepler cards ? It is off-topic . This is only about 900 and 1000 series, asdf2345 and I have tested on GTX 980. Forget about my Titan , it was used only to confirm the issue with XP64 not detecting PCI-e 2.0, besides , asdf2345 has tested on a laptop. As you can see , it has nothing to do with my mobo.

My guess is that unity games use the same TEMP folder . I've encountered weird errors and some games won't even launch and/or load the saved settings (graphics quality , etc) . What to do ? Just calm down , wait , relaunch . May resolve itself on it's own in a day or two. Also , unity engine has extensive telemetry and the logs/reports/temp files usually go into the same folder for all games . My observations that all of the above leads to numerous glitches.

SetThreadErrorMode replace with SetErrorMode , this should do. DisplayConfigGetDeviceInfo = I'm afraid you're outta luck with this one , it's a tough uncle of a bleach , otherwise the game would definitely launch. Perhaps win32 will suggest something too.

TryAcquireSRWLockExclusive can be replaced with AcquireSRWLockExclusive . GetLogicalProcessorInformationEx can be replaced with GetLogicalProcessorInformation. You need to use CFF Explorer. I'm guessing you're familiar with the procedure. If not , just scroll the extended kernel topic back. I've successfully launched the programmes I wanted to launch . Keep in mind , I'm not using the ex-kernel and I don't have it installed. If you encounter another error (the next in the queue) , you need to replace it too, with something similar , or just open the programme you want to launch in the Dependency walker and see all of that it "wants" in advance . This fix works , but not every time , of course.