Keyboard Stops Working While Installing Windows... HELP!!!

[ohdoor]

So today I buit my first computer. I'm pretty sure that I put it together the right way. After I got done I powered it up and everything seems to be working fine. The harddrives and CD-rom drives work and the fans are working. So I set it to boot from a CD and I start installing Windows. Near the beginning of the installation you have to agree to a License Agreement but whenever I get to this screen my keyboard stops working . I've tried different keyboards and plugging it into different USB ports but that won't fix it. I've been trying for severals hours to get it to work but I always get stuck when I have to press F8 to agree to the license agreement.

[Dark Nova]

have you tried a regular keyboard using the plugs, usb can be a bug sometimes

[LDawg]

Is there a F-lock button on your keyboard? If so, is it on?

[ohdoor]

i feel like a complete dumba$$. it worked in usb for the first part until i tried installing windows but when i tried to see if it worked on the ps2 port i was putting it in the one for a mouse not a keyboard because i was using one of those usb to ps2 adapter things and it was green so i had it confused. its all good now i'm on the computer i built right now and its running like a charm.... gah i still feel like an idiot

edit: Dark Nova, I saw in your sig that you have an Athlon 64 3500. Thats what I put in this computer. I thought that the 3500 meant that it was 3500mhz but its saying that its 2.2ghz. Was I right and theres something wrong or is that not what 3500 means.

[jfk]

It is a 2.2 Ghz. The AMD architecture is different than Intel, so they run comparably fast at lower speeds. Although it seems that a lot of folks think the 3500+ means it's the same speed as a 3.5 Ghz Intel, I believe it actually is a comparison to an older AMD chip (Thunderbird???). Anyway, I'm sure someone will correct me. Regardless, I think you'll love that CPU, it is EXTREMELY fast and, if you're into it, very overclockable if you got the Venice core.

[blue60007]

Originally Posted by jfk It is a 2.2 Ghz. The AMD architecture is different than Intel, so they run comparably fast at lower speeds. Although it seems that a lot of folks think the 3500+ means it's the same speed as a 3.5 Ghz Intel, I believe it actually is a comparison to an older AMD chip (Thunderbird???).

I believe that's correct. Based on pricing, a 3500+ would be similar to a 3.2GHz P4

[Dark Nova]

Originally Posted by blue60007 I believe that's correct. Based on pricing, a 3500+ would be similar to a 3.2GHz P4

i dont know about the pricing
but the 3500+ AMD = a 3.5GHz in the intel, the reason they put the number on the box is to compare with intel. (3500 = 3.5ghz)

[ohdoor]

if you're into it, very overclockable if you got the Venice core.

what do you mean by this? sorry i'm pretty new to this stuff

[jfk]

I simply meant to imply that the Venice core is very overclockable, which basically means it can be pushed to levels beyond its actual clock speed (ie. "overclocked"). This means it can be readily made to run faster than what it's specs would indicate.

Dark Nova,

This is once again a case where you respond too quickly without thinking through the question. The AMD rating is NOT intended to imply Intel equivalency (is that a word?). It is a comparison to an earlier AMD chip. Although a 3500+ "may" be as fast as a 3.5 Ghz Intel, that is NOT what the rating implied. Do a little studying on the matter............................

[Dark Nova]

Originally Posted by jfk Dark Nova, This is once again a case where you respond too quickly without thinking through the question. The AMD rating is NOT intended to imply Intel equivalency (is that a word?). It is a comparison to an earlier AMD chip. Although a 3500+ "may" be as fast as a 3.5 Ghz Intel, that is NOT what the rating implied. Do a little studying on the matter............................

wow, i so disagree, even my technicien friends disagree on that matter. there perhaps few reasons why they put it as 3500+. they, the company denny thats its one reasons But i know and everyone knows that one of them is to compare with intel. many costumers come in and ask why it says that the 3500+ is only 2.21GHz but the intel is faster, so we say that its to compare with intel, like i said there are perhaps more reasons but thats one of them, not everyone knows about pc's and they will automaticly say that 3.5ghz (intel) is faster then 2.21Ghz (amd). would'nt that lose sutomers? have you studied about that???

[jfk]

Have I studied what? The naming system or AMD's marketing plan? I have seen many print references that say the numbering system is a comparison to an earlier AMD chip. I don't doubt that premise. With that said, here is what I am talking about:

That's exactly what AMD wants to hear, although the company maintains its new naming scheme is based on comparisons between today's Athlon XP chip and the performance of the pre-XP Athlon running at higher megahertz, according to Pat Moorhead, the company's vice president of customer advocacy. "To be crystal clear: The model numbering system shows the relative performance between Athlon XP chips, and signals that it is a superior product to the 'Thunderbird' chip," he said.

From this article:

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,66485,00.asp

[Dark Nova]

that why i said the company denys it, but everyone knowsthat its there to compare with intel, it could also ne a comparison to an earlier AMD chip, but we al know why its there

you see 3000+ is actually equals to 3.0ghz intel pentium4, its basically depends on the core of processor, AMD processors has shorter pipelines, hence makin it run faster whereas Intel processors has longer pipelines.

thats why: -

2200+ = 2.2ghz pentium
2400+ = 2.4ghz pentium

But now since Northwood core has hit the market, its nothing like 2600+ equals to 2.6C, its like 2.4C = 2600+

new stats are somewhat like this: -

AMD 64 2800+ = 2.8 intel
AMD 64 3200+ = 3.2 intel