Help
i know xp doesnt use more than 2g of ram, does vista
Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.
Page 1 of 1
Can Vista Process More Than 2gb?
Back to top
#2
- Forum Addict
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,875
- Joined: 25-November 04
- Gender:Male
- Location:Finland
Posted 23 August 2007 - 07:07 PM
The 64-bit versions of Vista can address from 8GB to 128GB+ depending on version. The 32 bit versions have the same limits as XP.
"Anyone who cannot form a community with others, or who does not need to because he is self-sufficient [...] is either a beast or a god." Aristotle
Intel Core 2 Quad | XFX 780i SLI | 8GB Corsair | Gigabyte GeForce 8800GTX | Auzentech X-Fi Prelude| Logitech G15 | Logitech MX Revolution | LG Flatron L2000C | Logitech Z-5500 Digital
Intel Core 2 Quad | XFX 780i SLI | 8GB Corsair | Gigabyte GeForce 8800GTX | Auzentech X-Fi Prelude| Logitech G15 | Logitech MX Revolution | LG Flatron L2000C | Logitech Z-5500 Digital
#3
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 144
- Joined: 15-July 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Northern Virginia, USA
Posted 23 August 2007 - 10:27 PM
#4
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 139
- Joined: 06-July 06
- Gender:Male
- Location:O.C.
Posted 24 August 2007 - 12:16 AM
i currently have 4gb of RAM on my Vista x64, runs fine without any BIOS changes
#5
- Still visually handicapped, new avatar (a camel) :0)
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 16,689
- Joined: 02-October 05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Southeastern CT, USA
Posted 24 August 2007 - 06:18 AM
I have 4 gB of RAM on 2 Vista 32 bit systems now, and it's working just fine. Both systems only admit to 3.326 gB of RAM, but there are no issues with running programs or operating.
- John
**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **
**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **
#6
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 518
- Joined: 30-October 05
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 August 2007 - 12:34 AM
Ok let's make a correction of two
The gentleman speaking about the correct useable space is somewhat correct. XP has a limit of 2gb Virtual Address Space, and and 2gb kernel address space foe the purposes of use. You may change this to 3gb and 1gb using a switch in the boot loader.
this page is just a reference. MS if you read this, I nested deep in the site for accuracy.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
here is the KB
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605
Backing of this
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/291988
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms791558.aspx
So it is true, and important to know how to use it.
In some form or fashion 32bit vista can use 6gb in total. two gigs are relocated in some fashion to make this work.
The MS Article didn't provide enough info so I'm left with having to reply when they fix that. I filled the survey question
on that aricle so it would be corrected hopefully. Will post If I see a change.
The gentleman speaking about the correct useable space is somewhat correct. XP has a limit of 2gb Virtual Address Space, and and 2gb kernel address space foe the purposes of use. You may change this to 3gb and 1gb using a switch in the boot loader.
this page is just a reference. MS if you read this, I nested deep in the site for accuracy.
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx
here is the KB
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605
Backing of this
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/291988
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms791558.aspx
So it is true, and important to know how to use it.
In some form or fashion 32bit vista can use 6gb in total. two gigs are relocated in some fashion to make this work.
The MS Article didn't provide enough info so I'm left with having to reply when they fix that. I filled the survey question
on that aricle so it would be corrected hopefully. Will post If I see a change.
#7
- Still visually handicapped, new avatar (a camel) :0)
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 16,689
- Joined: 02-October 05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Southeastern CT, USA
Posted 10 December 2007 - 05:59 PM
Here's a link that states that the use of the PAE (Physical Address Extension) can enable 32 bit versions of Windows to use more than 4 gB of physical memory: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366796.aspx
Following the BCD Edit link ( http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=93291 ) leads you to a page that discusses the implementation of PAE when the system boots or with hot swappable memory (only available in Server OS's now). It sends us to this link that RandomUser already posted: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid&ID=929605
That link discusses (in the More Information section) the problems with using PAE - and the consequent driver failures that may occur. And it states that DMA transfers and memory allocation are the most common problems caused by it.
Not a nice picture - but it sure makes me want to try it out. FWIW - the article also states that the maximum memory available will be 3.12 gB - on my system I've got 3.26 gB, so I'm not sure of the validity of it all.
Quote
With PAE enabled, the operating system moves from two-level linear address translation to three-level address translation. The extra layer of translation provides access to physical memory beyond 4 GB. Instead of a linear address being split into three separate fields for indexing into memory tables, it is split into four separate fields: a 2-bit field, two 9-bit fields, and a 12-bit field that corresponds to the page size implemented by Intel Architecture (4 KB).
Following the BCD Edit link ( http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=93291 ) leads you to a page that discusses the implementation of PAE when the system boots or with hot swappable memory (only available in Server OS's now). It sends us to this link that RandomUser already posted: http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid&ID=929605
That link discusses (in the More Information section) the problems with using PAE - and the consequent driver failures that may occur. And it states that DMA transfers and memory allocation are the most common problems caused by it.
Not a nice picture - but it sure makes me want to try it out. FWIW - the article also states that the maximum memory available will be 3.12 gB - on my system I've got 3.26 gB, so I'm not sure of the validity of it all.
- John
**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **
**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **
#8
- New Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 8
- Joined: 27-December 07
Posted 27 December 2007 - 07:41 PM
I am reminded of the LIM memory tricks of the 80's. They allowed more memory in DOS, but never as a native actuality. The result was better performance for big spreadsheets and such, but not much else was helped. If you need more ram, then use 64bit hardware with an OS that will support it natively. Seriously consider something NOT produced by Microsoft. 
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1