2gig or 4

Cleric7x9 · 05-12-2008, 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spl00g

not sure if you are aware but XP is a 32 bit system and as a 32 bit system the max memory it can utilize is 3gb

not saying the upgrade wouldn't be useful a year down the road when you switch to vista 64bit. but for right now i'd say you wouldn't notice much difference between 2 and 3 gb memory on XP. I would think other parts of your computer would be lacking before the ram starts to e.g. graphics card or processor.

hope that helps

not sure if you are aware but a 32 but OS has a maximum memory of 4gb. sorry, but im having this same argument with tlarking in another thread.

the reason you see less than 4gb is bc the OS has to address everything else that needs memory first, then it gives whats left of the 4GB addressable space to the RAM.

Emperor_nero · 05-12-2008, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cleric7x9

not sure if you are aware but a 32 but OS has a maximum memory of 4gb. sorry, but im having this same argument with tlarking in another thread.

the reason you see less than 4gb is bc the OS has to address everything else that needs memory first, then it gives whats left of the 4GB addressable space to the RAM.

Read his.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html

Cleric7x9 · 05-12-2008, 04:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emperor_nero

Read his.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html

yes im well aware of that article, tlarkin provided it as well lol. im not sure why people are misinterpreting that. the author is explaining WHY you cant actually reach the 4gb limit of a 32 bit operating system.

tyttebøvs · 05-12-2008, 02:10 PM

That article from codinghorror is actually pretty horrible. There are better sources that this

lovely? · 05-12-2008, 03:05 PM

if what you are saying was true, wouldnt all 4gb still be in use even though you cant see all of it?

Emperor_nero · 05-12-2008, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovely?

if what you are saying was true, wouldnt all 4gb still be in use even though you cant see all of it?

That's my understanding of it.

To be more specific, it would be there even though you can't see it and it would be being used by the hardware.

tyttebøvs · 05-12-2008, 04:34 PM

That is a no. The missing ram will not be used.

Emperor_nero · 05-12-2008, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyttebøvs

That is a no. The missing ram will not be used.

Alright, for whatever reason you seem to have a better understanding then I so I will respect what you say as, and that you know what you're talking about.

Could you provide some other links then?

tyttebøvs · 05-12-2008, 04:51 PM

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888137
"the kernel memory manager ignores any physical address that is more than 4 GB"

To make use of 4GB RAM you need an address space that is bigger than 4GB, because the same address space needs to hold various IO devices.

CPTMuller · 05-12-2008, 05:01 PM

Still, in benchmarks there is no difference big enough change in the performance of the system that would warrant spending money to upgrade your computer. (Assuming 32bit XP)

05-12-2008, 03:05 PM	#15 (permalink)
lovely? Diamond Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: California Age: 15 Posts: 3,647	if what you are saying was true, wouldnt all 4gb still be in use even though you cant see all of it? __________________ E4500 @ 2.93GHZ ASUS P5K-DELUXE 2GB OCZ Reaper CL3 @ 800MHZ 3-4-4-15 eVGA 8800GT OZC GameXStream 700W PSU 320GB WD Caviar SATA, 80GB WD Caviar IDE Sometimes scientists make things alot harder than they need to. All they've gotta do is put a big spring on the ground where they think it's gonna land, or send a mission to the moon to erect a sign that says "Welcome to Earth".

05-12-2008, 05:01 PM	#20 (permalink)
CPTMuller Platinum Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Not there. Posts: 731	Still, in benchmarks there is no difference big enough change in the performance of the system that would warrant spending money to upgrade your computer. (Assuming 32bit XP) __________________ Specs of my main PC:Laptop (Thinkpad X61) C2D e6320, NVIDIA 7950GT (Factory OC) : C2D T7100, Intel GMA 965 Express 2gb ram 533mhz DDR2, 320GB 7200RPM : 1gb ra, 80gb 5400RPM Soundblaster X-FI Xtreme Audio, Linksys 10/100 Ethernet Card : on board Audio, on board Ethernet

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
2gig or 4gig?	ShawnHeather88	Laptop and Handheld Computers	10	04-09-2008 09:12 PM
support 2gig stick per slot? Acer Aspire 5100	UpskirtHayley	Desktop Computers	6	03-27-2008 05:51 AM
2gig max? really?	UpskirtHayley	Desktop Computers	2	02-20-2008 02:30 AM
Upgreat Ram from 1gig to 2gig? Should I?	tobywuk	Computer Memory and Hard Drives	3	01-05-2007 11:33 PM
512 upgrade to 2gig??	edgaracrunkog	Computer Memory and Hard Drives	4	04-04-2006 02:15 AM

05-12-2008, 02:10 PM	#14 (permalink)
tyttebøvs Silver Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 220	That article from codinghorror is actually pretty horrible. There are better sources that this

05-12-2008, 04:34 PM	#17 (permalink)
tyttebøvs Silver Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 220	That is a no. The missing ram will not be used.

05-12-2008, 04:51 PM	#19 (permalink)
tyttebøvs Silver Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 220	http://support.microsoft.com/kb/888137 "the kernel memory manager ignores any physical address that is more than 4 GB" To make use of 4GB RAM you need an address space that is bigger than 4GB, because the same address space needs to hold various IO devices.