Re: Why is Vista showing only 3 Gb memory when 4 Gb is installed?

[Colin Barnhorst]

The /PAE switch does not function to override the hiding of the higher
addresses that have been reserved by the BIOS and OS. It does not make more
ram available to programs than already available to the user.

In essence you are trying to solve a non-problem. This is all by design.

The OS uses the high 1GB or so for system addresses. When these addresses
are above the uppermost physical ram addresses installed on the system the
memory manager offsets them into physical ram as needed. There is no need
to block any address space. However, once you have 4GB of real ram, the
memory manger is no longer offsetting these high addresses because system
memory represents real ram addresses and performance improves by not having
to translate addresses. Now that this address space is in real ram, this
ram must be made inaccessible to user programs to prevent user programs from
corrupting the system by writing there. Thus the system addresses are
hidden from the user.

I know I am not getting the description quite right, but I hope you get the
idea. The bottom line is that just because the user cannot see all of the
4GB does not mean that all 4GB is not in use.

"dirty old man" <a...@def.com> wrote in message
news:OL8d%232%23PHH...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>I have tried the /PAE switch with Vista x86 and it did not work for me.
> Winver still only shows ~ 3.3 GB RAM.
>

[dirty old man]

Yeah, after reading several posts and links provided in these newsgroups,
I realized there was no advantage (might even be disadvantageous) and
no problem, so I just removed the /PAE switch and moved on. HAD to
give it a go though.

Regards

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinb...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:D869C4BD-A6FF-4E1E...@microsoft.com...

[F r e e]

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinb...@msn.com>

hi Colin, i have been reading you and others here with great satisfaction,
and now i have a question:

What is the ideal maximum RAM in Vista 32bits? Does 4G make sense? Or, p.e.
3 G would be more reasonable?

And... isn't 4 G becoming fastly a very low limit (nowadays everybody edits
videos etc)

Thanks in advance!

f r e e

[Mike Williams]

"F r e e" <sp...@no.thanx> wrote in message
news:%23p%23afe0Q...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> And... isn't 4 G becoming fastly a very low limit

Which is one of the main attractions of 64bit...

(nowadays everybody edits videos etc)

Since the number of people who can down-sample a screenshot or digital photo
for upload seems to be vanishingly small, I'd seriously question that one
:-)

[F r e e]

"Mike Williams" <mi...@mvps.spam.invalid.org> escribió en el mensaje
news:OePl$f4QHH...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

LOL :)

[Colin Barnhorst]

4GB, all things being equal. The system will leverage it for you.

"F r e e" <sp...@no.thanx> wrote in message
news:%23p%23afe0Q...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>

[F r e e]

ok thank you!

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinb...@msn.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:F165E016-2C2A-41B9...@microsoft.com...

[studio]

I am not an expert ( but I read many posts & then did this )
& the issues was fixed 1st try... !! : ' )
enter Bios
Advance chipset features
memory hole for PCI MMIO
enable feature!

this feature is to remap to address above 4G of ram

its all there now!

"Stan Kay" wrote:

> I have an ASUS P5B Deluxe motherboard and four 1 Gb sticks of CorsairTwinX
> XMS2, DDR2 PC2-6400 memory and am runing version 6000 of Windows vista
> Ultimate. The bios reports that I have 4 Gb of memory but after the O/S has
> booted it reports only 3 Gb of memory. Moreover, when I run msinfo32 it
> reports that I have:-
>
> Total Physical Memory: 4,096.00 Mb
> Available Physical Memory: 2.28 Gb
> Total Virtual Memory: 2.00 Gb
> Available Virtual Memory: 1.96 Gb
>
> Can anyone please offer an explanation for this discrepancy and a view on
> whether I will be able to use all of my memory rather than only 75% of it?
>
>
>