4Gb in 32bit os showing less than before

Soldato
Joined
4 Feb 2007
Posts
9,899
Location
Nuneaton, UK
I'm running Vista Ulitmate 32bit and before I had 4 x 1Gb Crucial and it showed in windows as about 3300MB (roughly), now I have just changed to 2 x 2Gb G.Skill and its showing as 3069MB. Anyone know why this is?

I have to to a re-install really and I'm considering going to 64bit, is it well worth it with 4Gb ram or should I wait til I have 8Gb?

My pc is mainly used to web browsing and playing cod4.
 
Simple version

the 32bit OS (XP/Vista/whatever) can only address 4GB memory max
the memory on your graphics card etc is included in this 4GB "pool"

therefor some of it gets lopped off and is un-unsable

if you want to utilise all of your 4GB you'll have to go 64bit
& if you can get 64bit drivers for all your hardware why not :D
 
Simple version

the 32bit OS (XP/Vista/whatever) can only address 4GB memory max
the memory on your graphics card etc is included in this 4GB "pool"

therefor some of it gets lopped off and is un-unsable

if you want to utilise all of your 4GB you'll have to go 64bit
& if you can get 64bit drivers for all your hardware why not :D

Read the OP, he wasn't talking about that.

- Pea0n
 
Read the OP, he wasn't talking about that.

eh! you havin a bubble!!! :confused:

I'm running Vista Ulitmate 32bit and before I had 4 x 1Gb Crucial and it showed in windows as about 3300MB (roughly), now I have just changed to 2 x 2Gb G.Skill and its showing as 3069MB. Anyone know why this is?

Simple version

the 32bit OS (XP/Vista/whatever) can only address 4GB memory max
the memory on your graphics card etc is included in this 4GB "pool"

therefor some of it gets lopped off and is un-unsable

and again...
I have to to a re-install really and I'm considering going to 64bit, is it well worth it with 4Gb ram or should I wait til I have 8Gb?

My pc is mainly used to web browsing and playing cod4.

& if you can get 64bit drivers for all your hardware why not :D

Answered:confused:
 
My Vista 32Bit install was showing the full 4Gb, maybe its been fixed with SP1?

Also found this whilst browsing, not sure if it'll help:

Enable support for 4GB of RAM (or more) in Vista 32-bit

On a computer that has 4 GB of RAM, the System Properties dialog box and the System Information dialog box may report less memory than you expect. This problem occurs because the address space is limited to 4 GB in a 32-bit hardware environment. Memory may be relocated to make room for addresses that the basic input/output system (BIOS) reserves for hardware. However, because of this limitation, Windows Vista cannot access memory that is relocated above the 4 GB boundary.

Solution: Open an elevated Command Prompt, type BCDEdit /set pae ForceEnable and press Enter.

The pae parameter enables Physical Address Extension (PAE). On 32-bit versions of Windows, PAE is disabled by default. PAE is an addressing strategy that uses a page-translation hierarchy to enable systems with 32-bit addressing to address more than 4 GB of physical memory. PAE also supports several advanced system and processor features, such as Data Execution Prevention (DEP; "No execute"), Non-Uniform Memory Architecture (NUMA), and hot-add memory, so it is also used on computers with less than 4 GB of memory. PAE must be supported by the processor.

On a computer that supports hardware-enabled Data Execution Prevention (DEP), PAE is automatically enabled when DEP is enabled and automatically disabled when you disable DEP. To enable PAE when DEP is disabled, you must enable PAE explicitly: Open an elevated Command Prompt.
Type BCDEdit /set nx AlwaysOff & BCDEdit /set pae ForceEnable and press Enter.

Info & Sources:
• Memory Limits for Windows Releases
• Windows Vista may report less memory than you expect
• Boot Parameters to Configure DEP and PAE
• BCDEdit /set Parameters
 
800mhz Ram underclocking to 667

Guys does anyone no why 800/6400 ocz memory would underclock to 667 when fitted in an abit I-N73HD board, 4gb btw sorry.
 
Guys does anyone no why 800/6400 ocz memory would underclock to 667 when fitted in an abit I-N73HD board, 4gb btw sorry.

Its because it needs more than the standard 1.8V for PC6400 speeds, so it will default to PC5300 allowing it to boot at standard voltages.
 
Its because it needs more than the standard 1.8V for PC6400 speeds, so it will default to PC5300 allowing it to boot at standard voltages.
i have set the voltage to 2.1 which is what is quoted in OC website for the memory but i have had no change in vista score or bios. I'm stuck big time.
 
Have you changed the RAM speed too? You need to manually set the RAM divider to get PC6400 speeds.

to be honest i am a newb at this overclocking thing all i did was go into my bios and set the FSB to 1333 on my q6600 and left it all linked. then changed the voltage on the ram and that is it. RAM divider i have no clue about lol sorry bein a bit thick.
 
I installed SP1 and now it shows 4Gb in system properties task manager still reports 3069.

I havent changed anything else, system specs are in my sig, very strange how I can now use 300mb less, ah well I may install 64bit this weekend, only trouble is I know I will want 8Gb of ram then lol.
 
it is impossible to use more than 4gb ram in a 32-bit operating system including video ram etc.

it is possible for windows to use the 'inaccessable' ram as a pagefile though.
 
I installed SP1 and now it shows 4Gb in system properties task manager still reports 3069.

I havent changed anything else, system specs are in my sig, very strange how I can now use 300mb less, ah well I may install 64bit this weekend, only trouble is I know I will want 8Gb of ram then lol.

Only 3068mb is addressable. But with SP1 in system properties it now shows installed RAM.
 
The newer larger RAM sticks most likely consist of fewer but larger memory IC’s than the older memory and therefore the rounding on the amount of useable under the 32-bit system is far coarser!!
 
Back
Top Bottom