but then there is us Dinosaurs still running 16/8 bit apts :'( At 05:35 PM 9/18/2009, DSinc Poked the stick with: >Tim, >In your "business" position I get this. Should you choose this position >personally, that is fine. Please accept that there are many folk everywhere >that just do NOT yet see the need for a 64-bit OS. JMHO. >Best, >Duncan > > >Tim Lider wrote: >>Hello all, >>Man explaining it and reading the explanation can make your brain hurt. >>Let's just say for the original poster it's not enough and should upgrade to >>64-bit OS. >>Regards, >>Tim Lider >>Sr. Data Recovery Specialist >>Advanced Data Solutions, LLC >>http://www.adv-data.com >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- >>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Sevart >>>Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 12:24 PM >>>To: [email protected] >>>Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question >>> >>>It isn't as much of a mystery as people make it out to be. By default, >>>on a >>>32-bit system with 4GB of RAM, 2GB is available for user space, and 2GB >>>is >>>reserved for exclusive use by the kernel--which would include kernel >>>mode >>>drivers. You are also correct in that some of this upper space is >>>reduced by >>>various system devices, some of which might not make much sense. The >>>reason >>>that systems differ is because of varying chipsets, their maximum >>>addressable memory, the ability of the chipset and BIOS to remap memory >>>above system-reserved spaces, and, of course, the devices installed. >>> >>>Using the /3GB switch will shift the division to 3GB of userland and >>>1GB of >>>kernel memory, but keep in mind that each individual 32-bit address >>>will >>>still be limited to 2GB of memory unless it was compiled with >>>LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE. It gets much more complicated when you're using >>>PAE >>>(Physical Address Extensions) and AWE (Address Windowing Extensions), >>>but >>>that realm is only relevant if you're running Server Enterprise or >>>better. >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- >>>>>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Winterlight >>>>Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:00 PM >>>>To: [email protected] >>>>Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question >>>> >>>>This is not how I understand it to work, not that there seems to be >>>>any kind of consensuses on this, but I read in Maximum PC that 32 bit >>>>supports 4GB of RAM addressing. You start out with 4GB of RAM and >>>>then windows starts knocking off for addresses already used by your >>>>video card, your network card, whatever. This is why some people show >>>>3.2GB some, just 3GB. To add to the confusion, Maximum PC has >>>>reported that MS has stated that windows can actually use some of >>>>that undressed RAM for things such as drivers. >>>> >>>> >>>>At 07:24 AM 9/18/2009, you wrote: >>>>>Hello Brian, >>>>>32-bit is really locked to 3GB of RAM, it's just Windows is >>>reporting >>>>the >>>>>3.6GB of RAM. >>> >> > >__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature >database 4439 (20090918) __________ > >The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > >http://www.eset.com > >
-- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- No facts are sacred, none are profane.
