Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Bino Gopal wrote: Well thought I'd share my results as a data point: Got a Lenovo (aka IBM) T61 laptop from circa late 2007. It's the Santa Rosa mobile platform, specifically an Intel Core 2 Duo Merom 2nd gen processor (T7500 @ 2.2Ghz). I don't know what the exact chipset is (anyone know an easy way to find that with an app...?) but in any case the chipset it what usually came with that chip. So I installed Win7 Ent 64-bit (and remember I only have 4GB TOTAL memory installed) and on the System screen, the machine went from saying 3.2GB usable out of the 4GB installed (which was with Win7 32-bit), to just saying a plain 4GB RAM installed with nothing missing... So it looks like even though I only have 4GB physical memory, the MMIO devices don't need to reserve any of my 4GB of memory b/c they can map above it (I assume up to 8GB in my case). So based on the KB article, I assume if I upgraded to 8GB of RAM, it would show 7.2GB of RAM b/c then the devices would still need to map and since 8GB is their max, it would take away from my physical memory...I'll see if I can get 8GB of RAM for it and test this out! ;) Incorrect unfortunately. There were so many complaints/questions from people with the I have 4GB installed why does it only say 3.5GB that Microsoft now reports the INSTALLED memory as the full 4GB, but you still can't use it all. I believe in 32bit Windows 7 you can see the true number in task manager or process explorer. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778%28v=VS.85%29.aspx Microsoft isn't kidding when they say 4GB for windows 7. They are not mapping things above that. They just removed showing you the real number in the system tab. Christopher Fisk
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Well 32bit I dunno as none of my x32 boxes have more than 2GB. Process Explorer lists 4,192,372 here on Win7 x64. They adjusted the reported amount for x32 but it was a minor 3GB fractional amount not to report fake full 4GB. On 5/12/2010 12:36 PM, Christopher Fisk wrote: Incorrect unfortunately. There were so many complaints/questions from people with the I have 4GB installed why does it only say 3.5GB that Microsoft now reports the INSTALLED memory as the full 4GB, but you still can't use it all. I believe in 32bit Windows 7 you can see the true number in task manager or process explorer. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778%28v=VS.85%29.aspx Microsoft isn't kidding when they say 4GB for windows 7. They are not mapping things above that. They just removed showing you the real number in the system tab. Christopher Fisk
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
On Sat, 1 May 2010, maccrawj wrote: Differing amounts of memory hole from differing configurations would be my guess before blaming a bug. This. 4GB of memory is the max you can have between anything. Got an oldass video card that uses only 32MB of memory? You'll have more usable main memory than if you have 2x768MB NVidia's (In which case you'd be down by 1.5GB or have only 2.5G show up. This isn't rocket science. Anything that uses addressable memory needs to fit within the 32bit range. Modem with 32k? Fit into the 32 bit range. PCI SATA adaptor with a cache? Needs to fit in the 32bit range. New Fangled Video card with 1GB of memory? Needs to fit in the 32bit range. All of those things take away from the 4GB hard cap on 32bit systems. This can be programically sidestepped with kernel programming, very similarly to how dos used to work with highmem. http://www.linux.com/archive/feed/119287 Windows PAE has a lot of artificial limitations in place, put there by Microsoft. Windows XP is software limited to 4GB of memory Windows Vista is software limited to 4GB of memory Windows 7 is also software limited to 4GB of memory http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778%28v=VS.85%29.aspx It has been shown that Vista at least uses the same codebase as Server 2008 and can have some DLL's switched to enable higher memory limits, so it is definitely a programming decision, and one that is likely explained by the following: Drivers need to understand PAE in order to function without issue. MS knew that hardware programmers can barely get a regular driver working, so adding more trouble to a 32bit system when they have a 64bit solution available is not worth it. I agree with that. If you have a 64bit processor you should have a 64bit OS. Christopher Fisk -- SwifT many; we have bugreports asking us to fix the docs on the cds SwifT i fixed/invalid them because they're fixed online, and they reopen stating it's still wrong on their cd SwifT *sigh*
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Not as long as your BIOS has a hardware address space remap option that moves it above the installed memory. Without BIOS support to remap your assertion would be true. I have an Asus Rampage, X48 chipset which does this. I have also seen older 64bit laptops that DO NOT have the BIOS option (Toshiba for one) AND are brain dead wired for no more than 4GB installed thus 3.25GB total, lose lose. Another example is my Asus 1201N netbook which is Atom n330 dual core 64bit yet can't address more than 4GB. Why I am not exactly sure except I hear it shows up in BIOS but Vist/Win7 x64 listed as hardware reserved and unusable. Likely a BIOS support issue though people argue it's a chipset limitation imposed by Intel. On 4/30/2010 1:49 PM, Bino Gopal wrote: snip So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). snip
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Not a bug, that's the Microsoft artificial memory map limit on 32bit OS to (ostensibly) prevent driver issues caused by brain dead drivers writing to 64bit addresses as if they were 32bit which is also why x64 is so draconian about signed drivers! In other words despite PAE MS prevents working outside 32bit/4GB memory space on32bit OS. This was the subject of much discussion a few months ago here and someone posted a link to the conspiracy guy who outed M$' secret agenda, LOL. Now assuming x64 hardware, switch to a x64 OS (caveat The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature) to get 4GB+ addressable w/ device memory mapped above that. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 On 4/30/2010 3:35 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Well no, I've seen systems with 4G of memory show: 2.5G 2.8G 3.5G with /PAE :) On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 12:30:54AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Not a bug, that's the Microsoft artificial memory map limit on 32bit OS to (ostensibly) prevent driver issues caused by brain dead drivers writing to 64bit addresses as if they were 32bit which is also why x64 is so draconian about signed drivers! In other words despite PAE MS prevents working outside 32bit/4GB memory space on32bit OS. This was the subject of much discussion a few months ago here and someone posted a link to the conspiracy guy who outed M$' secret agenda, LOL. Now assuming x64 hardware, switch to a x64 OS (caveat The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature) to get 4GB+ addressable w/ device memory mapped above that. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 On 4/30/2010 3:35 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Sorry, your point/counterpoint is? Think I'm missing something here. On 5/1/2010 7:28 AM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Well no, I've seen systems with 4G of memory show: 2.5G 2.8G 3.5G with /PAE :) On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 12:30:54AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Not a bug, that's the Microsoft artificial memory map limit on 32bit OS to (ostensibly) prevent driver issues caused by brain dead drivers writing to 64bit addresses as if they were 32bit which is also why x64 is so draconian about signed drivers! In other words despite PAE MS prevents working outside 32bit/4GB memory space on32bit OS. This was the subject of much discussion a few months ago here and someone posted a link to the conspiracy guy who outed M$' secret agenda, LOL. Now assuming x64 hardware, switch to a x64 OS (caveat The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature) to get 4GB+ addressable w/ device memory mapped above that. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 On 4/30/2010 3:35 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
I'm not sure how this changes anything about the original post. The reason for those figures is all based on how things like BIOS handles shadowing, higher memory registers, PCI-E segments (for the 2.5G) etc. The 3.5G can -show- but it's because of the way the memory controller works there.. which would make me think it's far more likely you saw that on either a server board or using an AMD chip, which has the memory controller onboard. Some good explanation here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.html -Original message- From: Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net Date: Sat, 01 May 2010 06:28:26 -0700 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? Well no, I've seen systems with 4G of memory show: 2.5G 2.8G 3.5G with /PAE :) On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 12:30:54AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Not a bug, that's the Microsoft artificial memory map limit on 32bit OS to (ostensibly) prevent driver issues caused by brain dead drivers writing to 64bit addresses as if they were 32bit which is also why x64 is so draconian about signed drivers! In other words despite PAE MS prevents working outside 32bit/4GB memory space on32bit OS. This was the subject of much discussion a few months ago here and someone posted a link to the conspiracy guy who outed M$' secret agenda, LOL. Now assuming x64 hardware, switch to a x64 OS (caveat The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature) to get 4GB+ addressable w/ device memory mapped above that. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 On 4/30/2010 3:35 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Look in the resource monitor...you can see exactly how your physical memory is used... Mine: Available 5325MB Cached 3731MB Total 8190MB Installed 8192MB Then it shows another catagory referred to as hardware reserved. On my system this amount is 2MB. Look at the difference between total and installed. 2MB. There is further breakdown given but I'm too lazy to type all that... But the fact is on a 64bit OS with the right CPU and chipset, you can essentially use all that ram...with some exceptions, obviously. But more physical RAM still means more available ram. On 4/30/2010 4:49 PM, Bino Gopal wrote: But from the MS article: Note When the physical RAM that is installed on a computer equals the address space that is supported by the chipset, the total system memory that is available to the operating system is always less than the physical RAM that is installed. For example, consider a computer that has an Intel 975X chipset that supports 8 GB of address space. If you install 8 GB of RAM, the system memory that is available to the operating system will be reduced by the PCI configuration requirements. In this scenario, PCI configuration requirements reduce the memory that is available to the operating system by an amount that is between approximately 200 MB and approximately 1 GB. The reduction depends on the configuration. So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). And to put a further point on it, since the video card is a MMIO (memory-mapped I/O) device, I assume it'll take memory away from the max 4GB too. So the moral of the story is that sure I can upgrade to 64-bit Win7, but if I don't put more than 4GB of memory in the system, I should end up with exactly the same amount of memory as with 32-bit Win7 right?! Now, apps running faster is a whole 'nother reason and definitely worth doing it for that! ;) BINO From: bh...@sc.rr.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM. = No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.814 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2844 - Release Date: 04/30/10 02:27:00
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Seems to be a bug or a chipset thing if it's different on different systems, all with 4G of ram. Either way there's no reason to not use a 64 bit os in 2010. On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 10:43:14AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Sorry, your point/counterpoint is? Think I'm missing something here. On 5/1/2010 7:28 AM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Well no, I've seen systems with 4G of memory show: 2.5G 2.8G 3.5G with /PAE :) On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 12:30:54AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Not a bug, that's the Microsoft artificial memory map limit on 32bit OS to (ostensibly) prevent driver issues caused by brain dead drivers writing to 64bit addresses as if they were 32bit which is also why x64 is so draconian about signed drivers! In other words despite PAE MS prevents working outside 32bit/4GB memory space on32bit OS. This was the subject of much discussion a few months ago here and someone posted a link to the conspiracy guy who outed M$' secret agenda, LOL. Now assuming x64 hardware, switch to a x64 OS (caveat The BIOS must support the memory remapping feature) to get 4GB+ addressable w/ device memory mapped above that. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 On 4/30/2010 3:35 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Good info in that link except the PDF for memory hole is very dated (2004) only hinting at what is now the norm: Work is being done by the BIOS and/or chip manufacturers that will either remap physical memory or move device address space in order to eliminate the hole. This memory hole may be a thing of the past soon. The MS link I posted I think covers it all including expectations solutions: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Meanwhile KB929580 conflicts with KB929605 stated need for x64 OS: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929580 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, Windows Server 2003, and Windows Server 2008 cannot access memory that is relocated above the 4 GB boundary. *But then goes on to say*: A 32-bit operating system can address memory that is relocated above the 4 GB boundary if the following conditions are true: * The computer is in Physical Address Extension (PAE) mode. * The computer has 4 GB of RAM. In this case, the operating system correctly reports how much memory is installed. Lastly, a break down of memory limits by OS: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx On 5/1/2010 11:24 AM, CW wrote: I'm not sure how this changes anything about the original post. The reason for those figures is all based on how things like BIOS handles shadowing, higher memory registers, PCI-E segments (for the 2.5G) etc. The 3.5G can -show- but it's because of the way the memory controller works there.. which would make me think it's far more likely you saw that on either a server board or using an AMD chip, which has the memory controller onboard. Some good explanation here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.html snip
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Differing amounts of memory hole from differing configurations would be my guess before blaming a bug. Agreed, with driver support (on new devices at least) finally happening there is no reason to use x32. On 5/1/2010 3:16 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Seems to be a bug or a chipset thing if it's different on different systems, all with 4G of ram. Either way there's no reason to not use a 64 bit os in 2010. On Sat, May 01, 2010 at 10:43:14AM -0700, maccrawj wrote: Sorry, your point/counterpoint is? Think I'm missing something here. On 5/1/2010 7:28 AM, Bryan Seitz wrote: Well no, I've seen systems with 4G of memory show: 2.5G 2.8G 3.5G with /PAE :) snip
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
When talking about 64 bit OS, does it matter what hardware you have in a PC? Meaning, do you need to have compatible motherboard, etc or is it strictly an OS this?
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Oh yes...some processors can't run 64-bit...if you run the Win7 upgrade adviser, it will tell you if your system can handle 64bit or not. I have had some of my old hardware become obsolete after going 64-bitin my case, it was my scanner. On 4/30/2010 8:32 AM, GPL wrote: When talking about 64 bit OS, does it matter what hardware you have in a PC? Meaning, do you need to have compatible motherboard, etc or is it strictly an OS this? No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.814 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2843 - Release Date: 04/29/10 14:27:00
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Indeed you need a compatible CPU/Mobo (mostly CPU matters here) and you might run into hardware that doesn't have 64 bit drivers as well. On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 08:41:41AM -0400, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Oh yes...some processors can't run 64-bit...if you run the Win7 upgrade adviser, it will tell you if your system can handle 64bit or not. I have had some of my old hardware become obsolete after going 64-bitin my case, it was my scanner. On 4/30/2010 8:32 AM, GPL wrote: When talking about 64 bit OS, does it matter what hardware you have in a PC? Meaning, do you need to have compatible motherboard, etc or is it strictly an OS this? No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.814 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2843 - Release Date: 04/29/10 14:27:00 -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Not to sound like a NOOB, but here goes. I'm looking at the i7 930 and GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R specs page and am either missing it or it is assumed you can run 64 bit OS on them. Is it called something else? On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: Indeed you need a compatible CPU/Mobo (mostly CPU matters here) and you might run into hardware that doesn't have 64 bit drivers as well. On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 08:41:41AM -0400, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Oh yes...some processors can't run 64-bit...if you run the Win7 upgrade adviser, it will tell you if your system can handle 64bit or not. I have had some of my old hardware become obsolete after going 64-bitin my case, it was my scanner. On 4/30/2010 8:32 AM, GPL wrote: When talking about 64 bit OS, does it matter what hardware you have in a PC? Meaning, do you need to have compatible motherboard, etc or is it strictly an OS this? No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.814 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2843 - Release Date: 04/29/10 14:27:00 -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
64 bit will work. On Apr 30, 2010 9:17 PM, GPL hardwarelistrea...@gmail.com wrote: Not to sound like a NOOB, but here goes. I'm looking at the i7 930 and GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R specs page and am either missing it or it is assumed you can run 64 bit OS on them. Is it called something else? On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: Indeed you need a compat...
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
But from the MS article: Note When the physical RAM that is installed on a computer equals the address space that is supported by the chipset, the total system memory that is available to the operating system is always less than the physical RAM that is installed. For example, consider a computer that has an Intel 975X chipset that supports 8 GB of address space. If you install 8 GB of RAM, the system memory that is available to the operating system will be reduced by the PCI configuration requirements. In this scenario, PCI configuration requirements reduce the memory that is available to the operating system by an amount that is between approximately 200 MB and approximately 1 GB. The reduction depends on the configuration. So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). And to put a further point on it, since the video card is a MMIO (memory-mapped I/O) device, I assume it'll take memory away from the max 4GB too. So the moral of the story is that sure I can upgrade to 64-bit Win7, but if I don't put more than 4GB of memory in the system, I should end up with exactly the same amount of memory as with 32-bit Win7 right?! Now, apps running faster is a whole 'nother reason and definitely worth doing it for that! ;) BINO From: bh...@sc.rr.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 4:49 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? But from the MS article: Note When the physical RAM that is installed on a computer equals the address space that is supported by the chipset, the total system memory that is available to the operating system is always less than the physical RAM that is installed. For example, consider a computer that has an Intel 975X chipset that supports 8 GB of address space. If you install 8 GB of RAM, the system memory that is available to the operating system will be reduced by the PCI configuration requirements. In this scenario, PCI configuration requirements reduce the memory that is available to the operating system by an amount that is between approximately 200 MB and approximately 1 GB. The reduction depends on the configuration. So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). And to put a further point on it, since the video card is a MMIO (memory-mapped I/O) device, I assume it'll take memory away from the max 4GB too. So the moral of the story is that sure I can upgrade to 64-bit Win7, but if I don't put more than 4GB of memory in the system, I should end up with exactly the same amount of memory as with 32-bit Win7 right?! Now, apps running faster is a whole 'nother reason and definitely worth doing it for that! ;) BINO From: bh...@sc.rr.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Yeah I've seen that bug too, even with /PAE etc still doesn't fix it. You should upgrade to Win7-64 :) On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 06:32:30PM -0400, Jason Carson wrote: I have 6 GB of RAM and a GeForce 295 with 1.7 GB of memory but am running WinXP 32 bit and my system only shows that I have 2.49 GB of RAM. Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 4:49 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? But from the MS article: Note When the physical RAM that is installed on a computer equals the address space that is supported by the chipset, the total system memory that is available to the operating system is always less than the physical RAM that is installed. For example, consider a computer that has an Intel 975X chipset that supports 8 GB of address space. If you install 8 GB of RAM, the system memory that is available to the operating system will be reduced by the PCI configuration requirements. In this scenario, PCI configuration requirements reduce the memory that is available to the operating system by an amount that is between approximately 200 MB and approximately 1 GB. The reduction depends on the configuration. So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). And to put a further point on it, since the video card is a MMIO (memory-mapped I/O) device, I assume it'll take memory away from the max 4GB too. So the moral of the story is that sure I can upgrade to 64-bit Win7, but if I don't put more than 4GB of memory in the system, I should end up with exactly the same amount of memory as with 32-bit Win7 right?! Now, apps running faster is a whole 'nother reason and definitely worth doing it for that! ;) BINO From: bh...@sc.rr.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM. -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
It depends on what the chipset can support. If you have 4GB installed but the chipset supports addressing up to 8GB, then that leaves 4GB of address space that can be used to map the video memory (and others) into. It is not necessary to map the video memory into actual memory--just within the supported address space. That all assumes that you are running a 64-bit version of Windows. If you're running 32-bit, then everything has to map into the 4GB space. -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bobby Heid Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 3:56 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? Well, it does sort of sound like that. I have Win 7 ultimate with 6GB RAM. When I right-click on My Computer and select properties, it says I have 6.0GB. On my work machine (4GB RAM) with XP and 2 graphic cards, it says I have about 2.89GB RAM. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 4:49 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? But from the MS article: Note When the physical RAM that is installed on a computer equals the address space that is supported by the chipset, the total system memory that is available to the operating system is always less than the physical RAM that is installed. For example, consider a computer that has an Intel 975X chipset that supports 8 GB of address space. If you install 8 GB of RAM, the system memory that is available to the operating system will be reduced by the PCI configuration requirements. In this scenario, PCI configuration requirements reduce the memory that is available to the operating system by an amount that is between approximately 200 MB and approximately 1 GB. The reduction depends on the configuration. So doesn't that imply that based on the fact that I only have 4GB, I'll still be short some memory, unlike what some others said? Or to put it another way, like Gary said, what will the devices map into since they can't map to thin air (and apparently they still need to map). And to put a further point on it, since the video card is a MMIO (memory- mapped I/O) device, I assume it'll take memory away from the max 4GB too. So the moral of the story is that sure I can upgrade to 64-bit Win7, but if I don't put more than 4GB of memory in the system, I should end up with exactly the same amount of memory as with 32-bit Win7 right?! Now, apps running faster is a whole 'nother reason and definitely worth doing it for that! ;) BINO From: bh...@sc.rr.com To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 22:32:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes- of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM.
[H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Hey guys, we have a site volume license for Windows-I might not be being precise about this as I'm not sure, but I work at Citrix Systems, Inc. and we're a pretty close Microsoft partner and so get licenses for a lot of MS software so I think that's what it is (in case it matters). For example, I have to authenticate to the KMS server using slmgr.vbs from my laptop, and have been having issues reaching it and just got it figured out recently! Anyway, I want to install Win7 Enterprise (that's what we get; basically Ultimate minus the games right?) on my somewhat new laptop and was wondering whether I wanted the 32bit or 64-bit version... I know you get the full support of the 4GB of RAM on the 64-bit version (well, that you can actually address/use over 3GB) and btw I only have 4GB on this laptop... But are there any other reasons to go 64-bit? Or are there reasons not to go 64-bit still, like app/program compatability/issues? I'm not going to be playing many games on it (though I might install one or two simpler ones for travel), but that's not a main concern for me... Thanks for any input! BINO
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Go for 64bit and use all memory.no reason not to. -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 5:25 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? Hey guys, we have a site volume license for Windows-I might not be being precise about this as I'm not sure, but I work at Citrix Systems, Inc. and we're a pretty close Microsoft partner and so get licenses for a lot of MS software so I think that's what it is (in case it matters). For example, I have to authenticate to the KMS server using slmgr.vbs from my laptop, and have been having issues reaching it and just got it figured out recently! Anyway, I want to install Win7 Enterprise (that's what we get; basically Ultimate minus the games right?) on my somewhat new laptop and was wondering whether I wanted the 32bit or 64-bit version... I know you get the full support of the 4GB of RAM on the 64-bit version (well, that you can actually address/use over 3GB) and btw I only have 4GB on this laptop... But are there any other reasons to go 64-bit? Or are there reasons not to go 64-bit still, like app/program compatability/issues? I'm not going to be playing many games on it (though I might install one or two simpler ones for travel), but that's not a main concern for me... Thanks for any input! BINO
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
I second that. Last year installed Win7 64bit and never thought of going back. Drivers, for the most part, are no longer a problem. I even got an update driver from M-Audio (that's why it snowed in Maine this weekend) Steve On 4/29/2010 6:38 PM, Gary wrote: Go for 64bit and use all memory.no reason not to. -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 5:25 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? Hey guys, we have a site volume license for Windows-I might not be being precise about this as I'm not sure, but I work at Citrix Systems, Inc. and we're a pretty close Microsoft partner and so get licenses for a lot of MS software so I think that's what it is (in case it matters). For example, I have to authenticate to the KMS server using slmgr.vbs from my laptop, and have been having issues reaching it and just got it figured out recently! Anyway, I want to install Win7 Enterprise (that's what we get; basically Ultimate minus the games right?) on my somewhat new laptop and was wondering whether I wanted the 32bit or 64-bit version... I know you get the full support of the 4GB of RAM on the 64-bit version (well, that you can actually address/use over 3GB) and btw I only have 4GB on this laptop... But are there any other reasons to go 64-bit? Or are there reasons not to go 64-bit still, like app/program compatability/issues? I'm not going to be playing many games on it (though I might install one or two simpler ones for travel), but that's not a main concern for me... Thanks for any input! BINO
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
Since the OP only has 4.0GB, how will that help him? Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- Go for 64bit and use all memory.no reason not to.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:23 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? Since the OP only has 4.0GB, how will that help him? Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- Go for 64bit and use all memory.no reason not to.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:24:30PM -0700, Bino Gopal wrote: Hey guys, we have a site volume license for Windows-I might not be being precise about this as I'm not sure, but I work at Citrix Systems, Inc. and we're a pretty close Microsoft partner and so get licenses for a lot of MS software so I think that's what it is (in case it matters). For example, I have to authenticate to the KMS server using slmgr.vbs from my laptop, and have been having issues reaching it and just got it figured out recently! Anyway, I want to install Win7 Enterprise (that's what we get; basically Ultimate minus the games right?) on my somewhat new laptop and was wondering whether I wanted the 32bit or 64-bit version... I know you get the full support of the 4GB of RAM on the 64-bit version (well, that you can actually address/use over 3GB) and btw I only have 4GB on this laptop... But are there any other reasons to go 64-bit? Or are there reasons not to go 64-bit still, like app/program compatability/issues? I'm not going to be playing many games on it (though I might install one or two simpler ones for travel), but that's not a main concern for me... 1) You can use all 4G 2) Speed. Even though you might not need 64 bit for memory reasons, a lot of applications that are 64 bit will run faster. This includes the OS itself too. -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605 Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Gary VanderMolen Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:09 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit? So what will they map into instead? As far as I know, the video has to map into RAM, regardless if the OS is 32-bit or 64-bit. Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) -Original Message- From: Bobby Heid IIRC, the BIOS and video RAM will not have to map into the 4GB address space (in 64-bit). He will have the whole address space for RAM.
Re: [H] Win7 Ent 32-bit vs 64-bit?
If you have 1GB video card it helps a lot moving it above the actual RAM address space. There are other devices that would also otherwise map onto the 4GB space. 4GB RAM + 512MB video + misc hardware would yield me about 3.25GB under x32 where I get fill 4.0GB on x64. On 4/29/2010 7:32 PM, Bobby Heid wrote: It maps into the address space of whatever the 64-bit address space is (8 terabytes or something like that). When you have a 32-bit OS, the address space is only 4GB, the system maps in the hardware memory (BIOS, graphics card RAM, etc.) space from the top of the address space down. That is why you get between about 3-3.5GB of actual RAM when you have 4GB RAM on a 32-bit system. I know I'm not explaining this well, so take a look here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/dude-wheres-my-4-gigabytes-of-ram.h tml and http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605
