Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

[Guest Eric]

As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM and

was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows XP

Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

 

Thanks a lot

[Guest Bob I]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

Yes.

 

Eric wrote:

> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM and

> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

> try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows XP

> Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

>

> Thanks a lot

>

>

>

[Guest DustWolf]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

On 19 sep., 16:17, "Eric" <eric-nospam09834...@mail4u.net> wrote:

> As the title really.  I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM and

> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

> try out Vista shortly.  But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows XP

> Pro?  Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

 

Yes.

 

However additional free RAM will change nothing if it's not being

used. Windows does not utilize the extra free RAM, but the space is

available for use in application.

[Guest JS]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

No problem for XP and a good choice for Vista.

 

JS

http://www.pagestart.com

 

 

"Eric" <eric-nospam09834746@mail4u.net> wrote in message

news:gb0c94$7um$1@registered.motzarella.org...

> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM

> and

> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

> try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows

> XP

> Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

>

> Thanks a lot

>

>

>

[Guest Ken Blake, MVP]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:17:06 +0100, "Eric"

<eric-nospam09834746@mail4u.net> wrote:

> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM and

> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

> try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows XP

> Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

 

 

Yes it can. But will that much RAM improve Windows XP's performance?

The answer depends on what apps you run, but the answer is very likely

no, and that it will provide no additional performance over what apps

you run. Here's my standard post on this subject:

 

How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a

one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of

RAM you have keeps you from using the page file, and that depends on

what apps you run. Most people running a typical range of business

applications find that somewhere around 256-384MB works well, others

need 512MB. Almost anyone will see poor performance with less than

256MB. Some people, particularly those doing things like editing large

photographic images, can see a performance boost by adding even more

than 512MB--sometimes much more.

 

If you are currently using the page file significantly, more memory

will decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your performance.

If you are not using the page file significantly, more memory will do

nothing for you. Go to

http://billsway.com/notes%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ and download

WinXP-2K_Pagefile.zip and monitor your pagefile usage. That should

give you a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how

much more.

 

Also bear in mind one additional point: how much RAM can be used (in

either XP or Vista) depends on your hardware configuration. Most

computers can use a little more than 3GB, but bear in mind that

there's a slight possibility that yours will not.

 

All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a 4GB

address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can

not go.

 

But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

3.1GB.

 

Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

address space to map it too.

 

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Guest Jason]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

I wouldn't use XP with less than 1Gb RAM when I can fit at least this.

"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

news:ahq7d45774e20jqlb7897r1e7nss4acumr@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:17:06 +0100, "Eric"

> <eric-nospam09834746@mail4u.net> wrote:

>

>> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM

>> and

>> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

>> try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows

>> XP

>> Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

>

>

> Yes it can. But will that much RAM improve Windows XP's performance?

> The answer depends on what apps you run, but the answer is very likely

> no, and that it will provide no additional performance over what apps

> you run. Here's my standard post on this subject:

>

> How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a

> one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of

> RAM you have keeps you from using the page file, and that depends on

> what apps you run. Most people running a typical range of business

> applications find that somewhere around 256-384MB works well, others

> need 512MB. Almost anyone will see poor performance with less than

> 256MB. Some people, particularly those doing things like editing large

> photographic images, can see a performance boost by adding even more

> than 512MB--sometimes much more.

>

> If you are currently using the page file significantly, more memory

> will decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your performance.

> If you are not using the page file significantly, more memory will do

> nothing for you. Go to

> http://billsway.com/notes%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ and download

> WinXP-2K_Pagefile.zip and monitor your pagefile usage. That should

> give you a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how

> much more.

>

> Also bear in mind one additional point: how much RAM can be used (in

> either XP or Vista) depends on your hardware configuration. Most

> computers can use a little more than 3GB, but bear in mind that

> there's a slight possibility that yours will not.

>

> All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a 4GB

> address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can

> not go.

>

> But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

> have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

> That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

> available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

> use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

> range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

> 3.1GB.

>

> Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

> RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

> address space to map it too.

>

> --

> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Guest Ken Blake, MVP]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:30:19 +1200, "Jason" <JAllen@Hotmail.com>

wrote:

> I wouldn't use XP with less than 1Gb RAM when I can fit at least this.

 

 

 

Your choice, of course. But only few people will see a performance

increment by running XP with 1GB instead of 512M.

 

 

> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message

> news:ahq7d45774e20jqlb7897r1e7nss4acumr@4ax.com...

> > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:17:06 +0100, "Eric"

> > <eric-nospam09834746@mail4u.net> wrote:

> >

> >> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of RAM

> >> and

> >> was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give me chance to

> >> try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this work OK in Windows

> >> XP

> >> Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

> >

> >

> > Yes it can. But will that much RAM improve Windows XP's performance?

> > The answer depends on what apps you run, but the answer is very likely

> > no, and that it will provide no additional performance over what apps

> > you run. Here's my standard post on this subject:

> >

> > How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a

> > one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of

> > RAM you have keeps you from using the page file, and that depends on

> > what apps you run. Most people running a typical range of business

> > applications find that somewhere around 256-384MB works well, others

> > need 512MB. Almost anyone will see poor performance with less than

> > 256MB. Some people, particularly those doing things like editing large

> > photographic images, can see a performance boost by adding even more

> > than 512MB--sometimes much more.

> >

> > If you are currently using the page file significantly, more memory

> > will decrease or eliminate that usage, and improve your performance.

> > If you are not using the page file significantly, more memory will do

> > nothing for you. Go to

> > http://billsway.com/notes%5Fpublic/winxp%5Ftweaks/ and download

> > WinXP-2K_Pagefile.zip and monitor your pagefile usage. That should

> > give you a good idea of whether more memory can help, and if so, how

> > much more.

> >

> > Also bear in mind one additional point: how much RAM can be used (in

> > either XP or Vista) depends on your hardware configuration. Most

> > computers can use a little more than 3GB, but bear in mind that

> > there's a slight possibility that yours will not.

> >

> > All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a 4GB

> > address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can

> > not go.

> >

> > But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you

> > have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.

> > That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not

> > available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can

> > use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can

> > range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around

> > 3.1GB.

> >

> > Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual

> > RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no

> > address space to map it too.

> >

> > --

> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>

 

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Guest Don B]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

 

"Jason" <JAllen@Hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:eUjDf#qGJHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> I wouldn't use XP with less than 1Gb RAM when I can fit at least this.

 

I agree entirely. 256MB is really too little and an experienced user would

immediately see the slowdown in performance, even on a basic install of XP.

 

512 is maybe OK for most poople, but when RAM is as cheap as it is now, why

mess around with 512MB, when you can stick a GIG in there.

 

I agree with you Jason. I would never accept less than 1024MB on a Windows

XP system now. Infact I have never run less than this for quite a long time

now. I bought a laptop about 5 years ago and upgraded the RAM to 1G from

the standard 256MB (which was making the system sluggish).

[Guest Jason]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

I've found that RAM is relative to performance. (I installed 512Mb from 256

on a machine running 98 - Windows 2000 immediately improved and made no

difference to 98). On XP I've updated as I've changed motherboards -

starting with 512Mb, then 1Gb when I went to 2.8GHz - I now run 2Gb on the

replacement motherboard motherboard with 2.2GHz CPU. The same thing has

happened when upgrading hard drives. Each time I used a new hard drive as

the windows drive, windows and apps ran faster. This particular computer is

300GHz with 192Mb RAM, 18Gb Hard drive running XP Pro. Rather slow even

sending/receiving email/news and browsing on broadband. But can't afford to

upgrade/replace yet. Good for downloading large files off the 'net though.

"Don B" <nospam@spamtrap.net> wrote in message

news:gb2tab$sdj$1@registered.motzarella.org...

>

> "Jason" <JAllen@Hotmail.com> wrote in message

> news:eUjDf#qGJHA.4140@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> I wouldn't use XP with less than 1Gb RAM when I can fit at least this.

>

> I agree entirely. 256MB is really too little and an experienced user

> would

> immediately see the slowdown in performance, even on a basic install of

> XP.

>

> 512 is maybe OK for most poople, but when RAM is as cheap as it is now,

> why

> mess around with 512MB, when you can stick a GIG in there.

>

> I agree with you Jason. I would never accept less than 1024MB on a

> Windows

> XP system now. Infact I have never run less than this for quite a long

> time

> now. I bought a laptop about 5 years ago and upgraded the RAM to 1G from

> the standard 256MB (which was making the system sluggish).

>

>

>

[Guest HeyBub]

Re: Can XP use 3GB of RAM?

 

DustWolf wrote:

> On 19 sep., 16:17, "Eric" <eric-nospam09834...@mail4u.net> wrote:

>> As the title really. I have a motherboard capable of running 3GB of

>> RAM and was thinking of installing 3GB to max out the board and give

>> me chance to try out Vista shortly. But in the meantime, will this

>> work OK in Windows XP Pro? Can XP handle 3GB od RAM ok?

>

> Yes.

>

> However additional free RAM will change nothing if it's not being

> used. Windows does not utilize the extra free RAM, but the space is

> available for use in application.

 

Windows DOES use extra free RAM to improve its efficiency.