Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

[Guest Charles Elliott]

Hello:

 

I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

3,406,240 bytes

 

are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

get WinXP to use

 

the full 4GB?

 

 

Thanks,

 

CHE

[Guest Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

Charles Elliott <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote:

> Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates

> only 3,406,240 bytes

>

> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any

> way to get WinXP to use

>

> the full 4GB?

>

>

> Thanks,

>

> CHE

 

This is normal if you aren't using WinXP x64.

[Guest Thee Chicago Wolf]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

>3,406,240 bytes

>

>are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

>get WinXP to use

>

>the full 4GB?

 

Nope. That is the limit of a 32-bit operating system. You're lucky to

be seeing 3.4GB. Most see only 3-3.25. The only way to see all 4GB is

to use a 64-bit OS.

 

- Thee Chicago Wolf

[Guest Bob I]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Because there is only 4 gig of address space available in a 32 bit

operating system and you must first use some addresses to communicate

with the other installed hardware. What is left is used to address the

installed memory, 3.4 gig in your case. What you see is normal, and if

you want more of that 4 gig space to address RAM, you would have to give

up other things that make up the computer.

 

Charles Elliott wrote:

> Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

> 3,406,240 bytes

>

> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

> get WinXP to use

>

> the full 4GB?

>

>

> Thanks,

>

> CHE

>

>

[Guest Unknown]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

Does task manager really only show 3.4 MEGs?

"Charles Elliott" <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote in message

news:OJZ6CJWKJHA.4996@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

> 3,406,240 bytes

>

> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

> get WinXP to use

>

> the full 4GB?

>

>

> Thanks,

>

> CHE

>

[Guest Charles Elliott]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

Yes.

 

 

"Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

news:XW5Hk.3006$c45.138@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...

> Does task manager really only show 3.4 MEGs?

> "Charles Elliott" <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote in message

> news:OJZ6CJWKJHA.4996@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>> Hello:

>>

>> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

>> 3,406,240 bytes

>>

>> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way

>> to get WinXP to use

>>

>> the full 4GB?

>>

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> CHE

>>

>

>

[Guest Bob I]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Only if if you ignore the "(K)" indicating "Kilobytes" in Task Manager,

and the fact that the word "bytes" does not appear anywhere.

 

Charles Elliott wrote:

> Yes.

>

>

> "Unknown" <unknown@unknown.kom> wrote in message

> news:XW5Hk.3006$c45.138@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...

>

>>Does task manager really only show 3.4 MEGs?

>>"Charles Elliott" <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote in message

>>news:OJZ6CJWKJHA.4996@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>

>>>Hello:

>>>

>>> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

>>>3,406,240 bytes

>>>

>>>are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way

>>>to get WinXP to use

>>>

>>>the full 4GB?

>>>

>>>

>>> Thanks,

>>>

>>>CHE

>>>

>>

>>

>

>

[Guest John]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

Who ate my memory?

http://blogs.msdn.com/dcook/archive/2007/03/25/who-ate-my-memory.aspx

 

"Charles Elliott" <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote in message

news:OJZ6CJWKJHA.4996@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

> 3,406,240 bytes

>

> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

> get WinXP to use

>

> the full 4GB?

>

>

> Thanks,

>

> CHE

>

[Guest Ken Blake, MVP]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 12:23:54 -0400, "Charles Elliott"

<elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote:

> Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

> 3,406,240 bytes

>

> are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

> get WinXP to use

>

> the full 4GB?

 

 

Answered in another newsgroup. Please do not send the same message

separately to more than one newsgroup (called multiposting). Doing so

just fragments the thread, so someone who answers in one newsgroup

doesn't get to see answers from others in another newsgroup. And for

those who read all the newsgroups the message is multiposted to, they

see the message multiple times instead of once (they would see it only

once if you correctly crossposted instead). This wastes everyone's

time, and gets you poorer help than you should get.

 

If you must send the same message to more than one newsgroup, please

do so by crossposting (but only to a *few* related newsgroups).

 

--

Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience

Please Reply to the Newsgroup

[Guest Peter Foldes]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

No . That is not the limit of a 32 bit operating system It is specific to XP,Vista and before.And as you said the 64 bit can handle more . The reason I said the latter is on account I have a 32 bit operating system and it has 16gigs of memory and it shows as such. It is the Window 2003 Enterprise 32 bit . It also has the capability to go up to 68gigs.

 

What you need to say is that Vista 32 bit is only capable of registering 3.2 - 3.5 gigs of memory when there is 4 and plus gigs of memory installed. Not that is the limit of a 32 bit etc etc

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"Thee Chicago Wolf" <.@.> wrote in message news:n9ope4p95fafbv5j1kv0k8558l0c9eph1t@4ax.com...

>> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

>>3,406,240 bytes

>>

>>are available for use. Does anyone know why that is? Is there any way to

>>get WinXP to use

>>

>>the full 4GB?

>

> Nope. That is the limit of a 32-bit operating system. You're lucky to

> be seeing 3.4GB. Most see only 3-3.25. The only way to see all 4GB is

> to use a 64-bit OS.

>

> - Thee Chicago Wolf

[Guest Tim Slattery]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

"Charles Elliott" <elliott.ct@verizon.net> wrote:

>Hello:

>

> I installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but Task Manager indicates only

>3,406,240 bytes are available for use.

 

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

 

--

Tim Slattery

MS MVP(Shell/User)

Slattery_T@bls.gov

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

[Guest Thee Chicago Wolf]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

>No . That is not the limit of a 32 bit operating system It is specific to XP,Vista and before.And as you said the 64 bit can handle more . The reason I said the latter is on account I have a 32 bit operating system and it has 16gigs of memory and it shows as such. It is the Window 2003 Enterprise 32 bit . It also has the capability to go up to 68gigs.

>

>What you need to say is that Vista 32 bit is only capable of registering 3.2 - 3.5 gigs of memory when there is 4 and plus gigs of memory installed. Not that is the limit of a 32 bit etc etc

 

What you're referring to is PAE and it's a mapping kludge to

pseudo-recognize more than 4GB RAM. Linux can do this same "trick" so

I do realize there are some exceptions to the rule. This is just a

poor trick to sort-of get around the real-world limit of a 32-bit OS.

Addressing 4GB or more of physical RAM still requires 64-bit, no bones

about it. Tricks or no tricks.

 

- Thee Chicago Wolf

[Guest Peter Foldes]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

You were saying and I quote "All 32 bit systems"

 

Read and see the following on some 32 bit systems what I was telling you or trying to explain. No tricks and no PAE.

 

Actual fact

 

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2003

 

Also to which you were correctly referring to.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"Thee Chicago Wolf" <.@.> wrote in message news:9t5qe4t88b1hor3u8vq2j16239gjipnvem@4ax.com...

> >No . That is not the limit of a 32 bit operating system It is specific to XP,Vista and before.And as you said the 64 bit can handle more . The reason I said the latter is on account I have a 32 bit operating system and it has 16gigs of memory and it shows as such. It is the Window 2003 Enterprise 32 bit . It also has the capability to go up to 68gigs.

>>

>>What you need to say is that Vista 32 bit is only capable of registering 3.2 - 3.5 gigs of memory when there is 4 and plus gigs of memory installed. Not that is the limit of a 32 bit etc etc

>

> What you're referring to is PAE and it's a mapping kludge to

> pseudo-recognize more than 4GB RAM. Linux can do this same "trick" so

> I do realize there are some exceptions to the rule. This is just a

> poor trick to sort-of get around the real-world limit of a 32-bit OS.

> Addressing 4GB or more of physical RAM still requires 64-bit, no bones

> about it. Tricks or no tricks.

>

> - Thee Chicago Wolf

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Please read the literature that you pointed us to. Thee Chicago Wolf is

right, none of the Windows 32-bit versions can access more than 4GB of

RAM without the use of PAE, and that includes Server Enterprise

versions. The information in the link that you provided say as much:

 

 

Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2003

 

The following table specifies the limits on physical memory for Windows

Server 2003. Limits over 4 GB for 32-bit Windows assume that PAE is enabled.

 

[end quote]

 

John

 

Peter Foldes wrote:

> You were saying and I quote "All 32 bit systems"

>

> Read and see the following on some 32 bit systems what I was telling you or trying to explain. No tricks and no PAE.

>

> Actual fact

>

> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2003

>

> Also to which you were correctly referring to.

> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

>

[Guest Peter Foldes]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

John John

 

Sorry but a difference of opinion on my end anyway. I stick with what I posted

 

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:e$0mSSaKJHA.3812@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Please read the literature that you pointed us to. Thee Chicago Wolf is

> right, none of the Windows 32-bit versions can access more than 4GB of

> RAM without the use of PAE, and that includes Server Enterprise

> versions. The information in the link that you provided say as much:

>

>

>

> Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2003

>

> The following table specifies the limits on physical memory for Windows

> Server 2003. Limits over 4 GB for 32-bit Windows assume that PAE is enabled.

>

> [end quote]

>

> John

>

> Peter Foldes wrote:

>

>> You were saying and I quote "All 32 bit systems"

>>

>> Read and see the following on some 32 bit systems what I was telling you or trying to explain. No tricks and no PAE.

>>

>> Actual fact

>>

>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_server_2003

>>

>> Also to which you were correctly referring to.

>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

>>

[Guest John John (MVP)]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

This is not an issue of debatable differences of opinions! It is simply

a fact that NONE of the Windows 32-bit versions can access more than 4GB

of RAM without the use of PAE! If you want to stick with what you

posted that is fine by me, but it doesn't change the facts that what you

say is incorrect. Read here for more information:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/283037/en-us

 

John

 

Peter Foldes wrote:

> John John

>

> Sorry but a difference of opinion on my end anyway. I stick with what I posted

>

[Guest Peter Foldes]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytes available

 

As is the case here

 

Note In Windows Server 2003, PAE is automatically enabled only if the server is using hot-add memory devices. In this case, you do not have to use the /PAE switch on a system that is configured to use hot-add memory devices. In all other cases, you must use the /PAE switch in the Boot.ini file to take advantage of memory over 4GB.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/pnppwr/hotadd/hotaddmem.mspx

--

Peter

 

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others

Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

 

"John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:uZRaaqaKJHA.1012@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> This is not an issue of debatable differences of opinions! It is simply

> a fact that NONE of the Windows 32-bit versions can access more than 4GB

> of RAM without the use of PAE! If you want to stick with what you

> posted that is fine by me, but it doesn't change the facts that what you

> say is incorrect. Read here for more information:

> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/283037/en-us

>

> John

>

> Peter Foldes wrote:

>

>> John John

>>

>> Sorry but a difference of opinion on my end anyway. I stick with what I posted

>>

[Guest dennis]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:

> What you're referring to is PAE and it's a mapping kludge to

> pseudo-recognize more than 4GB RAM. Linux can do this same "trick"

 

The core of PAE is not a mapping kludge. Some people just keep telling

it that.

[Guest Bob I]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

 

dennis wrote:

> Thee Chicago Wolf wrote:

>

>> What you're referring to is PAE and it's a mapping kludge to

>> pseudo-recognize more than 4GB RAM. Linux can do this same "trick"

>

>

> The core of PAE is not a mapping kludge. Some people just keep telling

> it that.

 

 

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/pae_os.mspx

[Guest dennis]

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Re: Installed 4Gb of memory under WinXP, but only 3,406,240 bytesavailable

 

Bob I wrote:

> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/pae_os.mspx

 

Yes?