Guest Exp Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 Hi, I'm having some issues with memory. I just installed two new modules of memory (see link below). Both memories, two old modules and two new modules, are compatible with the motherboard. The system, it seems, sees only 2 modules. Check 2 links on the bottom to see screen shots of the Task Manager. I have tried switching both pairs and putting them into different slots, but whatever I did, the Task Manager showed only 2 modules. Then I run PC Wizard, and the wizard sees all 4 modules. Screen shots are down below. Any ideas on how to tell Windows there is more juice? Thanks a lot! Exp. Task Manager 1: http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/9436/winmem2pi2.jpg Task Manager 2: http://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=winmemzt1.jpg PC Wizard 1: http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/7722/pcwizard2tn0.jpg PC Wizard 2: http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6862/pcwizardik7.jpg New memory: http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82E16820146565 Old memory (2x1GB): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820141210
Guest jorgen Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Exp wrote: > Any ideas on how to tell Windows there is more juice? You have a 32-bit XP, so you won't be able to use it all. If you have memory remapping enabled it bios, disable it, and a bit more ram will appear
Guest Exp Posted August 20, 2007 Posted August 20, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Hello Jorgen, Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing that I can do to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to Vista, will I be able to use all 4GB? Thank you in advance.
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted August 20, 2007 Posted August 20, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected to the 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you already have a 64-bit capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get much more than 3GB of usable RAM. -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... > Hello Jorgen, > > Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing that I can > do > to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to Vista, > will > I be able to use all 4GB? > > > Thank you in advance.
Guest Exp Posted August 20, 2007 Posted August 20, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Hello Gary, My CPU is 64-bit capable ( Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor). Here is the link to it: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004. What I'm hesitant about is that by upgrading to Vista, the fact that Vista needs more resources to run smoothly, and the fact that now I have 4 GB of RAM (as opposed as 2GB with XP Pro), these 4GB won't speed up my PC in any way. What do you think? Does it then make sense to upgrade at all? "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected to the > 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you already have a 64-bit > capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get much more > than 3GB of usable RAM. > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... > > Hello Jorgen, > > > > Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing that I can > > do > > to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to Vista, > > will > > I be able to use all 4GB? > > > > > > Thank you in advance. > > >
Guest Gary S. Terhune Posted August 20, 2007 Posted August 20, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Again, you need the 64-bit version of Windows, not just the 64-bit hardware. As for Vista... Windows XP 64-bit version has quirks and some compatibility problems with applications and added hardware, but much fewer than those found in Vista 32-bit... See where this is headed? I installed 64-bit XP on the wife's machine and after a few months of use, she wants her 32-bit version back. We aren't even looking at Vista for another year or so. And even then, it will be 32-bit. What are you planning to do that would make 4GB of RAM important to have and 3GB insufficient? -- Gary S. Terhune MS-MVP Shell/User http://www.grystmill.com "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:04689366-7DA1-4B9E-83C7-3961FE6C0180@microsoft.com... > Hello Gary, > > My CPU is 64-bit capable ( Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M shared > L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor). Here is the link to it: > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004. > > What I'm hesitant about is that by upgrading to Vista, the fact that Vista > needs more resources to run smoothly, and the fact that now I have 4 GB of > RAM (as opposed as 2GB with XP Pro), these 4GB won't speed up my PC in any > way. What do you think? Does it then make sense to upgrade at all? > > > "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > >> No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected to the >> 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you already have a >> 64-bit >> capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get much >> more >> than 3GB of usable RAM. >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... >> > Hello Jorgen, >> > >> > Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing that I >> > can >> > do >> > to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to >> > Vista, >> > will >> > I be able to use all 4GB? >> > >> > >> > Thank you in advance. >> >> >>
Guest Exp Posted August 28, 2007 Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Hello Garry, I was gone for days so I'm responding just now. I do understand that I need a 64-bit Windows, not only the hardware. I process some huge tif files in Photoshop, some as large as 250MB. 4GB would definitely help, which doesn't mean that 3 GB won't do it. But this is where I get confused. You said 3GB. Where did you come up with 3GB? "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > Again, you need the 64-bit version of Windows, not just the 64-bit hardware. > As for Vista... Windows XP 64-bit version has quirks and some compatibility > problems with applications and added hardware, but much fewer than those > found in Vista 32-bit... See where this is headed? I installed 64-bit XP on > the wife's machine and after a few months of use, she wants her 32-bit > version back. We aren't even looking at Vista for another year or so. And > even then, it will be 32-bit. > > What are you planning to do that would make 4GB of RAM important to have and > 3GB insufficient? > > -- > Gary S. Terhune > MS-MVP Shell/User > http://www.grystmill.com > > "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:04689366-7DA1-4B9E-83C7-3961FE6C0180@microsoft.com... > > Hello Gary, > > > > My CPU is 64-bit capable ( Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M shared > > L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor). Here is the link to it: > > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004. > > > > What I'm hesitant about is that by upgrading to Vista, the fact that Vista > > needs more resources to run smoothly, and the fact that now I have 4 GB of > > RAM (as opposed as 2GB with XP Pro), these 4GB won't speed up my PC in any > > way. What do you think? Does it then make sense to upgrade at all? > > > > > > "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > > > >> No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected to the > >> 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you already have a > >> 64-bit > >> capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get much > >> more > >> than 3GB of usable RAM. > >> > >> -- > >> Gary S. Terhune > >> MS-MVP Shell/User > >> http://www.grystmill.com > >> > >> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > >> news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... > >> > Hello Jorgen, > >> > > >> > Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing that I > >> > can > >> > do > >> > to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to > >> > Vista, > >> > will > >> > I be able to use all 4GB? > >> > > >> > > >> > Thank you in advance. > >> > >> > >> > > >
Guest Daave Posted August 28, 2007 Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM 3 GB is the system limit for 32-bit operating systems: http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm Exp wrote: > Hello Garry, > > I was gone for days so I'm responding just now. I do understand that > I need > a 64-bit Windows, not only the hardware. > I process some huge tif files in Photoshop, some as large as 250MB. > 4GB > would definitely help, which doesn't mean that 3 GB won't do it. But > this is where I get confused. You said 3GB. Where did you come up > with 3GB? > > > "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: > >> Again, you need the 64-bit version of Windows, not just the 64-bit >> hardware. As for Vista... Windows XP 64-bit version has quirks and >> some compatibility problems with applications and added hardware, >> but much fewer than those found in Vista 32-bit... See where this is >> headed? I installed 64-bit XP on the wife's machine and after a few >> months of use, she wants her 32-bit version back. We aren't even >> looking at Vista for another year or so. And even then, it will be >> 32-bit. >> >> What are you planning to do that would make 4GB of RAM important to >> have and 3GB insufficient? >> >> -- >> Gary S. Terhune >> MS-MVP Shell/User >> http://www.grystmill.com >> >> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:04689366-7DA1-4B9E-83C7-3961FE6C0180@microsoft.com... >>> Hello Gary, >>> >>> My CPU is 64-bit capable ( Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M >>> shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor). Here is the link to it: >>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004. >>> >>> What I'm hesitant about is that by upgrading to Vista, the fact >>> that Vista needs more resources to run smoothly, and the fact that >>> now I have 4 GB of RAM (as opposed as 2GB with XP Pro), these 4GB >>> won't speed up my PC in any way. What do you think? Does it then >>> make sense to upgrade at all? >>> >>> >>> "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: >>> >>>> No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected >>>> to the 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you >>>> already have a 64-bit >>>> capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get >>>> much more >>>> than 3GB of usable RAM. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>> >>>> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>> news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... >>>>> Hello Jorgen, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing >>>>> that I can >>>>> do >>>>> to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to >>>>> Vista, >>>>> will >>>>> I be able to use all 4GB? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thank you in advance.
Guest Ken Blake Posted August 28, 2007 Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message news:%237VNL%23R6HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >3 GB is the system limit for 32-bit operating systems: No, this isn't quite correct. There is a 4GB address space, but because some of that address space is used for other hardware devices in the system, you can't map the full 4GB to it. How much RAM you can actually use varies, depending on what devices you have in the system. 3GB to 3.1 GB is common, but I've seen some systems able to use as much as 3.5GB. -- Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User Please reply to the newsgroup > http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm > > > Exp wrote: >> Hello Garry, >> >> I was gone for days so I'm responding just now. I do understand that >> I need >> a 64-bit Windows, not only the hardware. >> I process some huge tif files in Photoshop, some as large as 250MB. >> 4GB >> would definitely help, which doesn't mean that 3 GB won't do it. But >> this is where I get confused. You said 3GB. Where did you come up >> with 3GB? >> >> >> "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: >> >>> Again, you need the 64-bit version of Windows, not just the 64-bit >>> hardware. As for Vista... Windows XP 64-bit version has quirks and >>> some compatibility problems with applications and added hardware, >>> but much fewer than those found in Vista 32-bit... See where this is >>> headed? I installed 64-bit XP on the wife's machine and after a few >>> months of use, she wants her 32-bit version back. We aren't even >>> looking at Vista for another year or so. And even then, it will be >>> 32-bit. >>> >>> What are you planning to do that would make 4GB of RAM important to >>> have and 3GB insufficient? >>> >>> -- >>> Gary S. Terhune >>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>> http://www.grystmill.com >>> >>> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>> news:04689366-7DA1-4B9E-83C7-3961FE6C0180@microsoft.com... >>>> Hello Gary, >>>> >>>> My CPU is 64-bit capable ( Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M >>>> shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor). Here is the link to it: >>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004. >>>> >>>> What I'm hesitant about is that by upgrading to Vista, the fact >>>> that Vista needs more resources to run smoothly, and the fact that >>>> now I have 4 GB of RAM (as opposed as 2GB with XP Pro), these 4GB >>>> won't speed up my PC in any way. What do you think? Does it then >>>> make sense to upgrade at all? >>>> >>>> >>>> "Gary S. Terhune" wrote: >>>> >>>>> No. Unless you get the 64-bit version. The limitation is connected >>>>> to the 32-bit aspect of the OS, not the version. Unless you >>>>> already have a 64-bit >>>>> capable processor and a 64-bit version of Windows, you won't get >>>>> much more >>>>> than 3GB of usable RAM. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Gary S. Terhune >>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User >>>>> http://www.grystmill.com >>>>> >>>>> "Exp" <Exp@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:6043E842-8668-47E1-BE86-537A98082030@microsoft.com... >>>>>> Hello Jorgen, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for your response. So it seems that there is nothing >>>>>> that I can >>>>>> do >>>>>> to be able to use all 4GB. What about Vista? What if I upgrade to >>>>>> Vista, >>>>>> will >>>>>> I be able to use all 4GB? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you in advance. > > >
Guest Daave Posted August 28, 2007 Posted August 28, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM Ken Blake wrote: > "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message > news:%237VNL%23R6HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > >> 3 GB is the system limit for 32-bit operating systems: > > > No, this isn't quite correct. There is a 4GB address space, but > because some of that address space is used for other hardware devices > in the system, you can't map the full 4GB to it. > > How much RAM you can actually use varies, depending on what devices > you have in the system. 3GB to 3.1 GB is common, but I've seen some > systems able to use as much as 3.5GB. Interesting. Thanks for the clarification! How would we determine the effective RAM limit for OP?
Guest Ken Blake Posted August 29, 2007 Posted August 29, 2007 Re: Windows not seeing new RAM "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message news:eN1iBKZ6HHA.5980@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Ken Blake wrote: >> "Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message >> news:%237VNL%23R6HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> >>> 3 GB is the system limit for 32-bit operating systems: >> >> >> No, this isn't quite correct. There is a 4GB address space, but >> because some of that address space is used for other hardware devices >> in the system, you can't map the full 4GB to it. >> >> How much RAM you can actually use varies, depending on what devices >> you have in the system. 3GB to 3.1 GB is common, but I've seen some >> systems able to use as much as 3.5GB. > > Interesting. Thanks for the clarification! You're welcome. Glad to help. > How would we determine the effective RAM limit for OP? Although there probably is a way, I don't know any way to calculate it accurately, other than by installing 4GB, and seeing how much Windows tells you is available. However from a practical standard, most people will be very close if they assume it's about 3.1GB -- Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User Please reply to the newsgroup
Recommended Posts