Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

I assume so. I don't run dual video cards. Makes no sense for what I do.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:B4813107-DE11-4634-80AB-54A83622E356@microsoft.com...

> Yes, most of the folks with shockingly low numbers have SLI boards (I

> presume Crossfire does the same).

>

> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

> news:E1886837-AFFB-47EF-B141-1760745EEE2A@microsoft.com...

>> Yes, I've seen this as low as 2.7 GB and as high as 3.5 GB. Depends on

>> the hardware devices. Try putting in two 512 Mb Video cards and watch

>> your RAM disappear. :(

>>

>> --

>> Charlie.

>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64

>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>>

>>

>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>> news:5AC1BDE8-0655-47B5-98E2-E54E97E5BD9A@microsoft.com...

>>> btw, the 3.12GB given in the article is not a fixed number. Notice that

>>> it is only given as an example to illustrate the symptom: "For example,

>>> the System Information dialog box may report 3,120 megabytes (MB) of

>>> system memory on a computer that has 4 GB of memory installed." In

>>> theory Windows can span 4GB's of addresses. It is the conflicting

>>> needs of the OS and the hardware devices, plus the way Windows reports

>>> memory, that results in all the confusion.

>>>

>>> <miso@sushi.com> wrote in message

>>> news:952929db-ad85-498b-b786-54b9f5db92d1@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>>>> On Dec 15, 2:57 pm, "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarha...@msn.com> wrote:

>>>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

>>>>> under

>>>>> Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not 64-bit.

>>>>> It

>>>>> does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a different mobo to

>>>>> fix.

>>>>>

>>>>> "Dan" <Danodem...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>>>>

>>>>> news:d0136760-5499-44ce-92cb-c57ab77ed669@b1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...

>>>>>

>>>>> > On Dec 15, 12:58 pm, "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarha...@msn.com>

>>>>> > wrote:

>>>>> >> What did HP tell you when you asked a support person?

>>>>>

>>>>> >> "Dan" <Danodem...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>>>>>

>>>>> >>news:7a663206-fca0-48e0-9240-d0c53ed79f66@w56g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

>>>>>

>>>>> >> > On Dec 14, 5:16 pm, Dan <Danodem...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>> >> >> On Dec 14, 4:35 pm, m...@sushi.com wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > On Dec 14, 4:42 am, Dan <Danodem...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > > Windows XP Professional x64 and 4GB RAM?

>>>>> >> >> > > Alright, So with all the development and what not that I do,

>>>>> >> >> > > I

>>>>> >> >> > > decided

>>>>> >> >> > > to upgrade my system to 4GB of RAM. Also, due to software

>>>>> >> >> > > incompatibilities with Vista, I decided the my only real

>>>>> >> >> > > choice

>>>>> >> >> > > was

>>>>> >> >> > > Windows XP Professional x64 for my OS. I ran through the

>>>>> >> >> > > entire

>>>>> >> >> > > install, got all my drivers, everything seemed to be going

>>>>> >> >> > > well. I

>>>>> >> >> > > got

>>>>> >> >> > > my RAM today in the mail, slapped it in, checked the BIOS,

>>>>> >> >> > > and

>>>>> >> >> > > everything looked good. However, once I got into Windows, it

>>>>> >> >> > > only

>>>>> >> >> > > shows that I have 3GB

>>>>> >> >> > > available:http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h33/danodemano/Spec.jpg

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > > I checked with CPUZ to make sure that it was seeing the full

>>>>> >> >> > > 4GB

>>>>> >> >> > > and

>>>>> >> >> > > it

>>>>> >> >> > > was:http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h33/danodemano/CPUZ_RAM.jpg

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > > Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I had always thought that

>>>>> >> >> > > XP

>>>>> >> >> > > 64-bit

>>>>> >> >> > > supported something like 128GB of RAM....so why is my system

>>>>> >> >> > > not

>>>>> >> >> > > seeing the full 4GB???? Is there some option that I have to

>>>>> >> >> > > enable

>>>>> >> >> > > to

>>>>> >> >> > > allow Windows to use the full 4GB???

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > > Any help would be appreciated, thanks!!

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> > On my mobo, you need to get into the bios, enter control+F1,

>>>>> >> >> > which

>>>>> >> >> > adds more features to tweak. Then find "memory remap."

>>>>>

>>>>> >> >> Interesting....I will try that and let you know how it turns

>>>>> >> >> out. I

>>>>> >> >> have an HP laptop though so I don't know how much I can do with

>>>>> >> >> the

>>>>> >> >> BIOS.

>>>>> >> >> This is my motherboard info if that

>>>>> >> >> helps:http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h33/danodemano/Motherboard.jpg

>>>>>

>>>>> >> > No luck.....I can't seem to get into any of the hidded options of

>>>>> >> > the

>>>>> >> > BIOS. It's propably something that HP has done to keep me from

>>>>> >> > doing

>>>>> >> > it, I'm sure.....

>>>>> >> > Grrr....guess I'm just out of luck at this point, unless someones

>>>>> >> > has

>>>>> >> > any ideas???

>>>>>

>>>>> > They said that it doesn't support 4GB of RAM and that there was

>>>>> > nothing that they could do....the typical BS answer I'm sure.

>>>>

>>>> I thought the 32 bit MS OS couldn't span the full 32 bits, but about

>>>> 3.2G.

>>>>

>>>> Here is a microsoft link indicating 32 bit windows is limited to 3.12G

>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/en-us

>>>

>>

>

[Guest Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Assuming you are using a newer BIOS, the 'less than 4 GB RAM' problem should

only happen with 32-bit OSes not 64-bit ones. Sounds like you need to update

your BIOS...

 

Adapter cards (like plug-in video cards) steal from the 'upper 1 GB' of the

4 GB memory space of standard 32-bit memory systems. The more and larger

your cards, the less memory your 32-bit OS will see. Again, x64 OSes

shouldn't have this problem with a properly working BIOS.

 

--

Chuck Walbourn

SDE, XNA Developer Connection

 

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

The OP does need to update his bios.

 

"Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chuckw@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:OuHfHERQIHA.5988@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Assuming you are using a newer BIOS, the 'less than 4 GB RAM' problem

> should only happen with 32-bit OSes not 64-bit ones. Sounds like you need

> to update your BIOS...

>

> Adapter cards (like plug-in video cards) steal from the 'upper 1 GB' of

> the 4 GB memory space of standard 32-bit memory systems. The more and

> larger your cards, the less memory your 32-bit OS will see. Again, x64

> OSes shouldn't have this problem with a properly working BIOS.

>

> --

> Chuck Walbourn

> SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>

> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

> rights.

>

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Yes, we were talking (way up the thread somewhere) about a system that

didn't have the BIOS re-mapping going on. On my systems, I only run 64-bit.

Full stop.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chuckw@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:OuHfHERQIHA.5988@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Assuming you are using a newer BIOS, the 'less than 4 GB RAM' problem

> should only happen with 32-bit OSes not 64-bit ones. Sounds like you need

> to update your BIOS...

>

> Adapter cards (like plug-in video cards) steal from the 'upper 1 GB' of

> the 4 GB memory space of standard 32-bit memory systems. The more and

> larger your cards, the less memory your 32-bit OS will see. Again, x64

> OSes shouldn't have this problem with a properly working BIOS.

>

> --

> Chuck Walbourn

> SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>

> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

> rights.

>

[Guest miso@sushi.com]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

On Dec 17, 5:34 pm, "Charlie Russel - MVP"

<char...@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:

> Yes, we were talking (way up the thread somewhere) about a system that

> didn't have the BIOS re-mapping going on. On my systems, I only run 64-bit.

> Full stop.

>

> --

> Charlie.http://msmvps.com/xperts64http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>

> "Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chu...@online.microsoft.com> wrote in messagenews:OuHfHERQIHA.5988@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>

> > Assuming you are using a newer BIOS, the 'less than 4 GB RAM' problem

> > should only happen with 32-bit OSes not 64-bit ones. Sounds like you need

> > to update your BIOS...

>

> > Adapter cards (like plug-in video cards) steal from the 'upper 1 GB' of

> > the 4 GB memory space of standard 32-bit memory systems. The more and

> > larger your cards, the less memory your 32-bit OS will see. Again, x64

> > OSes shouldn't have this problem with a properly working BIOS.

>

> > --

> > Chuck Walbourn

> > SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>

> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

> > rights.

 

I know you can use the hardware manager to see the memory that each

device uses. However, is there a program that does the reverse? That

is, show the memory map.

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

I'm sure there must be, but honestly, I don't know one off the top of my

head.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

<miso@sushi.com> wrote in message

news:ce2b5fdf-500f-4a9d-acb7-ab7e2879b9f8@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...

> On Dec 17, 5:34 pm, "Charlie Russel - MVP"

> <char...@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote:

>> Yes, we were talking (way up the thread somewhere) about a system that

>> didn't have the BIOS re-mapping going on. On my systems, I only run

>> 64-bit.

>> Full stop.

>>

>> --

>> Charlie.http://msmvps.com/xperts64http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>>

>> "Chuck Walbourn [MSFT]" <chu...@online.microsoft.com> wrote in

>> messagenews:OuHfHERQIHA.5988@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>>

>> > Assuming you are using a newer BIOS, the 'less than 4 GB RAM' problem

>> > should only happen with 32-bit OSes not 64-bit ones. Sounds like you

>> > need

>> > to update your BIOS...

>>

>> > Adapter cards (like plug-in video cards) steal from the 'upper 1 GB' of

>> > the 4 GB memory space of standard 32-bit memory systems. The more and

>> > larger your cards, the less memory your 32-bit OS will see. Again, x64

>> > OSes shouldn't have this problem with a properly working BIOS.

>>

>> > --

>> > Chuck Walbourn

>> > SDE, XNA Developer Connection

>>

>> > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no

>> > rights.

>

> I know you can use the hardware manager to see the memory that each

> device uses. However, is there a program that does the reverse? That

> is, show the memory map.

[Guest jorgen]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

> I know you can use the hardware manager to see the memory that each

> device uses. However, is there a program that does the reverse? That

> is, show the memory map.

 

Right there in the device manager, change the view to "show resources by

type"

[Guest miso@sushi.com]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

On Dec 17, 10:22 pm, jorgen <na@invalid> wrote:

> > I know you can use the hardware manager to see the memory that each

> > device uses. However, is there a program that does the reverse? That

> > is, show the memory map.

>

> Right there in the device manager, change the view to "show resources by

> type"

 

Thanks. That was simple.

[Guest Primo]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Colin Barnhorst wrote:

> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

> under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not

> 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a different

> mobo to fix.

 

If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows

64-bit does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem

is NOT with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a favor,

Colin, don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64 sees more

than 4 GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw affecting

only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came out. The

manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the board but the

first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a 64-bit OS and 4GB

or more is installed. I will eventually replace it, but I am giving the

boards supporting the new quad-cores some more time to mature before doing

anything about this one.

 

"Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

>> under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not

>> 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a different

>> mobo to fix.

>

> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows 64-bit

> does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem is NOT

> with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a favor, Colin,

> don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64 sees more than 4

> GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

[Guest Dennis Pack]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Colin:

Is that the problem child you had from day 1 with the LGA775

chipset. I had continual problems with that chipset when the Prescott

processor was released because of timing issues between the processor and

motherboards. I haven't used an Intel processor since on any of my systems.

I haven't had any problems with AMD processors running XP x64 or Vista x64,

I've just been in the mood to build a new system trying Intel for a change

and comparison. Modifying my budget to build a system isn't a major problem,

but every time I see LGA775 chipset on the motherboard or processor I start

to have nightmares. Unless you have survived motherboard/processor or

motherboard/bios/processor conflicts it's hard to believe that it can

happen. Have a great day.

 

--

Dennis Pack

XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64

Office Professional Plus 2007

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:44F15929-8A5B-4299-86B5-F302B21BA91A@microsoft.com...

> Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw affecting

> only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came out. The

> manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the board but the

> first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a 64-bit OS and 4GB

> or more is installed. I will eventually replace it, but I am giving the

> boards supporting the new quad-cores some more time to mature before doing

> anything about this one.

>

> "Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

> news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

>>> under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not

>>> 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a different

>>> mobo to fix.

>>

>> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows 64-bit

>> does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem is NOT

>> with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a favor, Colin,

>> don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64 sees more than 4

>> GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Yes. And today I got together with the manager at my local computer store

and he is ordering me a mobo and q6600 cpu that can leverage my pc6400 ram

I'm using now. He's going to research the mobos to make sure I can use 4GB

with Vista x64 on it without issues. I told him to get me into a tried and

true mobo, not cutting edge. I'm tired of putting up with it. I expect

we'll do the brain transplant right after New Year's. He's a veteran system

builder I have dealt with many times. If I try it again I'll outsmart

myself again.

 

"Dennis Pack" <dennispack@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message

news:76A3B24B-9DE0-4603-A006-D2EA623E9BD7@microsoft.com...

> Colin:

> Is that the problem child you had from day 1 with the LGA775

> chipset. I had continual problems with that chipset when the Prescott

> processor was released because of timing issues between the processor and

> motherboards. I haven't used an Intel processor since on any of my

> systems. I haven't had any problems with AMD processors running XP x64 or

> Vista x64, I've just been in the mood to build a new system trying Intel

> for a change and comparison. Modifying my budget to build a system isn't a

> major problem, but every time I see LGA775 chipset on the motherboard or

> processor I start to have nightmares. Unless you have survived

> motherboard/processor or motherboard/bios/processor conflicts it's hard to

> believe that it can happen. Have a great day.

>

> --

> Dennis Pack

> XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64

> Office Professional Plus 2007

> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

> news:44F15929-8A5B-4299-86B5-F302B21BA91A@microsoft.com...

>> Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw

>> affecting only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came

>> out. The manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the

>> board but the first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a

>> 64-bit OS and 4GB or more is installed. I will eventually replace it,

>> but I am giving the boards supporting the new quad-cores some more time

>> to mature before doing anything about this one.

>>

>> "Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

>> news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

>>>> under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not

>>>> 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a

>>>> different mobo to fix.

>>>

>>> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows

>>> 64-bit does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem

>>> is NOT with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a favor,

>>> Colin, don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64 sees more

>>> than 4 GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

>>

>

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Having a local builder is beyond value. I'm on my own, now, but for years

and years I had an excellent relationship with a clone shop in the SF Bay

Area. Since I was always running beta versions of OSs, having someone who

would work with me to find parts and components that we could get to work

was worth much. Many's the evening I'd be in their shop until 10 or 11 at

night (they closed at 6!) trying yet another video card or SCSI controller

or whatever.

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:ABA45ACB-1DFE-4C2E-B245-975EC4E275BB@microsoft.com...

> Yes. And today I got together with the manager at my local computer store

> and he is ordering me a mobo and q6600 cpu that can leverage my pc6400 ram

> I'm using now. He's going to research the mobos to make sure I can use

> 4GB with Vista x64 on it without issues. I told him to get me into a

> tried and true mobo, not cutting edge. I'm tired of putting up with it.

> I expect we'll do the brain transplant right after New Year's. He's a

> veteran system builder I have dealt with many times. If I try it again

> I'll outsmart myself again.

>

> "Dennis Pack" <dennispack@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message

> news:76A3B24B-9DE0-4603-A006-D2EA623E9BD7@microsoft.com...

>> Colin:

>> Is that the problem child you had from day 1 with the LGA775

>> chipset. I had continual problems with that chipset when the Prescott

>> processor was released because of timing issues between the processor and

>> motherboards. I haven't used an Intel processor since on any of my

>> systems. I haven't had any problems with AMD processors running XP x64 or

>> Vista x64, I've just been in the mood to build a new system trying Intel

>> for a change and comparison. Modifying my budget to build a system isn't

>> a major problem, but every time I see LGA775 chipset on the motherboard

>> or processor I start to have nightmares. Unless you have survived

>> motherboard/processor or motherboard/bios/processor conflicts it's hard

>> to believe that it can happen. Have a great day.

>>

>> --

>> Dennis Pack

>> XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64

>> Office Professional Plus 2007

>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>> news:44F15929-8A5B-4299-86B5-F302B21BA91A@microsoft.com...

>>> Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw

>>> affecting only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came

>>> out. The manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the

>>> board but the first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a

>>> 64-bit OS and 4GB or more is installed. I will eventually replace it,

>>> but I am giving the boards supporting the new quad-cores some more time

>>> to mature before doing anything about this one.

>>>

>>> "Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

>>> news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

>>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB ram

>>>>> under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but not

>>>>> 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a

>>>>> different mobo to fix.

>>>>

>>>> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows

>>>> 64-bit does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem

>>>> is NOT with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a favor,

>>>> Colin, don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64 sees

>>>> more than 4 GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

>>>

>>

>

[Guest Colin Barnhorst]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Isn't it incredible how those shops accumulate case screws by the barrel?

They are like the peanuts at a Texas Roadhouse.

 

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

news:3B98BF31-A997-4382-89FA-D678BE49AC03@microsoft.com...

> Having a local builder is beyond value. I'm on my own, now, but for years

> and years I had an excellent relationship with a clone shop in the SF Bay

> Area. Since I was always running beta versions of OSs, having someone who

> would work with me to find parts and components that we could get to work

> was worth much. Many's the evening I'd be in their shop until 10 or 11 at

> night (they closed at 6!) trying yet another video card or SCSI controller

> or whatever.

>

> --

> Charlie.

> http://msmvps.com/xperts64

> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>

>

> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

> news:ABA45ACB-1DFE-4C2E-B245-975EC4E275BB@microsoft.com...

>> Yes. And today I got together with the manager at my local computer

>> store and he is ordering me a mobo and q6600 cpu that can leverage my

>> pc6400 ram I'm using now. He's going to research the mobos to make sure

>> I can use 4GB with Vista x64 on it without issues. I told him to get me

>> into a tried and true mobo, not cutting edge. I'm tired of putting up

>> with it. I expect we'll do the brain transplant right after New Year's.

>> He's a veteran system builder I have dealt with many times. If I try it

>> again I'll outsmart myself again.

>>

>> "Dennis Pack" <dennispack@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message

>> news:76A3B24B-9DE0-4603-A006-D2EA623E9BD7@microsoft.com...

>>> Colin:

>>> Is that the problem child you had from day 1 with the LGA775

>>> chipset. I had continual problems with that chipset when the Prescott

>>> processor was released because of timing issues between the processor

>>> and motherboards. I haven't used an Intel processor since on any of my

>>> systems. I haven't had any problems with AMD processors running XP x64

>>> or Vista x64, I've just been in the mood to build a new system trying

>>> Intel for a change and comparison. Modifying my budget to build a system

>>> isn't a major problem, but every time I see LGA775 chipset on the

>>> motherboard or processor I start to have nightmares. Unless you have

>>> survived motherboard/processor or motherboard/bios/processor conflicts

>>> it's hard to believe that it can happen. Have a great day.

>>>

>>> --

>>> Dennis Pack

>>> XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64

>>> Office Professional Plus 2007

>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>>> news:44F15929-8A5B-4299-86B5-F302B21BA91A@microsoft.com...

>>>> Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw

>>>> affecting only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came

>>>> out. The manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the

>>>> board but the first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a

>>>> 64-bit OS and 4GB or more is installed. I will eventually replace it,

>>>> but I am giving the boards supporting the new quad-cores some more time

>>>> to mature before doing anything about this one.

>>>>

>>>> "Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

>>>> news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

>>>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB

>>>>>> ram under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but

>>>>>> not 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a

>>>>>> different mobo to fix.

>>>>>

>>>>> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows

>>>>> 64-bit does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the problem

>>>>> is NOT with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do us a

>>>>> favor, Colin, don't come back and tell us that your Vista Ultimate 64

>>>>> sees more than 4 GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do with the other

>>>>

>>>

>>

>

[Guest Charlie Russel - MVP]

Re: Windows XP Professional x64 Only Seeing 3GB RAM?

 

Yup. And all those little case blanks that hide the PCI slots? I can NEVER

find one here when I need one. But they had them by the gross lying around

 

--

Charlie.

http://msmvps.com/xperts64

http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

 

 

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

news:EEB1079C-94B8-47FA-A195-9601DECEA08F@microsoft.com...

> Isn't it incredible how those shops accumulate case screws by the barrel?

> They are like the peanuts at a Texas Roadhouse.

>

> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <charlie@mvKILLALLSPAMMERSps.org> wrote in message

> news:3B98BF31-A997-4382-89FA-D678BE49AC03@microsoft.com...

>> Having a local builder is beyond value. I'm on my own, now, but for years

>> and years I had an excellent relationship with a clone shop in the SF Bay

>> Area. Since I was always running beta versions of OSs, having someone who

>> would work with me to find parts and components that we could get to work

>> was worth much. Many's the evening I'd be in their shop until 10 or 11 at

>> night (they closed at 6!) trying yet another video card or SCSI

>> controller or whatever.

>>

>> --

>> Charlie.

>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64

>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

>>

>>

>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>> news:ABA45ACB-1DFE-4C2E-B245-975EC4E275BB@microsoft.com...

>>> Yes. And today I got together with the manager at my local computer

>>> store and he is ordering me a mobo and q6600 cpu that can leverage my

>>> pc6400 ram I'm using now. He's going to research the mobos to make sure

>>> I can use 4GB with Vista x64 on it without issues. I told him to get me

>>> into a tried and true mobo, not cutting edge. I'm tired of putting up

>>> with it. I expect we'll do the brain transplant right after New Year's.

>>> He's a veteran system builder I have dealt with many times. If I try it

>>> again I'll outsmart myself again.

>>>

>>> "Dennis Pack" <dennispack@hotmail.nospam.com> wrote in message

>>> news:76A3B24B-9DE0-4603-A006-D2EA623E9BD7@microsoft.com...

>>>> Colin:

>>>> Is that the problem child you had from day 1 with the LGA775

>>>> chipset. I had continual problems with that chipset when the Prescott

>>>> processor was released because of timing issues between the processor

>>>> and motherboards. I haven't used an Intel processor since on any of my

>>>> systems. I haven't had any problems with AMD processors running XP x64

>>>> or Vista x64, I've just been in the mood to build a new system trying

>>>> Intel for a change and comparison. Modifying my budget to build a

>>>> system isn't a major problem, but every time I see LGA775 chipset on

>>>> the motherboard or processor I start to have nightmares. Unless you

>>>> have survived motherboard/processor or motherboard/bios/processor

>>>> conflicts it's hard to believe that it can happen. Have a great day.

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Dennis Pack

>>>> XP x64 SP2, Vista Enterprise x64

>>>> Office Professional Plus 2007

>>>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:44F15929-8A5B-4299-86B5-F302B21BA91A@microsoft.com...

>>>>> Not if, as this particular mobo does, the mobo has a timing flaw

>>>>> affecting only 64-bit systems. I bought it right after it first came

>>>>> out. The manufacturer corrected the problem in later revisions of the

>>>>> board but the first generation boards will bluescreen if booted with a

>>>>> 64-bit OS and 4GB or more is installed. I will eventually replace it,

>>>>> but I am giving the boards supporting the new quad-cores some more

>>>>> time to mature before doing anything about this one.

>>>>>

>>>>> "Primo" <prime@promo.net> wrote in message

>>>>> news:47698BE7.8030908@promo.net...

>>>>>> Colin Barnhorst wrote:

>>>>>>> It's not BS. I have a box with a mobo that refuses to support 4GB

>>>>>>> ram under Windows x64. It does support 4GB under 32-bit Windows but

>>>>>>> not 64-bit. It does happen. It is a design flaw and would take a

>>>>>>> different mobo to fix.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> If Windows 32-bit supports 4GB of ram on a motherboard but Windows

>>>>>> 64-bit does not - on the same motherboard - logic sez that the

>>>>>> problem is NOT with the motherboard but with Windows 64-bit. Now do

>>>>>> us a favor, Colin, don't come back and tell us that your Vista

>>>>>> Ultimate 64 sees more than 4 GB of RAM cause one has nothing to do

>>>>>> with the other

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>

>