4GB in 32-bit Vista: Issues?

I'm planning to get a laptop and it has 4GB of memory and it has 32-bit Vista Home Premium pre-loaded on it. I know that the OS can only see and utilize 3GB of RAM. I am aware of this and the OS 'wasting' 1GB is not the problem I'm concerned about.

The question is, will that unrecognized 1GB of RAM cause any problems, issues, or performance degrading on the computer?

Thanks!

 

Answer: no.

 

No, you will be fine. The 1GB odd memory which isnt user accessible is actually allocated for use of the hardware(bios, gpu etc..)

 

It will even help slightly, because you'll get the full 3+ gb in dual-channel. Also, some computers can use slightly more than 3 gb w/ 32-bit Windows... like 3.2 gb or something. So it may help that way too.

 

No. .......

 

If your lucky you can get 3.5

 

How can you get 3.5GB?

My total available RAM is 3,070GB. (Vista business)

 

Tried my ram with vista and xp on my notebook, got 3.5 off both. (from 4)

 

What notebook do you have?

 

the amount of access able ram depends on how much more memory, like GPU, there is. so if you have 4gb ram and 512 GRAM you will only see ~3.5gb.

 

should be fine i had 4gigs of ram on my vista 32bit dell a while ago... worked fine, and 3.5 of it was recognized.

 

Mine recognizes 4GB because a recent Vista tweak, but in the Task Manager, Performance tab it show maximum 3,070GB. I don't know how can we get 3.5GB when x86 is the architecture.

 

Just depends on the system and the ram

 

Explain please.

 

upgrade to sp1 and you will see all 4gb now it just does not address it all

 

Not all hardware take up the same amount of memory. Hence, if you install 4GB RAM in 32bit OS, its going to recognise anywhere from 3GB to 3.5GB. In some cases it might be even lower than 3GB.

4GB is the limit for 32bit but Windows has to allocate memory for your hardware within that 4GB. So, your available RAM is whatever is left after that allocation for the hardware.

 

I was just writting and saw you responded miner, great explination

 

I know all that, even how SP1 foul us with the 4GB, but my question remains, if the architecture is x86 for all, how can you get 3.5GB, I refuse to accept 3,070GB, I want to have 3.5GB

 

Install X64 then.

They added that to SP1 because too many people were complaining about not being able to see 4GB.

 

It has nothing to do with the architecture. Its the hardware.

SP1 just reports the installed RAM essentially what the BIOS sees instead of what was available for Windows to use.

 

I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about what the Task manager, Performance tab displays, the total available memory, that's 3,070GB for me and 3.5GB for others, and yes, it is an x86 32 bit architecture thing, so how comes I get less?

 

LOL, what do you think I have been trying to explain in my earlier post

4GB is the limit for x86-32bit but Windows has to allocate memory for your hardware within that 4GB. So, your available RAM is whatever is left after that allocation for the hardware. Different hardware uses different amounts of memory, so thats why you see 3070MB while someone else might only see 3.5GB or 2.75GB.

Its not an x86 architecture thing. Its because of the hardware that you are seeing the variation. Google if you want more info.

 

Miner is correct.

32bit technically can address 4gb of memory, but due to hardware I/O's mapping memory for itself, it goes down to 3-3.5gb for windows to use. How much ram shows up varies, depending on your hardware

Mine showed 3070mb when i had 4gb 32bit. Not a biggie.

 

Yeah. This is what I got when I was still using my 32-bit OS.

 

Wirelessman, here.. if you want some proof, I took a screenshot of my memory in XP Professional x86. As you can see about ~3.4GB is being recognized by the OS. I would probably get almost 3.5GB but I think my other devices are allocating the memory as well (sound card, etc.).

 

You know what they say...idle hands are the devil's workshop. Who knows what mischief that unemployed RAM will get into? My ex brother-in-law was unemployed for awhile, and he spent his idle time downloading porn. Now he lives alone in a trailer. I'd keep a close watch. I'm just saying.

But seriously, Miner et al are correct. My main desktop (Vista 32-bit) shows 3198 MB RAM available, while a second desktop shows 33xx. It just depends on the hardware and how much RAM is allocated to various devices.

My notebook of course shows 4093.

 

Vista Premium, Windows Task manager sees 3.837GB on my Vostro 1500.

 

My Windows Vista Home Premium, and Windows XP SP2/SP3 saw 3.5 GB. It has something to do with the motherboards I think?

 

Ok, let's make some distinctions for the base of our conversation.

- Vista 32 and Vista 64.

- See and Get

- See: What windows shows as RAM in the Control Panel -> System

- Get: What the Task Manager shows as total memory (addressable memory for the user usage)


Ok, based on this, I have Vista business 32, my Vista shows 4GB, but I get 3,070GB for usage. I'M NOT DEBATING WHY I DON'T GET 4GB, I KNOW VERY WELL WHY.

My question is, if someone has exactly the same laptop than me, the same OS, why would he/she GETS (not see) 3.5GB?

 

Btw, theres been instances where Vista Business x64 users can still only see and use 3gb of RAM even if they have 4gb installed. The answer for this mystery lies somewhere....

 

The answer is deep in Bill Gate's head, but he is gone now

 

the ram usage would depend upon the BIOS, audio, video, NIC, etc. hardware.

@wireless, the same laptop you are talking is it like the mirror image of your laptop, with the same BIOS and settings, gpu, nic, etc etc....??

A minor variation in the settings can cause the difference in the ram usage..!!

for eg. ur notebook's gpu maybe using 256MB ram and the other notebook's might have been reduced to 128MB or 64MB as per the BIOS's settings..!!

 

Ok, let me try to explain.

It really depends on the combination of BIOS/chipset/mobo/hardware. X2P's laptop can use 3.5 GB doesn't mean yours can do it, I assume you both have a different model of laptop. Your current best bet is maybe try updating the BIOS, but that's still no guarantee that Windows can use 3.5 GB with your laptop.

 

I see what you are saying, but it shouldn't be like that, that's why we have standards. Imagine you get a 2GB flash memory stick, then your laptop gets 1.5GB and your gf 1.8GB, and your boss 2GB (of course), that doesn't make sense. Is a 2GB flash mem stick, and you should be able to get 2GB regardless of the system you have, and is like that actually, you do get 2GB, the samething with your HDD, the video card memory, etc. you do get what others get regardless of their systems.

Regarding the 32 bits and x86 thing, I fully understand why we don't get to use the 4GB. But is the OS who holds the addressing policy, so as long as you have the same x86 platform and OS, you should get the same available RAM (e.g 3.5GB) regardless where you bought your laptop from.

 

Bottom line. WYSIWYG. Its your hardware which determines the amount not the standard.

 

Perhaps, it lies with the motherboard. Even though some motherboards can take 4GB of RAM and the operating system can see 4GB of RAM, the motherboard limits the RAM that's available to 3.2GB - 3.5GB. Usually, this is a problem with older motherboards.

 

WYSIWYG is not true, I see 4GB and I get 3,070GB

(I know I can't get 4GB, but at least 3.5GB like the rest )

 

My motherboard is about 8 months old. I need to get to the bottom of this, I'll send an e-mail to Compal

 

I just need to step in here, not sure if it's been cleared up yet or not.

Using more than 4294967296 addresses in a 32 bit operating system WILL cause some performance depredation. Noticeable? Hardly, but definitely present. It's like older motherboard chipsets that did not support drives over 32GB. You put in a larger drive, it saw it and it only saw 32GB, and you could install Windows and use it. But it usually led to some quirkiness and problems. This is why drives had a jumper setting to "clip" the drive to 32GB only. The drive is like a room with a kid playing inside, and the kid can only handle "32GB" of the room. You tell him not to wander outside but chances are it will happen eventually with aggravating results. Clipping the drive was like putting up a wall, so the kid will only stay in the space it can handle. This same theory applies to memory, as the system may utilize hardware (through error of course) that is has no address for. Results can just be temporary slowdown, or BSODs.

I might be wrong with Vista as I know it can recognize 4GB of RAM so it might be able to do a software "clip" of the memory size, but I know for sure that this is the case with XP and prior 32 bit operating systems. Also based on the fact that memory and all hardware for that matter is a lot more accurate than it used to be, you'll rarely see problems. But to say they don't exist is simply not true.

 

Not in that sense but the amount of memory left over is WYSIWYG.

 

Ok, I did some reading and here is what I found, the memory that is not addressable by the OS because the 32 bit limitation, is about 750MB, and this space is used for: PCI, chipsets, Direct Media Interface and ICH ranges. So, yes, these devices are definitely different from one mobo to another.

Thank you ALL for your great patience towards this monkey with a litle brain, but with a huge heart

 

Just switch to 64bit, solves all.

Join the force.

 

Hahahaha, I really want to switch to 64, but again there my concern is that even the applications written for 64 don't fully take advantage of the 64 architecture. In other words you can have application A for 32 and the same application written for 64, then you have both running in the 64 machine, and there will be no difference in terms of speed, that's what I have heard.

 

Theres alot more to 64bit than just the native programs.

You should consider trying it out first, maybe dual boot.

 

That makes sense, I'll try dual boot, I already have another laptop with Ubuntu and XP pro dual boot, but two HDD's. With my laptop I may do a partition dual booting, or may be just to buy another HDD, I'm not a very good friend with creating partitions

 

You should consider just reformatting your Vista Business with Vista Business X64. Pretty sure your license covers it (correct me if I'm wrong someone).

For 32 bit apps, things will run exactly the same as they did in 64 bit apps. But the OS itself, along with 64 bit native apps, will be much faster.

 

No, I don't think I can move up from business 32 to 64. I think you could from Ultimate 32 to 64 because the CD comes with both, That's what I heard.

But anyway, if I move up I would do it with glory so I would get Vista Ultimate, I will check the price.

 

Theres more to 64bit than speed. It is also more secure, 99% of remote attacks will fail due to the way memory is addressed. Plus other security measures.

Its the future anyway. Its only a matter of time till you switch to 64bit.

Your licence works for both 32bit and 64bit versions. You just need to get hold of a 64bit install disc.

Techically there is no difference between them, other than the system files contained.

 

Why not use the unusable RAM as RAMdisk. 3GB for OS, 1GB for RAMdisk.

 

One question, though, how will Montevina affect the operation of Vista 64, is it worth to ask this question?

Like booting from a disk? I can do that with Ubuntu, but I don't know if you can do that with Vista, though.