Vista - Missing 1 MB of RAM?

When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running Vista,
Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some systems with
onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a separate video card
(nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What happened to the 1 MB of
RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM chip?

--
Michael

"Michael Ray Brown" <velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OLrflcOnHHA.4896@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running
> Vista, Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some
> systems with onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a
> separate video card (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What
> happened to the 1 MB of RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM
> chip?
>
> --
> Michael

My machine does the same thing, it has a difference of 1MB.

"Michael Ray Brown" wrote
> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running
> Vista, Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some
> systems with onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a
> separate video card (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What
> happened to the 1 MB of RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM
> chip?

It's not anything to worry about. I have seen the amount of reported RAM
differ by 1MB on the same system under the same OS depending on where you
look for that measure. It is not shared video RAM. That will take more
than 1MB and anyway what Vista reports as RAM would include the amount
shared.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

Interesting. When I go to "system" in the control panel, Vista reports
that I have 1014 MB of RAM. But other checks, such as a sidebar
application that reports RAM availability in real-time, gives a
different number...and another application gives an even different
number.

I wouldn't get too worried about the "missing" 1 MB. I'm sure it's
tucked away in there somewhere and it just depends on how you count RAM
to explain the difference.

..




On Tue, 22 May 2007 20:04:55 -0700, "Michael Ray Brown"
<velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote:

>When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running Vista,
>Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some systems with
>onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a separate video card
>(nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What happened to the 1 MB of
>RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM chip?

On Tue, 22 May 2007 22:37:13 -0700, "Justin" <None@None.com> wrote:

>"Michael Ray Brown" <velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote in message
>news:OLrflcOnHHA.4896@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running
>> Vista, Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some
>> systems with onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a
>> separate video card (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What
>> happened to the 1 MB of RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM
>> chip?
>>
>> --
>> Michael
>
>My machine does the same thing, it has a difference of 1MB.

Justin's idea of him "helping".

LOL!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Adam Albright wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 22:37:13 -0700, "Justin" <None@None.com> wrote:
>
>> "Michael Ray Brown" <velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote in message
>> news:OLrflcOnHHA.4896@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running
>>> Vista, Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some
>>> systems with onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a
>>> separate video card (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What
>>> happened to the 1 MB of RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM
>>> chip?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael
>> My machine does the same thing, it has a difference of 1MB.
>
> Justin's idea of him "helping".
>
> LOL!
>
>
And your post helps, because????

- --
Iron Feliks

Trolls are like babies. After feeding, they get stinky.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGVEwHIEgejQPpTu4RCjtuAJ91VytvFzt4UTVrMTTmh3WKCQpPLwCggKck
Kxuq7VQOxOMsrTdT3NvHw8o=
=dSU6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Think yourself lucky, it's only 1 MB.

On mine, it shows 1000MB less RAM than is installed (GAB of RAM, instead of
GAB). That's the way is is apparently.


"Michael Ray Brown" <velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:OLrflcOnHHA.4896@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running
> Vista, Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some
> systems with onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a
> separate video card (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What
> happened to the 1 MB of RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM
> chip?
>
> --
> Michael

What is GAB?


"Haydon" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:huWdnWAfCtn1GMnbRVnytwA@pipex.net...
> Think yourself lucky, it's only 1 MB.
>
> On mine, it shows 1000MB less RAM than is installed (GAB of RAM, instead of
> GAB). That's the way is is apparently.
>
>
> "Michael Ray Brown" <velcrofaceNoSpam@yahooNoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:OLrflcOnHHA.4896@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> When running XP, Windows reports having 1024 MB of RAM. When running Vista,
>> Windows reports having 1023 MB of RAM. I've heard that some systems with
>> onboard video allocate some RAM to video, but I have a separate video card
>> (nVidia GeForce FX 5200) with 128 MB of RAM. What happened to the 1 MB of
>> RAM? Could this be a sign of a defective RAM chip?
>>
>> --
>> Michael
>

Meant to say "3GB of RAM, instead of 4GB". Damn spell check!


"Haydon" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:huWdnWAfCtn1GMnbRVnytwA@pipex.net...
> Think yourself lucky, it's only 1 MB.
>
> On mine, it shows 1000MB less RAM than is installed (GAB of RAM, instead
> of GAB). That's the way is is apparently.
>

"Haydon" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:5I-dnU4LyYl_FcnbRVnyhAA@pipex.net...
> Meant to say "3GB of RAM, instead of 4GB". Damn spell check!
>
>
> "Haydon" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:huWdnWAfCtn1GMnbRVnytwA@pipex.net...
>> Think yourself lucky, it's only 1 MB.
>>
>> On mine, it shows 1000MB less RAM than is installed (GAB of RAM, instead
>> of GAB). That's the way is is apparently.
>>
>
If this is Vista 32 bit, the following KB article explains:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/en-us

--
Michael Solomon
Backup is a PC user's best friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/