Vista - Upgraded from 2GB to 4GB but Vista doesn't see

03-01-2008

Oh man...I just did the same upgrade but with 4 x 1GB. Caveat Emptor: get
1 for the price of 2!

Really, though: thanks for this very useful information. I knew 4GB was
the max on 32 bit, but did not know about Vista's limitations...

Ready for an easy question? I've got a system with an Intel Pentium 4 3.0
Ghz processor...um...would it run Vista64? (running and hiding now)

Thanks again

"Scrivener" <dntsaycant@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%230j9XeBeIHA.1208@xxxxxx

Quote:

> Hi, Ken:
>
> I've enjoyed reading your posts.
>
> I have a laptop with three gigs of SDRAM housed in two slots: Slot 1, 2
> gigs; Slot 2, 1 gig. I've ordered a two-gig strip to put in the Slot 2,
> which now has the 1gig installed. If I'm understanding you correctly,
> you're indicating that it won't "help" the system and applications much
> beyond my 3 gigs? If that's the case, I wasted my money purchasing the 2
> gig for the second slot? (Live & Learn) If so, no big deal, except it
> proves once again my ignorance on the subject, and that I should have done
> more research.
>
> As an aside, when I check this machine's performance - I'm running Vista
> Ultimate - it shows approximately 1.1 gig used, 1.9 gig not used. I was
> hoping to make that 2.1 unused.
>
> Thanks, again, for any thoughts on this.
>
> Ernie
>
>
>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:ggi3s39sjthnmv3i4p8i3nmlnli79nvslh@xxxxxx

Quote:

>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:56:01 -0800, ICQM Houston
>> <ICQMHouston@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>

Quote:

>>> vista 32-bit can only recognize 3 GB even if you installed higher than 3
>>> BG
>>> RAM size total.

>>
>>
>> No, that's not exactly correct.
>>
>> All 32-bit versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address space.
>> That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.
>>
>> You can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you have a
>> 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM. That's
>> because some of that space is used by hardware and not available to
>> the operating system and applications. The amount you can use varies,
>> depending on what hardware you have installed, but is usually around
>> 3.1GB.
>>
>> Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual
>> RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no
>> address space to map it too.
>>
>>
>>

Quote:

>>> vista 64-bit can have it all sizes of RAM -

>>
>>
>> And that's not even close to correct. The amount varies with the
>> version of 64-bit Vista. It's 8GB with Home Basic, 16GB in Home
>> Premium, and 128GB in the other versions.
>>
>>

Quote:

>>> i had so far
>>> tested
>>> 8GB on a desktop workstation tunning vista 64 and no problem
>>>
>>> "Ian D" wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > "tony2tones" <tony2tones.359wi0@xxxxxx-mx.forums.net> wrote in message
>>> > news:tony2tones.359wi0@xxxxxx-mx.forums.net...
>>> > >
>>> > > I've upgraded my ram from 2GB to 4GB...the bios reports 4096 but
>>> > > Vista
>>> > > reports 2048...the exact same value before the upgrade. I'm aware
>>> > > of
>>> > > why Vista doesn't report all of the add'l memory but in my case I
>>> > > see no
>>> > > change at all...does any one have any ideas? Thanks!
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > tony2tones
>>> >
>>> > Make sure the memory remap or similar feature is not enabled in
>>> > your BIOS. This is for use with 64 bit OSs only, and the results
>>> > with a 32 bit OS are unpredictable. Showning only 2 GB of 4 GB
>>> > installed was the result I got with WinXP when the remap was
>>> > enabled for 64 bit Vista.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >

>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
>> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

>

03-01-2008	#11 (permalink)
PDX4WD n/a posts	Re: Upgraded from 2GB to 4GB but Vista doesn't see Oh man...I just did the same upgrade but with 4 x 1GB. Caveat Emptor: get 1 for the price of 2! Really, though: thanks for this very useful information. I knew 4GB was the max on 32 bit, but did not know about Vista's limitations... Ready for an easy question? I've got a system with an Intel Pentium 4 3.0 Ghz processor...um...would it run Vista64? (running and hiding now) Thanks again "Scrivener" <dntsaycant@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:%230j9XeBeIHA.1208@xxxxxx Quote: > Hi, Ken: > > I've enjoyed reading your posts. > > I have a laptop with three gigs of SDRAM housed in two slots: Slot 1, 2 > gigs; Slot 2, 1 gig. I've ordered a two-gig strip to put in the Slot 2, > which now has the 1gig installed. If I'm understanding you correctly, > you're indicating that it won't "help" the system and applications much > beyond my 3 gigs? If that's the case, I wasted my money purchasing the 2 > gig for the second slot? (Live & Learn) If so, no big deal, except it > proves once again my ignorance on the subject, and that I should have done > more research. > > As an aside, when I check this machine's performance - I'm running Vista > Ultimate - it shows approximately 1.1 gig used, 1.9 gig not used. I was > hoping to make that 2.1 unused. > > Thanks, again, for any thoughts on this. > > Ernie > > > > "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:ggi3s39sjthnmv3i4p8i3nmlnli79nvslh@xxxxxx Quote: >> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:56:01 -0800, ICQM Houston >> <ICQMHouston@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Quote: >>> vista 32-bit can only recognize 3 GB even if you installed higher than 3 >>> BG >>> RAM size total. >> >> >> No, that's not exactly correct. >> >> All 32-bit versions of Windows (not just XP) have a 4GB address space. >> That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go. >> >> You can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you have a >> 4GB address space, you can only use around 3.1GB of RAM. That's >> because some of that space is used by hardware and not available to >> the operating system and applications. The amount you can use varies, >> depending on what hardware you have installed, but is usually around >> 3.1GB. >> >> Note that the hardware is using the address space, not the actual >> RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no >> address space to map it too. >> >> >> Quote: >>> vista 64-bit can have it all sizes of RAM - >> >> >> And that's not even close to correct. The amount varies with the >> version of 64-bit Vista. It's 8GB with Home Basic, 16GB in Home >> Premium, and 128GB in the other versions. >> >> Quote: >>> i had so far >>> tested >>> 8GB on a desktop workstation tunning vista 64 and no problem >>> >>> "Ian D" wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > "tony2tones" <tony2tones.359wi0@xxxxxx-mx.forums.net> wrote in message >>> > news:tony2tones.359wi0@xxxxxx-mx.forums.net... >>> > > >>> > > I've upgraded my ram from 2GB to 4GB...the bios reports 4096 but >>> > > Vista >>> > > reports 2048...the exact same value before the upgrade. I'm aware >>> > > of >>> > > why Vista doesn't report all of the add'l memory but in my case I >>> > > see no >>> > > change at all...does any one have any ideas? Thanks! >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > tony2tones >>> > >>> > Make sure the memory remap or similar feature is not enabled in >>> > your BIOS. This is for use with 64 bit OSs only, and the results >>> > with a 32 bit OS are unpredictable. Showning only 2 GB of 4 GB >>> > installed was the result I got with WinXP when the remap was >>> > enabled for 64 bit Vista. >>> > >>> > >>> > >> >> -- >> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience >> Please Reply to the Newsgroup >
My System Specs

Similar Threads for: Upgraded from 2GB to 4GB but Vista doesn't see
Thread	Forum
Upgraded my CPU now Vista hates me!	Vista General
Help Upgraded from XP to VIsta	Vista General
OT: Upgraded my OS today (but not Vista)	Vista General
Has anyone upgraded from 2000 to XP to Vista	Vista installation & setup
Can xp pro x64 be upgraded to Vista x64 (5728)?	Vista General