ok. so i have an asus p5nsli mobo and already had 2gb of pc5300 ddr2 667mhz memory. Today i bought 2 more gb of kingston memory, same type and when i put all of the memory in the slots it said i had 2.75gb or 2818 mb, can someone plz tell me what is wrong? i am running vista (my dad has vista and his works) and my memory is in dual channel, i tried putting them side by side and still same prob!! plz help!! +1 karma for help
If you are running a 32 bit OS there is only enough address space to show 2.75-3.0 depending on your hardware configuration. One gig is probably allocated to virtual memory as well (Check your pagefile). Windows Vista 32 can take advantage of it still in some instances, but it will only show 2.75. If you really want to see it go to 64 bit. It can support a heck of allot more.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-03-16 19:09:37)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
This is why people really shouldn't be buying 32-bit OS's. Although you should have support for upto 4GB of RAM in a 32-bit environment, that is the absolute address limit. The CPU won't be able to recognise any more memory locations and that includes virtual ones.
With a 64-bit OS you should be able to support upto about 17 billion GBs of RAM, although I don't think these current architectures are true 64-bit. The Athlon 64s, for example, I think use 48-bit addressing giving only a meagre 260,000 something GB of addressable memory.
With a 64-bit OS you should be able to support upto about 17 billion GBs of RAM, although I don't think these current architectures are true 64-bit. The Athlon 64s, for example, I think use 48-bit addressing giving only a meagre 260,000 something GB of addressable memory.
Thats why I laugh every time I read this..wowser (Mac site)
64-bit computing shatters the 4GB limit giving a virtual address space in excess of 16 exabytes. That's more than 18 billion billion bytes. You can't even begin to put that much RAM in a Power Mac—yet—but Tiger sets the stage for some truly incredible system capabilities.
64-bits in Real Terms
The idea of a 4 terabytes of physical memory, much less 16 exabytes of address space, is a bit mind-blowing. To help you wrap your head around the scale of data that we are talking about, consider the following:
* A DVD can hold 4.7GB of data storing over 2 hours of high quality MPEG-2 video.
* 250 DVDs can contain about a terabyte of data.
* 4 250GB hard drives, the largest currently available in the Power Mac G5, will also store a terabyte of data.
* A fully loaded Xserve RAID can currently hold 5.6 terabytes of data.
* The largest physical library in the world, the U.S. Library of Congress, contains about 20 terabytes of text.
* The Internet Archive, dedicated to maintaining an archive of the Internet, holds over a petabyte (1000 terabytes) of data and is growing at over 20 terabytes a month. It would take 175 Xserve RAIDs, 4000 250GB hard drives, or 4.4 million DVDs to store that much data.
* An exabyte can contain 1000 Internet Archives—at least right now.
No matter how you slice it, 16 exabytes is a lot of address space. There's a lot of headroom for the future and it will take a long time to exhaust the potential of the 64-bit address space.
64-bit computing shatters the 4GB limit giving a virtual address space in excess of 16 exabytes. That's more than 18 billion billion bytes. You can't even begin to put that much RAM in a Power Mac—yet—but Tiger sets the stage for some truly incredible system capabilities.
64-bits in Real Terms
The idea of a 4 terabytes of physical memory, much less 16 exabytes of address space, is a bit mind-blowing. To help you wrap your head around the scale of data that we are talking about, consider the following:
* A DVD can hold 4.7GB of data storing over 2 hours of high quality MPEG-2 video.
* 250 DVDs can contain about a terabyte of data.
* 4 250GB hard drives, the largest currently available in the Power Mac G5, will also store a terabyte of data.
* A fully loaded Xserve RAID can currently hold 5.6 terabytes of data.
* The largest physical library in the world, the U.S. Library of Congress, contains about 20 terabytes of text.
* The Internet Archive, dedicated to maintaining an archive of the Internet, holds over a petabyte (1000 terabytes) of data and is growing at over 20 terabytes a month. It would take 175 Xserve RAIDs, 4000 250GB hard drives, or 4.4 million DVDs to store that much data.
* An exabyte can contain 1000 Internet Archives—at least right now.
No matter how you slice it, 16 exabytes is a lot of address space. There's a lot of headroom for the future and it will take a long time to exhaust the potential of the 64-bit address space.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-03-16 20:07:31)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
ok so at first i did wanted to install my 64bit vista ultimate that came with the 32bit, but then i looked at the drivers issue, maybe like in 4-5 more months till they get more drivers for my hardware, and what was the configuration settings you were talking about? how can i change it to show 3.XX gb? btw thx for clearing the issue up.
Offtopic, but I'm reminded of a prototype laptop I read about that had 2TB of RAM. It didn't need any hard disks, it just used the memory.Kmarion wrote:
Thats why I laugh every time I read this..wowser (Mac site)
64-bit computing shatters the 4GB limit giving a virtual address space in excess of 16 exabytes. That's more than 18 billion billion bytes. You can't even begin to put that much RAM in a Power Mac—yet—but Tiger sets the stage for some truly incredible system capabilities.
64-bits in Real Terms
The idea of a 4 terabytes of physical memory, much less 16 exabytes of address space, is a bit mind-blowing. To help you wrap your head around the scale of data that we are talking about, consider the following:
* A DVD can hold 4.7GB of data storing over 2 hours of high quality MPEG-2 video.
* 250 DVDs can contain about a terabyte of data.
* 4 250GB hard drives, the largest currently available in the Power Mac G5, will also store a terabyte of data.
* A fully loaded Xserve RAID can currently hold 5.6 terabytes of data.
* The largest physical library in the world, the U.S. Library of Congress, contains about 20 terabytes of text.
* The Internet Archive, dedicated to maintaining an archive of the Internet, holds over a petabyte (1000 terabytes) of data and is growing at over 20 terabytes a month. It would take 175 Xserve RAIDs, 4000 250GB hard drives, or 4.4 million DVDs to store that much data.
* An exabyte can contain 1000 Internet Archives—at least right now.
No matter how you slice it, 16 exabytes is a lot of address space. There's a lot of headroom for the future and it will take a long time to exhaust the potential of the 64-bit address space.
Ontopic now: can't a 32-bit OS detect 4GB of RAM? I thought that it could detect up to 4GB, but performance wasn't really effected going from 2GB to 4GB.
yeah i checked with cpuz it said i had 4gb but windows and all that junk confuse me
It can detect it however what it displays is a combination of your virtual and physical memory. Get a program like CPUZ and I guarantee it will show it all. Your hardware and memory are competing for space to be "addressed". I remember I replaced one of my GPU's once before and I went from 2.75 to 3 gigs that showed. It depends on a combination of things. Just understand that the architecture of 32 bit is more restrictive. However the hardware support continues to revolve around 32 bit. 64 bit is the future but some in the industry are dragging their feet.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-03-17 11:32:53)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
got it thx and u are the winner of +1 karma
That sounds like an incredibly stupid idea for a laptop. It'd need an extra battery to provide constant power for all that RAM and would consume power like crazy. For a desktop, perhaps, like the RAMdisks that are fairly widely available. But if your laptop battery ever died, you'd lose everything on it.Sup3r_Dr4gon wrote:
Offtopic, but I'm reminded of a prototype laptop I read about that had 2TB of RAM. It didn't need any hard disks, it just used the memory.
Unless of course they were using some crazy other technology, but then that wouldn't be RAM, which is, by it's very nature, volatile.
Maybe this will help..lol
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-03-18 15:38:37)
Xbone Stormsurgezz