How much Memory can Vista 32 bit support?

"Claude Hopper" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in message
news:r8-dnYg9SZEU1tfUnZ2dnUVZ_sHinZ2d@giganews.com...
> So what's the maximum memory a 64 bit os can see and use?????? as opposed
> to a Windows 64 bit system.
64bit architecture can theoretically use 16 exabytes. However, the operating
system and mainboard would have to support it aswell. As far as i know none
do yet. But there is room to raise the limit as there is need.

Better stop drinking because you are posting the same message over and over.
Speak to a counselor and he/she will help you with your drinking issues.


<ray rod> wrote in message
news:20081217194535f17raymondrodriguez221@gmail.com...
>I have 4 sticks of 2gb each pc-6400 so why does vista 32 bit home premium
>see 8gb of ram
> do not believe..see my attachment here>>>>
> http://www.mypcclinic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23401

Sorken wrote:
>
> "Claude Hopper" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in message
> news:r8-dnYg9SZEU1tfUnZ2dnUVZ_sHinZ2d@giganews.com...
>> So what's the maximum memory a 64 bit os can see and use?????? as
>> opposed to a Windows 64 bit system.
> 64bit architecture can theoretically use 16 exabytes. However, the
> operating system and mainboard would have to support it aswell. As far
> as i know none do yet. But there is room to raise the limit as there is
> need.
>

From 3.2 gig with 32 bit max and 16 exabytes with 64 bit. That's quite
a jump for only 32 bits more.

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 22:10:56 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

> "ray rod" wrote in message
> news:20081217193632f17raymondrodriguez221@gmail.com...
>> Well mine sees more than 4Gb
>> 32 bit vista home premium..do not believe then see my attachment
>> here>>>>
>> http://www.mypcclinic.com/forums/sho...028#post229028
>>
>> Can anyone of you experts explain?
>
>
> Regardless of what is shown (and the above link shows nothing), 32 bit
> Vista will only use around 3.2 GB of RAM. It is mathematically
> impossible for a 32 bit OS to use more than 4 GB. "Seeing" and "using"
> are 2 very different things. Look at Task Manager to see how much is
> actually being used.
>
> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.

FALSE. PAE enables a 32 bit system to access up to 64gb if the OS is aware
of how to use it. Such Linux systems are indeed available and, I believe,
some of the MS server systems as well. There is still a 4gb limitation on
memory used by a single process.

"ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:6qvc3mFeu97bU7@mid.individual.net...
>> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.
>
> FALSE. PAE enables a 32 bit system to access up to 64gb if the OS is aware
> of how to use it.

Well, sort of. If you are using PAE, you are no longer using 32 bits.
You now have 36 bits. It is impossible for 32 bits to address more than 4
GB.

PAE is a hack and a kludge anyway, and will soon go away now that we have
real 64 bit systems.

Claude Hopper <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote:

>So what's the maximum memory a 64 bit os can see and use?????? as
>opposed to a Windows 64 bit system.

The theoretical maximum would be 2**64, 16 exabytes. No current
hardware comes anywhere close.

As actually implemented, different versions of 64-bit Vista have
different limits:

Basic 8GB
Home Premium 16GB
Business, Enterprise, Ultimate 128GB.

see here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr..._windows_vista

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(Shell/User)
Slattery_T@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:33:09 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:

> "ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
> news:6qvc3mFeu97bU7@mid.individual.net...
>>> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.
>>
>> FALSE. PAE enables a 32 bit system to access up to 64gb if the OS is
>> aware of how to use it.
>
> Well, sort of. If you are using PAE, you are no longer using 32 bits.
> You now have 36 bits. It is impossible for 32 bits to address more
> than 4 GB.
>
> PAE is a hack and a kludge anyway, and will soon go away now that we
> have real 64 bit systems.

But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't a 64
bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it is a
'32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is not a 36
bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion remains.

> But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't a 64
> bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it is a
> '32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is not a 36
> bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion remains.

Guys: Ray obviously has to have the last word. I'd let him, if I were you!

;-)

SteveT

"Claude Hopper" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in message
news:NIOdnWrez6Y269fUnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Sorken wrote:
>>
>> "Claude Hopper" <boobooililililil@roadrunner.com> wrote in message
>> news:r8-dnYg9SZEU1tfUnZ2dnUVZ_sHinZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> So what's the maximum memory a 64 bit os can see and use?????? as
>>> opposed to a Windows 64 bit system.
>> 64bit architecture can theoretically use 16 exabytes. However, the
>> operating system and mainboard would have to support it aswell. As
>> far as i know none do yet. But there is room to raise the limit as
>> there is need.
>>
>
> From 3.2 gig with 32 bit max and 16 exabytes with 64 bit. That's quite
> a jump for only 32 bits more.

That's the way binary works - each bit doubles the size of the number,
so double 4GB (not 3.2 - 4GB is the total memory addressable in a 32-bit
addressing scheme, the 3.2 comes because some of that is taken by
hardware) 32 times and you get 17,179,869,184GB, or 16 exabytes.

--
Zaphod

No matter where you go, there you are!

>> Well mine sees more than 4Gb
>> 32 bit vista home premium..do not believe then see my attachment
>> here>>>>
>> http://www.mypcclinic.com/forums/sho...028#post229028
>>
>> Can anyone of you experts explain?
>
>
> Regardless of what is shown (and the above link shows nothing), 32 bit
> Vista will only use around 3.2 GB of RAM. It is mathematically
> impossible for a 32 bit OS to use more than 4 GB. "Seeing" and "using"
> are 2 very different things. Look at Task Manager to see how much is
> actually being used.
>
> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.

Running Vista Home Premium SP1 32 Bit,
Task Manager reports:
Total Physical Memory of 3065 MB
Total Kernel Memory of 265 MB.

Does one add the two values, or just refer to the Physical Memory?

--

I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
That's what everybody calls me.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
All those moments will be lost in time...
like tears in rain...
Time to die.
Roy Batty - Blade Runner

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 17:23:53 +0000, Steve Thackery wrote:

>> But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't a
>> 64 bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it
>> is a '32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is
>> not a 36 bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion
>> remains.
>
> Guys: Ray obviously has to have the last word. I'd let him, if I were
> you!
>
> ;-)
>
> SteveT

No, I simply don't like to see innaccuracies stand.

"ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:6qveltFeuvjfU1@mid.individual.net...
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:33:09 -0500, Bob Campbell wrote:
>
>> "ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
>> news:6qvc3mFeu97bU7@mid.individual.net...
>>>> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.
>>>
>>> FALSE. PAE enables a 32 bit system to access up to 64gb if the OS is
>>> aware of how to use it.
>>
>> Well, sort of. If you are using PAE, you are no longer using 32 bits.
>> You now have 36 bits. It is impossible for 32 bits to address more
>> than 4 GB.
>>
>> PAE is a hack and a kludge anyway, and will soon go away now that we
>> have real 64 bit systems.
>
> But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't a 64
> bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it is a
> '32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is not a 36
> bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion remains.

There is a difference. With 32 bits you can address 4GB directly, with
36 bit PAE you must use page switching. The extra 4 bits enable 16 pages
of 4GB each, then you can use 32 bit addressing within any page.You can't
go directly from one address to another across a 4GB boundary without
page switching. With 64 bits, and the same 64 GB you can directly access
any address.

PAE is a kludge similar to expanded memory addressing back in the early
days of DOS.

"ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:6qveltFeuvjfU1@mid.individual.net...
> But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't a 64
> bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it is a
> '32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is not a 36
> bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion remains.


That's why it is a kludge. It gives a 32 bit OS 36 bits of address space
but keeps all of the other limitations of 32 bits. The very definition of
a hack.

Hi Bob


" It is mathematically impossible for a 32 bit OS to use more than 4 GB. "

Not quite true. Not all 32 bit systems are restricted to this. For example the 32
bit W2K3 and 8 Enterprise versions can see and handle up to 64 gig's in memory . My
32 bit W2K3 Enterprise at present is handling more than 4 x that of a 32 bit Vista
or XP .
Of course you are absolutely correct when you say the above but you need to put in
"with the exception of certain 32 bit servers since the W2K3 Standard,Media and Web
Servers can only handle as much as Vista or XP which is 4gig's


--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"Bob Campbell" <bob@bob.bob> wrote in message
news:IpudnVtAvYbRItTUnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@supernews.com...
> "ray rod" wrote in message news:20081217193632f17raymondrodriguez221@gmail.com...
>> Well mine sees more than 4Gb
>> 32 bit vista home premium..do not believe then see my attachment here>>>>
>> http://www.mypcclinic.com/forums/sho...028#post229028
>>
>> Can anyone of you experts explain?
>
>
> Regardless of what is shown (and the above link shows nothing), 32 bit Vista will
> only use around 3.2 GB of RAM. It is mathematically impossible for a 32 bit OS
> to use more than 4 GB. "Seeing" and "using" are 2 very different things. Look
> at Task Manager to see how much is actually being used.
>
> To actually *use* it all, you need a 64 bit OS.

Bob Campbell wrote:
> "ray" <ray@zianet.com> wrote in message
> news:6qveltFeuvjfU1@mid.individual.net...
>> But it DOES exist and is a way for a 32 bit OS (it sure as hell ain't
>> a 64
>> bit OS) to address more than 4gb. You can quibble about whether it is a
>> '32 bit OS' or a '36 bit OS' if you want (though it obviously is not a 36
>> bit OS either, IMHO, since the 4gb per process limitaion remains.
>
>
> That's why it is a kludge. It gives a 32 bit OS 36 bits of address
> space but keeps all of the other limitations of 32 bits. The very
> definition of a hack.
Kludge or not, it is the basic premise for how virtual memory works as
well; so, everyone has to get use to it. Weather 32-bits, 36-bits or
64-bits doesn't matter.
When 64-bits gets supported up to the maximum limit, virtual memory will
need a boost to still allow virtual memory to work.

James