Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
Hardware and Windows Vista Hardware issues in relation to Windows Vista. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices) |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
ram ..please help
Colin Barnhorst wrote:
Which clearly states what I have been trying to tell you: "Although support for PAE memory is typically associated with support for more than 4 GB of RAM, PAE can be enabled on Windows XP SP2, Windows Server 2003, and later 32-bit versions of Windows to support hardware-enforced Data Execution Prevention (DEP)." This is not what we're talking about, I really do know that. You just keep saying that 32-bit OSes cannot mathematically address more than 4GB, and that is not true. Yes, XP and Vista cannot go above 4GB, but that is because Microsoft choose not to go there. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
Paul Smith wrote:
The trouble is in the real world PAE, and other extension "hacks" would often crash systems because hardware manufacturers drivers weren't written to support it. The issue is not about bad drivers that crash when they get a memory buffer allocated above 4G, but the fact that the 4G-limitation is something Microsoft chose for XP and Vista. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
Where do you get the idea that MS chose not to let the clients "go there."
They inherently don't "go there." The only "choice" MS made was to program a capability into the Windows Server editions that enables them to "go there." The capability to enable PAE to leverage additional addressable memory is something that has to be programmed into an OS, not something that is programmed out of one. "dennis" wrote in message ... Colin Barnhorst wrote: Which clearly states what I have been trying to tell you: "Although support for PAE memory is typically associated with support for more than 4 GB of RAM, PAE can be enabled on Windows XP SP2, Windows Server 2003, and later 32-bit versions of Windows to support hardware-enforced Data Execution Prevention (DEP)." This is not what we're talking about, I really do know that. You just keep saying that 32-bit OSes cannot mathematically address more than 4GB, and that is not true. Yes, XP and Vista cannot go above 4GB, but that is because Microsoft choose not to go there. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
Colin Barnhorst wrote:
Where do you get the idea that MS chose not to let the clients "go there." They inherently don't "go there." The only "choice" MS made was to program a capability into the Windows Server editions that enables them to "go there." The capability to enable PAE to leverage additional addressable memory is something that has to be programmed into an OS, not something that is programmed out of one. Okay, again. You said it yourself: both xp and vista comes with a PAE kernel, to support DEP. When you enter PAE mode the CPU makes it both mathematically and technically possible to address more than 4GB. So now the OS developer has a *choice*. Microsoft choose *not* to support more than 4GB in the PAE kernel (starting from XP/SP2), because there exist bad drivers out there. *This* is what we're talking about, at least I am. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
I interpret the following to mean that only 64bit Vista fully supports DEP.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/en-us "dennis" wrote in message ... Colin Barnhorst wrote: Where do you get the idea that MS chose not to let the clients "go there." They inherently don't "go there." The only "choice" MS made was to program a capability into the Windows Server editions that enables them to "go there." The capability to enable PAE to leverage additional addressable memory is something that has to be programmed into an OS, not something that is programmed out of one. Okay, again. You said it yourself: both xp and vista comes with a PAE kernel, to support DEP. When you enter PAE mode the CPU makes it both mathematically and technically possible to address more than 4GB. So now the OS developer has a *choice*. Microsoft choose *not* to support more than 4GB in the PAE kernel (starting from XP/SP2), because there exist bad drivers out there. *This* is what we're talking about, at least I am. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
You can only access a theoretical maximum of 4GB in 32-bit OS. Most computers are lucky to address 3.25 GB with newer video cards installed. 64-bit Ultimate can address 128GB of RAM and huge paging file. /pae switch does not allow you to break the 4GB 32-bit rule. I used it to help NUMA memory management on my AMD server boards. 2^ 32 =4294967296 =4GB -- SCSIraidGURU Michael A. McKenney 'www.SCSIraidGURU.com' (http://www.SCSIraidGURU.com) Supermicro X7DWA-N server board pair of Intel E5430 quad core 2.66 GHz Xeons 16GB DDR667 SAS RAID eVGA 8800 GTS 640 MB video card |
|
|||
ram ..please help
SCSIraidGURU wrote:
You can only access a theoretical maximum of 4GB in 32-bit OS. Most computers are lucky to address 3.25 GB with newer video cards installed. 64-bit Ultimate can address 128GB of RAM and huge paging file. /pae switch does not allow you to break the 4GB 32-bit rule. I used it to help NUMA memory management on my AMD server boards. 2^ 32 =4294967296 =4GB I suspect that you don't know fully how memory access works in a x86 cpu running in paging mode. The only thing that cannot change is the size of the virtual address space, which is always 4GB. The physical one can be much larger. Btw, 32bit xp/vista supports up to 16TB per paging file when the PAE kernel is loaded. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
*-PAE Mode-* PAE is the second method supported to access memory above 4 GB; this method has been widely implemented. PAE maps up to 64 GB of physical memory into a 32-bit (4 GB) virtual address space using either 4-KB or 2-MB pages. The Page directories and the page tables are extended to 8 byte formats, allowing the extension of the base addresses of page tables and page frames to 24 bits (from 20 bits). This is where the extra four bits are introduced to complete the 36-bit physical address. Windows supports PAE with 4-KB pages. PAE also supports a mode where 2-MB pages are supported. Many of the UNIX operating systems rely on the 2 MB-page mode. The address translation is done without the use of page tables (the PDE supplies the page frame address directly). I only have seen a few CAD applications successfully access PAE. Most applications on the market can't use PAE properly. So for most users it is a moot issue. You are still limited to physical RAM of 4GB with most applications limited to 2GB per application. Applications like Photoshop CS2 are paritally 64-bit and can access 6GB of RAM and a larger paging file. It is very few applications that can use PAE. Personally, I rather have 64-bit applications and more physical RAM instead being used in Vista over using paging files that are 1000x slower access. As 64-bit applications become available, it would be better to add RAM over paging space. It was $44 per GB for my 16GB of DDR667 RAM = $700.Benchmark Results Combined Index : 24648 MB/s Speed Factor : 42.2 2kB Blocks : 110697 MB/s 4kB Blocks : 120317 MB/s 8kB Blocks : 129715 MB/s 16kB Blocks : 133004 MB/s 32kB Blocks : 133339 MB/s 64kB Blocks : 119000 MB/s 128kB Blocks : 45663 MB/s 256kB Blocks : 45800 MB/s 512kB Blocks : 45807 MB/s 1MB Blocks : 45851 MB/s 4MB Blocks : 45300 MB/s 16MB Blocks : 15601 MB/s 64MB Blocks : 3160 MB/s 256MB Blocks : 3160 MB/s 1GB Blocks : 3160 MB/s 4GB Blocks : 3161 MB/s Results Interpretation : Higher index values are better. It is much faster than the $2200 SAS RAID controller and arrays. RAID 1 array Buffered Read : 1.01GB/s Sequential Read : 119.73MB/s Random Read : 128.25MB/s Buffered Write : 679.29MB/s Sequential Write : 31.91MB/s Random Write : 31.21MB/s Random Access Time : 1ms -- SCSIraidGURU Michael A. McKenney 'www.SCSIraidGURU.com' (http://www.SCSIraidGURU.com) Supermicro X7DWA-N server board pair of Intel E5430 quad core 2.66 GHz Xeons 16GB DDR667 SAS RAID eVGA 8800 GTS 640 MB video card |
|
|||
ram ..please help
SCSIraidGURU wrote:
I only have seen a few CAD applications successfully access PAE. Most applications on the market can't use PAE properly. So for most users it is a moot issue. You are still limited to physical RAM of 4GB with most applications limited to 2GB per application. Applications like Photoshop CS2 are paritally 64-bit and can access 6GB of RAM and a larger paging file. It is very few applications that can use PAE. Personally, I rather have 64-bit applications and more physical RAM instead being used in Vista over using paging files that are 1000x slower access. As 64-bit applications become available, it would be better to add RAM over paging space. Applications don't address physical memory, they only access their virtual address space. So it doesn't matter where in physical ram an application's virtual address space points to. It can be below or above 4G, it doesn't matter. And how can an application be partially 64bit? Last time I checked on adobe.com, photoshop is only 32bit. |
|
|||
ram ..please help
CS2 could use 6GB of RAM CS3 wimped out and was completely 32-bit. CS4 is going to 64-bit. You can setup CS2 to use 4-6GB for scratch space instead of hard drive. Since most users run Windows and not Linux, you have the 4GB limit on 32-bit OS. I have not seen how well Vista 32-bit handles virtual RAM. I use x64 Ultimate. These are Microsoft forums. I doubt Linux users hang out on them. You are correct about Unix and Linux using virtual RAM better. Since this is a Microsoft forum, does it really matter. My XP Pro box had 3.25GB physical RAM and 4095MB paging file. I would get out of memory errors long before filling all 7.24 GB. I switched to XP x64 to get 8GB of RAM and 12GB paging file to work better with my apps. CS2 could access 6GB of RAM. Would you rather run everything from your hard drive paging file or out of physical RAM? With Vista x64 Ultimate SP1, it uses my RAM more efficiently than XP x64 SP2. On Vista x64 Ultimate, I run 16GB physical and 16GB paging. It wanted 40GB + 16GB for the C: partition. If 4GB modules drop in price, I might check on a board that could do 32GB of RAM. -- SCSIraidGURU Michael A. McKenney 'www.SCSIraidGURU.com' (http://www.SCSIraidGURU.com) Supermicro X7DWA-N server board pair of Intel E5430 quad core 2.66 GHz Xeons 16GB DDR667 SAS RAID eVGA 8800 GTS 640 MB video card |