 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows Vista / General Topics / June 2009Install 4GB into laptop whose manufacturer claims 2GB as MAXIMUM
Now as an Electrical Engineer I proved this point and upped my HP to 4GB w/3.25GB usable: If your chipset is Intel945 - as in my HP dv8408us & MANY NEWER HP laptops (Pavilions/MediaCenters), ignore HP claim of maixmum memory = 4GB. You can install 2GB+2GB sticks, you'll get 3.25GB usable by Windows, I know you waste about 1GB but it still makes sense. Intel945 chipset is hardwired for 32-bit adddresses so Windows whether it be 32 or 64bit is not a limitation, it's the chipset which is a limitation, STILL it can address 4GB, not 2GB as HP claimed on my laptop specs. I've done the same with IBM Thinkpads, where they claimed 512MB to be max 5 years ago, but I was running with 1GB. It appears idiots sometimes write these specs because 2GB laptop SDRAM modules were unavailable at that time at reasonable price/pinout? By the way if your Windows is 32bit - that is a software limit at 4GB, chipset - is a hardware limit. Th eoverall system limit is obviously SMALLESt of these numbers. The only way to use over 4GB is if both hardware + Windows are 64-bit, AND BIOS is updated. Also the trick above may give you BLUE SCREEN of DEATH if your HP laptop BIOS is not latest, and you never get full 4GB due to memoryhole in older laptops, and I/O overhead which wastes 0.7GB I use strictly CORSAIR memory - not their Valueselect series, but regular Corsair - made in Colorado, CA, world's top speed/US-designed/US-made maker, with their valueselect line outsourced to Taiwan but regular still made in USA. This is in the same class as QCZ & Mushkin, etc but made in USA with all premium manufacturing/semiconductors/quality. They continue mislabel some SDRAm modules as "for Mac", but they're dual Mac/PC since Apple is using Intel chipsets now, that is one problem with Corsair they didn't listen to my complaint and lose revenues when nontechnical people don't realize what Corsair labeled as Mac, is for PC. So 3.25GB here on a laptop claiming to be 2GB max. I can appreaciate extra 1GB+ (55% increase!) for CAD & Engineering simulation wares som eof which list 8GB as 'recommended" (Autodesk Inventor2010 Profressional with assemblies over 5,000 parts, Agilent ADS RF simulation suit - wants quad core, 8GB) Everything you say is correct except your paean to memory manufacturers. As memory prices have dropped the percentage of defective brand new ram sticks, regardless of cost or manufacturer, has risen. Sadly brand name does not guarantee working RAM. I have had recent failures of new Mushkin and your beloved Corsair ram sticks. The same seems true of hard drives, possibly worse than RAM, as hard drives are more complex to assemble. Fortunately hard drive manufacturers actually honor their warranties. RAM manufacturer warranties are something else. We had Corsairs here on many systems, NOT valueRam series but regular American-made Corsairs. Were your failed Corsairs ValueRam serie smade in taiwan, or premium made in Colorado/California, USA? Besides stupid consumers demanding cheaper & cheaper & government alalowing upto present deceitful advertising, harddisk failure rate has risen due to fundamental physicis - specifically Quantum Theory which is starting to play role as magentic domains have shrunk to molecular level... not yet, bu tat nanolevel already. There're other storage mediums on the horizon to resolve this Probabilistic behavior which is replacing deterministic behavior of older, lower capacity drives. Your failed Corsairs are likely to be "ValueSelect" made in Taiwan I never buy these, I only buy VA-series labeled "for Mac" but in fact are dual-purpose (ANY Intel machine, be it PC or Mac). For example a regular individual will use Corsair or vendor (I like ZipZoomFly.com) memoryconfigurator and find fo rmy HP laptop this: VS1GSDS667D2 or something like that. Sorry to brag, but I go deeper. I will construct a part# as VSA1GSDS667D2 Just one letter makes a huge difference, the regular sales idiots have no technical background and no understanding what A stands for, they see one thingL APPLE MAC memory and immediately claim it's a wrong choice. Nope, this memory works in PC's and is made in Colorado, USA; whereas VS series = Value Select is a nongaming/nonCAD regular memory made in Taiwan. The rest of part# is identical. But I swear VSA* part is highly unlikely to fail, we've been using them in really hot high-speed environment. I contacted Corsair explaing this must be marketed to both PC and Mac but while excellent engineers, these people dont know marketing. So they lose to cheapies from Kingston, and horrible PNY. Sorry for PNy which is made in my homestate New York.... nothing comes close to VSA series. The next higher step is CG or something like that series, but I can't use those in a laptop, they com ewith heat sinks and usually for desktops As you can see the same Corsair comes in different shapes, you probably got a cheapie, my 2GB cost $80. You could buy SEVERAL 2GB module sfor these money if it were value select Yes When they say "max 2 GB RAM", they mean the RAM types supported by the MB only go up to 2 GB for the total amount possible from the number of chips possible at the time the PC is released. If they later release a larger RAM chip of a speed that is compatible with the MB, the max possible RAM for that PC increases, and they will not likely update the specs. There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. This is remotely related to Vista, since there is a 32 bit Vista and a 64 bit, but this should probably be discussed in a hardware specific forum. > Now as an Electrical Engineer I proved this point and upped my HP to 4GB > w/3.25GB usable: [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > (Autodesk Inventor2010 Profressional with assemblies over 5,000 parts, > Agilent ADS RF simulation suit - wants quad core, 8GB) > There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. Sorry, this is not correct, for a couple of reasons. All 32-bit *client* versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a 4GB address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go. Please note that this is for client versions only, not servers. But 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 is not available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around 3.1GB. Please note that this *not* 3GB, but an amount that varies, depending on the computer. It's *usually* a little more than 3GB. Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map it to.  SignatureKen Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup Ken This is what happens when posters edit someone else's post or an article and then try to put it in their own words and terms and having no clue as to what they are saying or what it means. :-) SignaturePeter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. >> There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM > goes unused because there is no address space to map it to. > Ken > > This is what happens when posters edit someone else's post or an article and then > try to put it in their own words and terms and having no clue as to what they are > saying or what it means. :-) Yep, that's what sometimes happens. > >> There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM > > goes unused because there is no address space to map it to. SignatureKen Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup 3.25GB you can use, as I said! 0.75GB is wasted on I/O overhead Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit hardware running a 64 bit OS. >> There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM > goes unused because there is no address space to map it to. > Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit > hardware running a 64 bit OS. Technicalities? Is that always your response when you say something that's wrong and you get corrected? If that was the point you wanted to make, it should have been what you said. What you said ("There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS") was *not* correct, and I simply pointed out the correct thing. Moreover, the thing you now say ("you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit hardware running a 64 bit OS") is *still* incorrect. It applies only to *Client* versions of Windows, as I said. You can use 4GB of RAM, and more, with some 32-bit Windows Server operating systems. > >> There is a max 3 GB RAM for any PC which has a 32 bit CPU or a 32 bit OS. > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM > > goes unused because there is no address space to map it to. SignatureKen Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup > Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit > hardware running a 64 bit OS. Even if you have 64 bit hardware running a 64 bit OS, odds are you won't be able to use all 4GB, unless you're running a 64 bit application. Most 32 bit applications can't use more than 2GB of address space, and the ones that are large address aware can usually only use 3GB. The OS may use 100 - 200MB above the 3GB division. Photoshop Elements 6 & 7, 32 bit Photoshop CS4, and MS Flight Simulator X with SP1+SP2, are some apps that are large address aware. SignaturePeter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. >> Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit hardware >> running a 64 bit OS. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > CS4, and MS Flight Simulator X with SP1+SP2, are some apps that > are large address aware. Ian I am running a 32 bit system and I have more than 4gigs of Ram installed and showing W2K3 SP2 Enterprise 32bit http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_win dows_server_2003 SignaturePeter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. >> Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit hardware >> running a 64 bit OS. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > CS4, and MS Flight Simulator X with SP1+SP2, are some apps that > are large address aware. > Ian > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > W2K3 SP2 Enterprise 32bit > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx#physical_memory_limits_win dows_server_2003 You're running Server, and Server has the PAE extensions, therefore it can use more than 4GB by paging. I wasn't talking about OS's. I was talking about the memory use capabilities of 32 bit applications. >>> Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit >>> hardware running a 64 bit OS. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> CS4, and MS Flight Simulator X with SP1+SP2, are some apps that >> are large address aware. > You're running Server, and Server has the PAE extensions, therefore > it can use more than 4GB by paging. I wasn't talking about OS's. I > was talking about the memory use capabilities of 32 bit applications. If you are running multiple applications they can use much more than 4GB combined. Hey, Whck what "Agilent ADS" CAD/EDA package recommends for best performance (I used to use it for RF circuits design, but switched to much betetr AWR MicrowaveOffice2009): They recommend Quad-core processor & 8GB memory. You can never satisfy these hungry software makers, they WILL use all avaialble resources and complain. This is in part due to Capitalist system where one industry stimulates another, they want 8GB, so you go buy mor ememory, and amemory maker ends up making profits as a byproduct of an Engineering company making software. Same with Windows - Microsoft stimulates more powerful PC sales. I am NOT saying it's bad, for the simple reason humanity has no better social system to offer yet. Twenty years in USSR taught me what happens when government regulates hi-tech --> it becomes LOW TECH & INFERIOR to the West! But it's just bad on environment - endless cycle of increasing consumption. I think 8GB memory is a catastrophically large amount LOL! Back in 1991 we bult Z80-based mcirocomputers where entire GUI & OS and some games fit into 32KB memory. Ian >You're running Server, and Server has the PAE extensions, therefore >it can use more than 4GB by paging. HUH? Do you know what you are saying at all. PAE or the 3GIG switch has nothing to do with this. What you were thinking was probably AWE. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366527(VS.85).aspx Also NUMA support http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363804(VS.85).aspx Some more reading http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms683202(VS.85).aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965225(VS.85).aspx SignaturePeter Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. >> Ian >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >>> CS4, and MS Flight Simulator X with SP1+SP2, are some apps that >>> are large address aware. Your're not running Windows client!! Your OS is a Server using memory extensions which are SLOWER, well it's really slower, than true 64-bit OS. Get educated! > Your're not running Windows client!! > Your OS is a Server using memory extensions which are SLOWER, well it's > really slower, than true 64-bit OS. > > Get educated! Why do you think PAE mode is that much slower than 64bit mode? I don't know, maybe i am wrong. But his OS is not trully 32-bit addressing. Where do you get 4GB limit anyways? Well if you took a course in Switching Systems (aka Boolean Algebra applie dto electronic circuits), AND if you were introiduced into Combinatorics branch of higher math, you will know: 2^10 = "Kilo" (k small) 2^20 = "Mega" (M capital) 2^30 = "Giga" (G capital) B = byte, b = bit Now 32-bits address provides for 2^32 possible unique binary combinations (each is a 32-bit word). But 2^32 = 4 * (2^30) = 4 Gigabytes. Thais is a maximum address space one can achieve from 32 bits by definition. Arguing with this is like arguing that 2+2 is nto equal 4 in decimal system in Eucledian world (which is our Universe). OK, if anyone gets MORE than 4GB they're cheating with extra bits/extensions, so while Windows Server is called 32 bit, thats for a simple user who doesn't go deep into Engineering, it's NOT 32-bit when it comes to addressing bus width. It's 32 bit for somethign else... whatever. You get the idea of where 4GB comes from now. Now if you're curious about the maximum memory for 64-bit OS AND hardware (CPU & chipset & data/address busses), you bet it's: 2^64, it's a GIGANTICLALY LARGE NUMBER which you migh tbe dead before manufacturers will exhaust that memory space. But who knows, we might witness 64-bit address also fille dup heheh!!! You never know....I remember when 1GB harddisk was state-of-the-art available only to superich! > OK, if anyone gets MORE than 4GB they're cheating with extra I am not sure you can call it cheating. It is how paging works. There are different paging modes that gives you different amount of bits to address with. XP and Vista runs in PAE mode by default, the kernel just ignores the additional addressing bits. Then might be slower than true 64bit hardware+OS. Look there's a reason for 64-bit processors coupled with 64bit OS, else they'd be playing with 32bit OS & paging forever. But I might be partially wrong. There're many confusions in USA, unlike other leading Engineering countries e.g. Japan, Germany, and hell even x-USSR. Confusions are caused by commercialization, when companies assign catchy eye-candy (or ear-candy?) labels to new products Here're 2 confusions: 1) A 64bit processor is only required to have 64-bit DATA BUS, but ADDRESS BUS can be whatever. It's rare that address bus is not a multiple of 2 due to binary logic. For example 16-bit Intel 8086 (?) or whatever, I am beginning to forget history!; was either 8-bit or 16-bit address. Somethign to that effect - 16 bit CPU was allowed to have shorter address bus to reduce cost. Moreover, if you design IC chips, you know often to reduce cost data/address are multiplexed onto the same bus!!-->reduces speed, increases soft complexity but sharply reduced hard complexity which was driving the marked a decade ago. Now soft/middle/firmware is driving the cost, not hardware. So how we define hardware bitwidth should be clarified for each case, in this case we only talk about Address, but it's extremely rare, if not impossible, to have Data bus shorter than Address, usually Address can be shorter or equal to Data bus. 2) Since years ago suddenly storage manufacturer began lying to increase sales, by defning a Kilobyte as 1000 bytes, Megabyte as 1000 Kilobytes, and Gigabyte as 1000 Megabytes. These are totally wrogn definitions, but they inflate storage capacity for street folks, who don't know Boolean Algebra. However it is now acccepted than GB is defined one way for data transmission/semiconductor (RAM) memory, and another way for magnetic media (harddisk). Because a true Gigabyte is not 1000, but 1024 MB, and so on.... I could also mention that DB9 connector still in use for power & some serial interfaces, is actually DE9. DB9 is a totally different connector. This is what happens when multiple commercial player play the market and not regulated by the Government. They lie even about capacity definitions in TB, GB, MB, etc. I will shutup now, sorry.. Been out of work for 2 months and miss my design work. > Then might be slower than true 64bit hardware+OS. > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > 16 bit CPU was allowed to have shorter address bus to reduce cost. > Moreover, <snip> 8086 had a 16-bit data bus and 20-bit address bus. OK, I don't remember (we used different part# in Russia, and Z80 made in Europe ]designed in USA] was popular in addiiton to Intels). I just wanted to point out people who don't do it for a living, don't always understand which bitwidth they refer to - data or address, which contrary to common sense are not always identical. Whenever we speak of Maximum Addressable memory (directly), we only refer to address bus, not data bus width. I need to shut up, thi sthread has grown... but I wish to save it, as some folks told me things I didn't know/ Such as 32-bit WinServer able to address more than 4GB yes 20 bit address, I was trying to dig ou tof my antique memory another processor part#, and typed wrong, sorry. So it couldn't address more than 2^20 = 1MB where each dataword is 16 bit. The full memory specs for that historic processor then should be: 16x1MB Ridiculous by modern standards. So what I meant is memory full specs is [databusXaddressbus], but many nonprofessional peoople when talking about "32bit" or "64bis" bit don't know what the heck they're talking about! They forget what data & what address bitwidth are, which can and often are different. So memory can be configured differently despite same "32" bit in its specs, depending what 32 refers to, in this case Address AND Data (identical), but not always. I am seriously crazy this time writing too much, but ummm when we say 4GB is max for 32-bit addressing, we actually mean this spec: 4x2^32 bits = 4x4xGB where B (Byte) = 8 bit You see 4 in front instead of 32 databus due to dividing by 8 to get Bytes expression, as this is how regular people think (they dont understand bit/byte/dat/address relationship, they just buy "more gugabytes"). You can have TWICE more memory by either adding an extra bit to Data or to Address, if you add to both you get 4x more memory. I've yet to study new 64-bit processors architecture, don't know..... I am tired of it all, good night. AdobeCS4 is what I use here. But I got much larger monster you guys probably never heard of, which can use 12GB (TWELVE GIGABYTE) memory: AgilentADS2009 Autodesk Inventor2010 Professional simulation assemblies w/over 5,000 parts and running FEA Stress analysis. AWR MicrowaveOffice <--love it, best RF circuits design suite ever! Cadence Allegro or Orcad16.2 And so on.... >> Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit >> hardware running a 64 bit OS. > >Even if you have 64 bit hardware running a 64 bit OS, odds are >you won't be able to use all 4GB, unless you're running a 64 bit >application. Not so. The 64-bit OS will use all that memory to keep more of your apps in RAM, both 64-bit and 32-bit apps. A 32-bit app can't address more than 4GB, and the way Windows does things usually restricts it to 2GB (the other 2GB is for the OS), but this is VIRTUAL memory, not physical RAM. Parts of MANY virtual memory spaces will be in RAM at the same time. Other parts will be in the swap file and will need to be brought into RAM from time to time. Extra physical RAM in a 64-bit system will keep this page swapping to a minimum. SignatureTim Slattery MS MVP(Shell/User) Slattery_T@bls.gov http://members.cox.net/slatteryt > Technicalities. Point is you can't use 4 GB RAM unless you have 64 bit > hardware running a 64 bit OS. Using PAE hardware and PAE aware software (Page Address Extension) one can address up to 64gb of RAM with a 32 OS. Several MS server versions do that - so does Linux. > Now as an Electrical Engineer I proved this point and upped my HP to 4GB > w/3.25GB usable: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > The only way to use over 4GB is if both hardware + Windows are 64-bit, > AND BIOS is updated. PAE enables the use of up to 64gb with a 32 bit system. Several MS server OSs have that capability as well as Linux. It is true that there is still a limit of 4gb per process. > Also the trick above may give you BLUE SCREEN of DEATH if your HP laptop > BIOS is not latest, and you never get full 4GB due to memoryhole in [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > (Autodesk Inventor2010 Profressional with assemblies over 5,000 parts, > Agilent ADS RF simulation suit - wants quad core, 8GB) On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:20:00 -0500, JEWboy wrote: > > If your chipset is Intel945 - as in my HP dv8408us & MANY NEWER HP > > laptops (Pavilions/MediaCenters), ignore HP claim of maixmum memory = > > 4GB. > > > > You can install 2GB+2GB sticks, you'll get 3.25GB usable by Windows, As I've said here numbers of times, that is not correct. *You* may have gotten 3.25GB, but not everyone gets exactly that amount. The actual amount can be more or less than that. Here's the correct info: All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a 4GB address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go. But 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 is not available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around 3.1GB. Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map it to. SignatureKen Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience Please Reply to the Newsgroup Asus made one MB that claimed 2GB but you would only get up to 1.5 in reality because of a missed design fault on the address bus. Maybe the maximum limits stated were put there because of similar defects on earlier version boards? On the Asus board (A777M I think but not sure now) installing 2GB showed almost no memory at all and no BIOS update ever fixed it :) So I think your suggestion is probably quite correct and your info on the chipset seems right I would not rule out early design faults in the MB. > Now as an Electrical Engineer I proved this point and upped my HP to 4GB > w/3.25GB usable: [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > (Autodesk Inventor2010 Profressional with assemblies over 5,000 parts, > Agilent ADS RF simulation suit - wants quad core, 8GB) no... it was due to avaialble RAM modules at the time being 1Gb+1GB maximum, but I945 accepts 4GB fine - just like a normal 32 bit chipset & CPU. So I am happy to once again ingore manufacturer specs and stick 4GB into lovely HP Pavilion. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.