4gb in vista32

[umich2010]

Hello everyone,

I have somewhat of a difficult decision to make in the near future. I am planning a build in which i would like to implement 4 gigs of RAM, and i know Vista64 is the only way to use all 4 gigs. However, i can get Vista 32 bit, fully licensed, for $18.87(!!) from my school computer store(The manager claims they only carry 32bit). I also know someone who works for Microsoft and can definitely get both versions for $45. Both are really good prices for Vista Ultimate, and since I plan to primarily use my computer for gaming, I was leaning towards paying the $45 to be able for 64 bit.

So my question is what do you guys think? Should I go 32bit and drop to 2 gigs of ram, should i stick with the 4 gigs in 32, or should I go all out and get vista64 and be able to use all 4 gigs+possibly more in the future?

Just for reference, here is my planned build:
q6600(may overclock slightly)
MSI GeForce 8800gt
Corsair 550VX psu
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L mobo
I am between crucial ballistix 2x1gb and Patriot Viper 2x2gb both ddr2 800

Thanks a lot,
Tim

 

[boner]

well get whatever you think is wise

 

[vangvace]

Get the 32bit for 18.87 if not oem. then spend, I think it's $10, for the 64bit version through MS.

I'd say either way go with 4 gigs in 2X2G sticks. Better upgrade path if you decide to jump to 64bit 8 gig of ram later.

 

[umich2010]

Thanks, I didn't know there was an option to upgrade to 64bit. I will get the 2x2gb sticks.

 

[jitpublisher]

Thanks, I didn't know there was an option to upgrade to 64bit. I will get the 2x2gb sticks.

If the version you get from school is a fully licensed retail version of Vista, it will come with a card detailing the web site that you can go to and order. Just enter your serial number, and your credit card, and as said for about $10 you will recieve an identical version of a Vista 64 DVD. I did this when I bought Home Premium, it took about a week to get it. I have not installed it yet though because.......

You cannot upgrad a 32 bit OS to a 64 bit OS, be warned.

You will have to do a completely new installation once you get the 64 bit disk, as you cannot upgrade a 32 bit OS to 64 bit. They are not compatable.
Format....everything goes....brand new fresh install.
Again, better check to make sure that you can indeed buy the 64 bit version from Microsoft with the license string that comes with the school's version.

 

[umich2010]

You cannot upgrad a 32 bit OS to a 64 bit OS, be warned.

Oh this is good to know, I'll check with the store to see if i can upgrade and if so i will do that now so I can have the 64 disk by the time i start building (I havent ordered any parts yet). Also, I have heard some not such great things about the 64 bit version's compatibility with certain applications/games, will the SP1 fix any of this or is it pretty much up to the manufacturers of the games?

thanks again,
Tim

 

[Guest]

I'd go for the $45 Vista for both. 64-bit is the future of computing. 32-bit will eventually bottleneck you. Of course that may be 2-3 years out, but 32 bit is a dying OS.

 

[Kanibel]

You Do relise that 4gb of Ram on Vista 32bit is still recognised it says something like 3.3gb or something and then the rest is used for optimisiation which is when vista runs at its best

 

[Scotteq]

You Do relise that 4gb of Ram on Vista 32bit is still recognised it says something like 3.3gb or something and then the rest is used for optimisiation which is when vista runs at its best

Incorrect


In 32 bit Windows operating systems, the total addressable space available is 4GB. If you install a total of 4GB worth of RAM, the system will detect/use/display less than 4GB of total memory because of address space allocation for other critical functions, such as:

- System BIOS (including motherboard, add-on cards, etc..)
- Motherboards resources
- Memory mapped I/O
- Configuration for AGP/PCI-Ex/PCI
- Other memory allocations for PCI devices

Different onboard devices and different add-on cards (devices) will result of different total memory size. e.g. more PCI cards installed will require more memory resources, resulting of less memory free for other uses.

This limitation applies to most chipsets & Windows XP/Vista 32-bit version operating systems. Again, this is a limitation of the Operating System not having enough address space to allocate to the system *and* the RAM. Not allocating address space to devices renders them inoperable. Not allocating addresses to RAM simply results in the unaddressed section not being used in an otherwise fully functional computer. Therefore the OS designers assign RAM last.

We can have long debates about mathematical fundamentals and discussions about why the original Windows designers couldn't allocate the full theoretical max of 36 bits of address space so that users today would be able to use more resource. But at the end of the day, the designers and engineers 'Didn't Then'. So we 'Can't Now'.


If you install a Windows operating system, and if more than 3GB memory is required for your system, then the below conditions must be met:

1. A memory controller which supports memory swap functionality is used. The latest chipsets like Intel 975X, 955X, Nvidia NF4 SLI Intel Edition, Nvidia NF4 SLI X16, AMD K8 and newer architectures can support the memory swap function.

2. Installation of Windows XP Pro X64 Ed. (64-bit), Windows Vista 64, or other OS which can provide more than 4GB worth of address space.



Note: According to the latest Change Log published by Microsoft, Windows Vista 32bit SP1 will display the installed amount of RAM. This is a display change only.

 

[lilsage]

Well with SP1 that is no longer correct... it will recognize the entire 4gb in the 32 bit version. I just installed it on my laptop... with some laptop upgrades while I was at it... and it recognized all 4 Gb on my system.

 

[Matt26LFC]

Dam in too l8 lol lilsage i've jus posted in the Vista section after u did with regards to SP1 and ur 4Gb claims explaining its simply a display change and that 32bit does not use all 4Gb as Scotteq has jus stated in the hope that u wouldnt b posting around saying 4Gb now works with 32Bit lol

 

[Scotteq]

Well with SP1 that is no longer correct... it will recognize the entire 4gb in the 32 bit version. I just installed it on my laptop... with some laptop upgrades while I was at it... and it recognized all 4 Gb on my system.

That is a Display Change ONLY

 

[bennyprofane]

I've read half a dozen articles on this Vista 32/4GB issue, and I think I get it, more or less. I do have one question, though. It may very well be obvious, so bear with me.

There is still a performance advantage to using 4GB instead of 2GB, correct?

Doesn't it follow that the same would be true of a 2GB setup? Meaning, only ~1.2GB spare RAM will be left over after Vista does its address space allocation?

(Reason I ask is I'm thinking about going with Mushkin's Redline 2 X 2GB modules for my new rig.)

 

[umich2010]

yeah you would have like 3.5gb of usable memory i believe, im not positive though

 

[blacksci]

If your running a basic setup i.e. processor, mobo,vidcard,cddrive,hardrive it will usually see 3.5, yes the other half gig is just hanging there, but there are already a few games out there that take advantage of more then 2 gigs of ram (company of heros) and also it allows the possiblity of running many apps at once. Performance wise, your opertaing system wont feel any faster, 2 gigs takes care of that well, but when you start opening things, youll be suprised how much you can do. I run a quad with 4 gigs, recongizes 3.5 and can have 2 games going, alt tab out, have a download going , play a song on media player, firewall, ventrillo, and a streaming video, and alt tab without a problem. Now youll never really do this in real life, but i wanted to see how far i could take it. Needless to say, its kinda nice .

 

[bennyprofane]

Hmm. Well, now that I've read http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm again, and given that I'll likely be ordering a 9800GX2 (just for Ss & Gs, and because I haven't upgraded in three years and feel like spoiling myself with a bunch of useless headroom at a performance/price ratio that isn't really worth it), which will take up 1GB out of the 4, all by its lonesome, leaving me with somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5-2.8GB when all's said and done (correct?), it would be right foolish to go with 2GB, wouldn't it?

With only 2GB, after Vista's allocation, I'd be left with less than 1GB, wouldn't I? Which just doesn't sound like enough (from everything I've heard) to feed that RAM-hungry OS sufficiently. Though I could be wrong.

 

[bennyprofane]

Er, wait... the leftover RAM would be for apps/games, right?

 

[bennyprofane]

If your running a basic setup i.e. processor, mobo,vidcard,cddrive,hardrive it will usually see 3.5, yes the other half gig is just hanging there, but there are already a few games out there that take advantage of more then 2 gigs of ram (company of heros) and also it allows the possiblity of running many apps at once. Performance wise, your opertaing system wont feel any faster, 2 gigs takes care of that well, but when you start opening things, youll be suprised how much you can do. I run a quad with 4 gigs, recongizes 3.5 and can have 2 games going, alt tab out, have a download going , play a song on media player, firewall, ventrillo, and a streaming video, and alt tab without a problem. Now youll never really do this in real life, but i wanted to see how far i could take it. Needless to say, its kinda nice .

Good to know. That Mushkin 4GB set is looking better all the time.

 

[blacksci]

bennyprofane you have to remember regardless of what vista uses, a great percentage of it is going to be dumped as you reallocate the ram to other processess, and vista isnt that bad, at the most it uses 34 % of my ram just sitting there.

 

[bennyprofane]

Ah, I see. Makes sense.

 

[RetiredChief]

The questions of 3 vs 4 Gigs Ram in a 32 bit operating system is well documented as to the reason only 3.2 +/- 0.4 ( 3.12, or less for Vista 32 unless memory remap is allowed in BIOS) is available for program use on this forum and looking at Microsoft explanation. A real good insight can be gained by reading Dan’s Data www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

I still have a question. This relates to the OLD days when 640K was normal and some had a whopping 1 Meg of memory (16 Bit OP). The 384 K above the 640 was called Upper memory. In my case I used a Program called QEMM to access this area.. This added 384K allowed a big performance boost to DOS as the memory mapping could be addressed from faster memory verses a call to BIOS.

Now for the real question that should be asked/addressed IS – where does this memory mapping reside in a system with less than 4 gigs. Is it still a BIOS call, or does XP/Vista 32 bit place this memory Map in virtual memory and if so is there a small performance boast by having it in “Real” main memory.

Note even with 3 Gigs of RAM there is still 536K (Lost to programs) reserved for DOS.
(3 Gigs equal 3,145,738 vs 3,145,192 available)

 

[blacksci]

Yes to the second half , this is where virtual memory comes into play a small part, and i havent noticed personally any boost to speak of, xp feels like it did on my p-4 the os only moves so fast .