All,
Sorry to beat a dead horse. But I have a question.
I am running vista 32bit.
I have 2GB memory.
I have read that vista can only allocate 4gb of memory (or addresses).
AND that some of that is already taken up by the hardware addresses.
So if I add more memory, it might not even be fully seen by the OS, because some of those addresses are taken up by video cards, cd drive, etc....
Now I also have one of those new 8800gts video cards. It has something like 680mb video memory on it.
Questions are:
- Does the 680mb count towards my 4GB total? If so, then it would be quite a big waste to add another 2GB memory, wouldn't it?
- I have 2x1GB ddr2 memory, should I just add another 2x512MB chips and give me a total of 3GB? Or is that even a waste? As I've heard depending on the MOBO, some peoples 4gb shows up as 2.5gb.
And the reason I am so caught up in this is because I enjoyed quite a performance boost when I upgraded my old XP from 1GB to 2GB. So It stands to reason, since Vista is a little more of a resource hog, to get similar performance, I'd need to go over 2GB.
Opinions are welcome.
p.s. too late to upgrade, I bought vista 32 OEM... so I can't go 64bit
Thanks
-MIke
Sorry to beat a dead horse. But I have a question.
I am running vista 32bit.
I have 2GB memory.
I have read that vista can only allocate 4gb of memory (or addresses).
AND that some of that is already taken up by the hardware addresses.
So if I add more memory, it might not even be fully seen by the OS, because some of those addresses are taken up by video cards, cd drive, etc....
Now I also have one of those new 8800gts video cards. It has something like 680mb video memory on it.
Questions are:
- Does the 680mb count towards my 4GB total? If so, then it would be quite a big waste to add another 2GB memory, wouldn't it?
- I have 2x1GB ddr2 memory, should I just add another 2x512MB chips and give me a total of 3GB? Or is that even a waste? As I've heard depending on the MOBO, some peoples 4gb shows up as 2.5gb.
And the reason I am so caught up in this is because I enjoyed quite a performance boost when I upgraded my old XP from 1GB to 2GB. So It stands to reason, since Vista is a little more of a resource hog, to get similar performance, I'd need to go over 2GB.
Opinions are welcome.
p.s. too late to upgrade, I bought vista 32 OEM... so I can't go 64bit
Thanks
-MIke