Specs: MB: Asus L1N32 (Socket F)
CPU: 2 x FX-74
Mem: 2 x 2GB DDR2
Video: 2 x 8800GTX
So here is the issue. This motherboard has a max capacity of 8GB. Of
course we know that the only OS that will recognize the complete 8GB is with
the 64 bit OS. So with the 4GB in the system and starting up the system,
the BIOS recognizes the total 4GB of memory. But once in Vista, only 2048MB
is recognized. We have looked at various Googled sites and even tried the
BCDEDIT /PAE ForceEnable routine, but that doesn't work, and when you try to
increase the amount of memory under config.sys, it just reverts back to
2048. There is no onboard anything sharing memory (obviously with the pair
of GTX's). I am really at wits end with this one. Please help someone.
On May 31, 9:00 am, "Paul Clemmons" <pclemm...@pcnetworkswa.com>
wrote:
> Specs: MB: Asus L1N32 (Socket F)
> CPU: 2 x FX-74
> Mem: 2 x 2GB DDR2
> Video: 2 x 8800GTX
>
> So here is the issue. This motherboard has a max capacity of 8GB. Of
> course we know that the only OS that will recognize the complete 8GB is with
> the 64 bit OS. So with the 4GB in the system and starting up the system,
> the BIOS recognizes the total 4GB of memory. But once in Vista, only 2048MB
> is recognized. We have looked at various Googled sites and even tried the
> BCDEDIT /PAE ForceEnable routine, but that doesn't work, and when you try to
> increase the amount of memory under config.sys, it just reverts back to
> 2048. There is no onboard anything sharing memory (obviously with the pair
> of GTX's). I am really at wits end with this one. Please help someone.
>
> --
> Paul Clemmons, VP
> Sales and Marketing
> PC Networks Inc (www.pcnetworkswa.com)
> Wicked Machines (www.wickedmachines.com)
> Wicked Home Theater (www.wickedhometheater.com)
Vista under 32bit will not show 4GB, but shoudl be showing something
like 3.2GB. I have heard of systems showing from 3.2 - 3.5. The rest
of the memory is in use by Vista but does not show to the user. Only
showing 2GB of memory is a little strange. If you look at resource
usage on the system you should be able to see all the memory being
used.
Have a look at this article: http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-que...windows-vista/
This is where the weirdness creeps in. With 2GB, it reads 2047. With 4GB
it reads 2048. The articles were ok, but it made the assumption that the
'hardware" would not read the 4GB. Again, another weird part is using XP
32bit on the same system, Windows recognizes the entire 4GB (although the
available amount is around the 3.3GB amount). This is why I think the
problem is Vista not being able to "see" what the BIOS sees, which is the
4096MB.
"WhoFan" <google@sueannanderic.com> wrote in message
news:1180620674.363575.130750@h2g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> On May 31, 9:00 am, "Paul Clemmons" <pclemm...@pcnetworkswa.com>
> wrote:
>> Specs: MB: Asus L1N32 (Socket F)
>> CPU: 2 x FX-74
>> Mem: 2 x 2GB DDR2
>> Video: 2 x 8800GTX
>>
>> So here is the issue. This motherboard has a max capacity of 8GB. Of
>> course we know that the only OS that will recognize the complete 8GB is
>> with
>> the 64 bit OS. So with the 4GB in the system and starting up the system,
>> the BIOS recognizes the total 4GB of memory. But once in Vista, only
>> 2048MB
>> is recognized. We have looked at various Googled sites and even tried
>> the
>> BCDEDIT /PAE ForceEnable routine, but that doesn't work, and when you try
>> to
>> increase the amount of memory under config.sys, it just reverts back to
>> 2048. There is no onboard anything sharing memory (obviously with the
>> pair
>> of GTX's). I am really at wits end with this one. Please help someone.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Clemmons, VP
>> Sales and Marketing
>> PC Networks Inc (www.pcnetworkswa.com)
>> Wicked Machines (www.wickedmachines.com)
>> Wicked Home Theater (www.wickedhometheater.com)
>
> Vista under 32bit will not show 4GB, but shoudl be showing something
> like 3.2GB. I have heard of systems showing from 3.2 - 3.5. The rest
> of the memory is in use by Vista but does not show to the user. Only
> showing 2GB of memory is a little strange. If you look at resource
> usage on the system you should be able to see all the memory being
> used.
> Have a look at this article:
> http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-que...windows-vista/
>
On Thu, 31 May 2007 07:00:00 -0700, Paul Clemmons wrote:
> Specs: MB: Asus L1N32 (Socket F)
> CPU: 2 x FX-74
> Mem: 2 x 2GB DDR2
> Video: 2 x 8800GTX
>
> So here is the issue. This motherboard has a max capacity of 8GB. Of
> course we know that the only OS that will recognize the complete 8GB is with
> the 64 bit OS.
Actually, that's not quite true. I understand that the 32 bit variety of
Linux will support 65gb although it's often recommended not to exceed
16gb. I understand there is a facility to extend the 32 bit adress space
to 36 bits.
> So with the 4GB in the system and starting up the system,
> the BIOS recognizes the total 4GB of memory. But once in Vista, only 2048MB
> is recognized. We have looked at various Googled sites and even tried the
> BCDEDIT /PAE ForceEnable routine, but that doesn't work, and when you try to
> increase the amount of memory under config.sys, it just reverts back to
> 2048. There is no onboard anything sharing memory (obviously with the pair
> of GTX's). I am really at wits end with this one. Please help someone.
Re: 4GB shows as 2GB in Vista Ultimate 32bit - essbee
I am actually suffering from the same situation. 4 GB Dual Channel PC-6400 installed (4 X 1GB). The BIOS recognizes it as 4GB and 64-bit Ubuntu recognizes it (as 3.8 GB). 32 Bit Vista, however, only sees 2.048 GB.
Of note, before I turned on Memory Remapping in the BIOS, the BIOS read 2816 MB. At that time, Vista saw approx 2.5 GB. It's since I've turned on remapping that the BIOS reads 4gb and Vista only 2GB.
Re: 4GB shows as 2GB in Vista Ultimate 32bit - essbee
dude, I haven't gotten a word out of MS support on this issue and that was
even at a convention up here in Seattle and they had never heard of it. Of
course they didn't know about the flash thing in IE 7 and Vista either
"essbee" wrote in message news:20076421222sbritton@hawaii.edu...
>I am actually suffering from the same situation. 4 GB Dual Channel PC-6400
>installed (4 X 1GB). The BIOS recognizes it as 4GB and 64-bit Ubuntu
>recognizes it (as 3.8 GB). 32 Bit Vista, however, only sees 2.048 GB.
>
> Of note, before I turned on Memory Remapping in the BIOS, the BIOS read
> 2816 MB. At that time, Vista saw approx 2.5 GB. It's since I've turned
> on remapping that the BIOS reads 4gb and Vista only 2GB.
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated...
>
> EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
> http://www.eggheadcafe.com
Re: 4GB shows as 2GB in Vista Ultimate 32bit - essbee
"Paul Clemmons" <pclemmons@pcnetworkswa.com> wrote in message
news:Oo2Iu15pHHA.1148@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> dude, I haven't gotten a word out of MS support on this issue and that was
> even at a convention up here in Seattle and they had never heard of it.
> Of course they didn't know about the flash thing in IE 7 and Vista either
>
>
> --
> Paul Clemmons, VP
> Sales and Marketing
> PC Networks Inc (www.pcnetworkswa.com)
> Wicked Machines (www.wickedmachines.com)
> Wicked Home Theater (www.wickedhometheater.com)
>
>
>
> "essbee" wrote in message news:20076421222sbritton@hawaii.edu...
>>I am actually suffering from the same situation. 4 GB Dual Channel
>>PC-6400 installed (4 X 1GB). The BIOS recognizes it as 4GB and 64-bit
>>Ubuntu recognizes it (as 3.8 GB). 32 Bit Vista, however, only sees 2.048
>>GB.
>>
>> Of note, before I turned on Memory Remapping in the BIOS, the BIOS read
>> 2816 MB. At that time, Vista saw approx 2.5 GB. It's since I've turned
>> on remapping that the BIOS reads 4gb and Vista only 2GB.
>>
>> Any help is greatly appreciated...
>>
>> EggHeadCafe.com - .NET Developer Portal of Choice
>> http://www.eggheadcafe.com
>
Here are some web references that bear on this problem (I had similar
questions a while back).
Of all the information I've found on this situation (4GB installed and 2048MB showing in Vista...NOT the 4GB installed and 3.XGB showing situation), it has always been an ASUS mobo (mine is a P5B-VM).
Of course searching ASUS' Forum is slightly less cumbersome than building an ice castle at noon in death valley...
I just find it weird that with memory remapping off Vista sees more RAM...it sees what the BIOS then sees (2.816GB)
In message <1180620674.363575.130750@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups. com> WhoFan
<google@sueannanderic.com> wrote:
>On May 31, 9:00 am, "Paul Clemmons" <pclemm...@pcnetworkswa.com>
>wrote:
>> Specs: MB: Asus L1N32 (Socket F)
>> CPU: 2 x FX-74
>> Mem: 2 x 2GB DDR2
>> Video: 2 x 8800GTX
>>
>> So here is the issue. This motherboard has a max capacity of 8GB. Of
>> course we know that the only OS that will recognize the complete 8GB is with
>> the 64 bit OS. So with the 4GB in the system and starting up the system,
>> the BIOS recognizes the total 4GB of memory. But once in Vista, only 2048MB
>> is recognized. We have looked at various Googled sites and even tried the
>> BCDEDIT /PAE ForceEnable routine, but that doesn't work, and when you try to
>> increase the amount of memory under config.sys, it just reverts back to
>> 2048. There is no onboard anything sharing memory (obviously with the pair
>> of GTX's). I am really at wits end with this one. Please help someone.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Clemmons, VP
>> Sales and Marketing
>> PC Networks Inc (www.pcnetworkswa.com)
>> Wicked Machines (www.wickedmachines.com)
>> Wicked Home Theater (www.wickedhometheater.com)
>
>Vista under 32bit will not show 4GB, but shoudl be showing something
>like 3.2GB.
No, it should be showing 4GB minus the amount of memory address space
needed by the add-in cards.
In this case, the two 8800GTXs each have 768MB of memory, so that's the
first 1.5GB if RAM. The motherboard probably reserves the other 0.5GB
"missing", which is pretty typical these days.
In other words, 2GB-2.5GB is the maximum you'll see with those video
cards.
>I have heard of systems showing from 3.2 - 3.5. The rest
>of the memory is in use by Vista but does not show to the user.
*sigh*
This gets repeated over and over for some reason, but it's just not
true.
--
If quitters never win, and winners never quit,
what fool came up with, "Quit while you're ahead"?