4GB Memory on my 32 bit CPU

I have a 32 bit HP dv9810us laptop that has 4GB as its max memory. I know
that the 32 bit processor limits the OS to addressing about 3GB of RAM. If I
added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared memory nVidia
GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?
Thanks.
Tom

* SF-East Bay'r:
> I have a 32 bit HP dv9810us laptop that has 4GB as its max memory. I
> know that the 32 bit processor limits the OS to addressing about 3GB of
> RAM. If I added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared
> memory nVidia GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?

No.

Benjamin

Benjamin Gawert <bgaw...@gmx.de> wrote: >

>> If I added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared
>> memory nVidia GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?

> No.

That suggests that most IGP/UMA graphics, under
32-bit Windows, effectively consume twice as much
memory as you'd expect:
* once to grab some from low memory for use,
* and again to map it into high memory

My latest build, with 4GB RAM, uses ATI IGP with 128MB
sideport (dedicated graphics RAM on motherboard),
and I set the BIOS to tell it to use only sideport.
Windows XP/32 reports
3.50 GB available. I was actually surprised.

The OP might still get some benefit to installing 3GB,
or 4GB if that's not much more expensive.

--
Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

I have 3GB installed. I just wondered whether 4GB would make any difference.
Tom

"rjn" <> wrote in message
news:209ea366-f0d4-40a3-b583-...
> Benjamin Gawert <bgaw...@gmx.de> wrote: >
>
>>> If I added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared
>>> memory nVidia GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?
>
>> No.
>
> That suggests that most IGP/UMA graphics, under
> 32-bit Windows, effectively consume twice as much
> memory as you'd expect:
> * once to grab some from low memory for use,
> * and again to map it into high memory
>
> My latest build, with 4GB RAM, uses ATI IGP with 128MB
> sideport (dedicated graphics RAM on motherboard),
> and I set the BIOS to tell it to use only sideport.
> Windows XP/32 reports
> 3.50 GB available. I was actually surprised.
>
> The OP might still get some benefit to installing 3GB,
> or 4GB if that's not much more expensive.
>
> --
> Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
> http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
> NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

"SF-East Bay'r" <not_r...@notreal.net> wrote:

> I have 3GB installed. I just wondered whether
> 4GB would make any difference.

You might see as little as 128MB of that extra 1GB.
I'm guessing that you'd get access to no more than
256MB of it. The exact answer depends on your
installed hardware and how it's configured.

I'd suggest borrowing some RAM and trying it.
Any web predictions, including mine, are unreliable.

The real solution, of course, is a 64-bit OS.
Your machine is a Turion64 and is apparently supported
with Vista/64. I'm not sure I'd make that leap just to
get an extra 1GB.

--
Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:18:31 -0700 (PDT), rjn <> wrote:

>"SF-East Bay'r" <not_r...@notreal.net> wrote:
>
>> I have 3GB installed. I just wondered whether
>> 4GB would make any difference.
>
>You might see as little as 128MB of that extra 1GB.
>I'm guessing that you'd get access to no more than
>256MB of it. The exact answer depends on your
>installed hardware and how it's configured.

If his computer supports PAE it may be possible for Windows
to see the full 4 GB.

I had a server with 8 gigs RAM running 32 bit Windows.
By activating PAE Windows could see and use the full
8 GB of RAM. PAE extends RAM addressing to 34 bits
thus 16 gigs.

Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og

* rjn:

>>> If I added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared
>>> memory nVidia GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?
>
>> No.
>
> That suggests that most IGP/UMA graphics, under
> 32-bit Windows, effectively consume twice as much
> memory as you'd expect:
> * once to grab some from low memory for use,
> * and again to map it into high memory

Nope. This is only true for dedicated gfx memory as it is necessary to
directly address it. Shared memory gfx is fed from the actual system
memory which already is located in the address space and hence mirroring
it into the I/O space is not necessary.

Benjamin

Your header says you're using the Windows Mail program, which only
runs under the Vista versions of Windows. 32-bit Vista can use 4 GB
of memory, but with about 0.5GB reserved for the use of the Vista
operating system (mainly to reach peripherals such as graphics boards),
and not the programs you tell it to run, even if more memory is installed.
Some of the other 3.5 GB may be needed to hold what you intend to
send to the graphics board.

You might want to ask in the following newsgroup whether your
nVidia board implements its memory it a way that makes it also usable
as non-graphics memory and whether doing this messes up the graphics:

alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia

There's a possibility that you may want to switch to a 64-bit version of
Vista to be able to use both the entire 4 GB or more and the graphics
board at the same time, but check whether any programs you want
to run that didn't come as a part of Vista will run under 64-bit versions
of Vista; there's a good chance some of them won't and some of them
may require you to upgrade to a 64-bit version first. 64-bit versions of
Vista are likely to need at least 0.5 GB or reserved space as well, but
are able to place it at a higher address than 32-bit programs can reach
directly. Many 32-bit programs are able to run under 64-bit versions
of Vista, though.

Robert Miles

"SF-East Bay'r" <> wrote in message
news:sQyxl.14910$...
>I have 3GB installed. I just wondered whether 4GB would make any
>difference.
> Tom
>
> "rjn" <> wrote in message
> news:209ea366-f0d4-40a3-b583-...
>> Benjamin Gawert <bgaw...@gmx.de> wrote: >
>>
>>>> If I added more memory to get to 4GB, would the built-in shared
>>>> memory nVidia GeForce use any of the 4GB memory that the OS can't use ?
>>
>>> No.
>>
>> That suggests that most IGP/UMA graphics, under
>> 32-bit Windows, effectively consume twice as much
>> memory as you'd expect:
>> * once to grab some from low memory for use,
>> * and again to map it into high memory
>>
>> My latest build, with 4GB RAM, uses ATI IGP with 128MB
>> sideport (dedicated graphics RAM on motherboard),
>> and I set the BIOS to tell it to use only sideport.
>> Windows XP/32 reports
>> 3.50 GB available. I was actually surprised.
>>
>> The OP might still get some benefit to installing 3GB,
>> or 4GB if that's not much more expensive.
>>
>> --
>> Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
>

Barry OGrady <god_free_jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> If his computer supports PAE it may be possible for Windows
> to see the full 4 GB.

Any x86-64 computer has to have PAE, because it's
a stepping stone from 32-bit boot to 64-bit execution.

Poking around the web, I see claims that, for XP32
(less clear for Vista), if the CPU has NX bit support,
PAE is on by default. This might explain why I see
3.5 GB on my XP32. The OP might already be in PAE,
and might get to use more of that last GB.

> I had a server with 8 gigs RAM running 32 bit Windows.
> By activating PAE Windows could see and use the full
> 8 GB of RAM. PAE extends RAM addressing to 34 bits
> thus 16 gigs.

Only Windows Server will support more than 4GB, per
various sources. Desktop is limited to 4GB. This may be
due to MS licen$ing desires, or to reduce the risk of
driver/ap incompatibility with >32bit memory space.

--
Regards, Bob Niland private.php?do=newpm&u=
http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider.

* rjn:
> Poking around the web, I see claims that, for XP32
> (less clear for Vista), if the CPU has NX bit support,
> PAE is on by default. This might explain why I see
> 3.5 GB on my XP32. The OP might already be in PAE,
> and might get to use more of that last GB.

Windowsxp and Vista support PAE but still are hard limited to 4GB memory
address space. PAE is only used for the NX bit.

Benjamin