A Question about ram

godtabh

I bought a new Dell XPS 420 last week (due to arrive next week).

Its fot 4gb of ram. I was reading that Vista HP (32bit) cant handle 4gbs of ram so was just wondering what happens with with the ram Vista cant handle?

Is it worth upgrading to Vista Ultimate 64 bit or is that pointless for an ever day consumer?

astrofool

It just goes unused, nothing special, no problems.

I prefer 64bit Vista, but there's not enough of a difference (mainly less susceptibilities to viruses, and being able to use all the RAM) to justify a complete reinstall if it's just for every day stuff.

godtabh

astrofool wrote: »

It just goes unused, nothing special, no problems.

I prefer 64bit Vista, but there's not enough of a difference (mainly less susceptibilities to viruses, and being able to use all the RAM) to justify a complete reinstall if it's just for every day stuff.

Is there more software titles available for Vista 64 bit?

At a minimum I'd be looking for AutoCad, Office and firefox. How about games?

Cuddlesworth

kearnsr wrote: »

I bought a new Dell XPS 420 last week (due to arrive next week).

Its fot 4gb of ram. I was reading that Vista HP (32bit) cant handle 4gbs of ram so was just wondering what happens with with the ram Vista cant handle?

Is it worth upgrading to Vista Ultimate 64 bit or is that pointless for an ever day consumer?

Its pointless for the every day consumer at the moment. Games in the next few years I can see the needing 64bit due to the 2gig limitation on apps.

I use 64bit and 8gigs, but because I run 6+ Virtual machines I found it was helpful.

godtabh

Why do the likes of dell sell systems with 4gbs on a 32bit os then?

BKtje

Because they are asked to and how are they to know what the system will eventually be used?

godtabh

So I got my computer and have it all set up and running.

In my system tray it shows 4.0gb of ram. I thought it would only show 3.5gb of ram (with a 512mb graphics card)?

MunsterCycling

Vista SP1 fixed that window to report the actual amount of RAM but only 3.5gb is addressable, including the 512Mb graphics card.


MC

godtabh

Ah right

conceited

And remember each application can address 4 gigs of "memory" .

bmaxi

I can't understand this. I bought a Dell Vostro during the summer and installed 4x1gig. sticks of RAM. Are you guys saying that only two of these will work? I have noticed in Properties that it is only recognizing two gigs and a Crucial scan did likewise. Orca on the other hand picked up 4x512mb while SIW is saying 4x1gig installed. Most confusing.

Cuddlesworth

conceited wrote: »

And remember each application can address 4 gigs of "memory" .

No, applications can't. Not without memory address extensions which are horrendous in terms of performance and something very few of them actually do.

kearnsr wrote: »

Why do the likes of dell sell systems with 4gbs on a 32bit os then?

Because ram slots on all current machines come in Dual channel. To put a single stick in would degrade performance. Adding to that the number four is bigger then three. So people are impressed by that.

rasmasyean

32-bit means it can only “see” 2^32 (2 to the 32nd power) = 4GB memory spaces.
The computer has to be able to see the RAM + VRAM + other devices on Motherboard, etc.
e.g. If you have 1GB VRAM and “other devices” takes up 0.3GB, you will only be able to use a max of 2.7GB (4 - 1 - 0.3 = 2.7) .
In this case, if you install 3GB, you waste 0.3GB…if you install 4GB you waste 1.3GB!

There's another 64-bit question on this forum as well and I answered it with some long thing I rather not repeat here so you can go find it if interested.

godtabh

rasmasyean wrote: »

There's another 64-bit question on this forum as well and I answered it with some long thing I rather not repeat here so you can go find it if interested.

When?

So we can narrow it down like

rasmasyean

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Its pointless for the every day consumer at the moment. Games in the next few years I can see the needing 64bit due to the 2gig limitation on apps.

That's wrong.

If this is any indication that 64-bit is the wave of the future and 32-bit will be “obsolete”…

There appears to be a shift taking place in the PC industry: the move from 32-bit to 64-bit PCs.
We've been tracking the change by looking at the percentage of 64-bit PCs connecting to Windows Update, and have seen a dramatic increase in recent months. The installed base of 64-bit Windows Vista PCs, as a percentage of all Windows Vista systems, has more than tripled in the U.S. in the last three months, while worldwide adoption has more than doubled during the same period. Another view shows that 20% of new Windows Vista PCs in the U.S. connecting to Windows Update in June were 64-bit PCs, up from just 3% in March. Put more simply, usage of 64-bit Windows Vista is growing much more rapidly than 32-bit. Based on current trends, this growth will accelerate as the retail channel shifts to supplying a rapidly increasing assortment of 64-bit desktops and laptops… PC Accelerators built into Windows Vista, such as Windows SuperFetch, improve performance by keeping commonly used programs in memory, even when the program is closed. More memory capacity on 64-bit PCs allows SuperFetch to do its job more efficiently.
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/07/30/windows-vista-64-bit-today.aspx

Understanding how SuperFetch uses RAM to enhance system performance…
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/window-on-windows/?p=735

Windows Vista - SuperFetch & ReadyBoost
http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2007/03/29/windows-vista-superfetch-readyboost.aspx

Considering this, SuperFetch is probably the most significant feature that distinguishes Vista from all other OS's for users of all walks. Many other features won't be noticeable or even used by the common person (that is until commercial developers start using WPF/WFC etc., and even more DX10). So why not take advantage of it since RAM is so cheap?

This is a huge 32 vs. 64 thread I participated in once in the CNET community if you want to go through it. There's many links and insights and heated arguments there.
http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10149_102-0.html?forumID=7&threadID=298600&start=0&tag=forum-w;forums06

rasmasyean

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

No, applications can't. Not without memory address extensions which are horrendous in terms of performance and something very few of them actually do.

Here is an application that can address 8,000 GB. That's 8 TB.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDOf3IEr4FU

Cehck this out...

What are the advantages of 64-bit computing?
In early testing of 64-bit support in Photoshop for Windows®, overall performance gains ranged from 8% to 12%. Those who work with extremely large files may realize noticeably greater gains in performance, in some cases as dramatic as ten times the previous speed. This is because 64-bit applications can address larger amounts of memory and thus result in less file swapping — one of the biggest factors that can affect data processing speed.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/faq/?promoid=DRHXB

rasmasyean

kearnsr wrote: »

When?

So we can narrow it down like

Here: :P
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055401425&page=2&highlight=Vista+64-bit