Is 4 GB ram wasted on Vista Premium 32 bit?

grey squirrel

Just as the title says

All the Studio Laptops from Dell are coming with 4GB+ ram.

Rebel021

Deleted

cpu-dude

Nope, it use's exactly what it can utilise which is 3.3GB but it will say 4GB. If you update Vista to 64-bit (if it's a Dual Core), it can use all the 4GB.

goodlad

Well its not completely wasted. The OS will still use 3.2GB of ram.
So you're only losing out on 800mb.

Voodu Child

Some ram is lost because of system components reserving those memory 'addresses'. It depends on the system, and the GPU is a big factor, especially with 256MB and 512MB cards being more common in laptops.

On the other hand, even if some ram is 'wasted', having 2x2GB will run in dual-channel (ie faster/more bandwidth). If you just got 3GB (1x2GB, 1x1GB) it will run in single-channel. Whether you notice the difference depends, but that's the theory anyhow.

Overheal

Unless you have a very specific need to use 32 bit, 64 bit is a good move at this juncture.

Ludo

Overheal wrote: »

Unless you have a very specific need to use 32 bit, 64 bit is a good move at this juncture.

Why bother with 64 bit unless you have a specific need for it? It costs more for no major gain right now. Must say on the few occasions I have had to use 64 bit version of windows, it just annoyed me as quite a number of applications cannot be installed on it. Maybe this has changed now...it was a year ago when I ran into these problems.

Rebel021

Ludo wrote: »

Why bother with 64 bit unless you have a specific need for it? It costs more for no major gain right now. Must say on the few occasions I have had to use 64 bit version of windows, it just annoyed me as quite a number of applications cannot be installed on it. Maybe this has changed now...it was a year ago when I ran into these problems.

64 installs 32bit programmes in its own folder now (Program Files (x86))
there is still too many flaws with 64 bluetooth being the main reason for me going back to 32bit as my everyday OS but I dual boot and 64 is great for video conversion and editing

Ludo

Rebel021 wrote: »

64 installs 32bit programmes in its own folder now (Program Files (x86))

That is true...BUT...a number of installers just won't run on 64 bit. therefore you can't install it anywhere. I was setting up a development 64 bit machine and a number of the tools I use every day as a developer simply could not be installed. Made my job a pain in the ass so I got shot of it.
More and more apps are now issuing 64 bit compatible installers alright but not some of the tools I use.

As I say this is based on experiences about a year ago so may not be a major problem now.

I know I am safe on 32 bit so as I say, why switch now until it becomes the standard OS.

Overheal

Its worth trying again 1 year later. Theres been a lot done with it.

Black_Knight

I had 32bit Vista with my machine (in my sig). Vista itself was taking up about 33% of my ram with minimal programs running.

Best decision I made was to install a lite version of XP. Runs a charm. Im still missing those 800mb of ram but at least im not using 1gb just to run the OS.

Tomk1

Ludo wrote: »

Why bother with 64 bit unless you have a specific need for it? It costs more for no major gain right now.

I checked out dell last week, no extra cost for 64 bit OS.

bnt

Have you tried PAE mode? See this for more details:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929580
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605/