Just trying to clarify something about RAM and 64-bit.
in [Hardware]
|
Prev: ports are not shown
Next: PSU power consumption
From: Brian V on 5 Feb 2010 03:13 I'v asked a lot of questions about my pc and have gotten a lot of responses. I think this should be the last one in this regard. I have read some info and it seems to be a bit unclear to me. I may not be specific enough, and I am happy with what answers I got so far. I hate to beat this topic to death. Here goes. My motherboard is a EM61SM/EM61PM. In the manual it says it has 4Gb capacity with RAM. On crucial.com it says 4Gb. In PcWizard, an Acer application and I think the DirectX programs that scan the hardware: They say my mobo can actually take 12Gb or RAM. I understand that a 32-bit OS only recognizes 4Gb, but it doesn't/can't recognize all of it, usually 3Gb and something. People keep telling me: to fully utilize the RAM in my system, I should switch to 64-bit. Now I don't care if I went with Windows Vista or 7. The only thing I am unclear of is: Would a 64-bit platform recognize the 12Gb limit? Or just the 4Gb? From the posts I have gotten back, the web-pages given and the web-pages I found myself: Nothing has really said. Or the reply has said I can get the 4Gb. Nothing is really mentioned about this discrepency. If it was, I missed it. In my BIOS, it shows something about 4Gb. I assume that is what the mobo and BIOS communicate. But is the OS communicating the 4GB to the BIOS? If so, does that mean a 64-bit OS may potentially communicate the apparent 12Gb limit of RAM? Is this related to overclocking? I do not intend to overclock. It appears to have to be too elaborate and potentially dangerous. I plan on not dealing with that. But would like to know about it's potential relation to this situation. Ideally, if my motherboard can handle such a high number of RAM, I should be able to access, it. Right? But if this is something typically done with mobos and other hardware: to protect the components, a limitation of somesort or as a scam or whatever: I just want to know. Thank you.
From: DL on 5 Feb 2010 04:50 According to google max memory is 4gb "Brian V" <BrianV(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:68D0FF69-1C84-438D-829D-0FF2D48F6EE5(a)microsoft.com... > I'v asked a lot of questions about my pc and have gotten a lot of > responses. > I think this should be the last one in this regard. I have read some info > and > it seems to be a bit unclear to me. I may not be specific enough, and I am > happy with what answers I got so far. I hate to beat this topic to death. > Here goes. > > My motherboard is a EM61SM/EM61PM. In the manual it says it has 4Gb > capacity > with RAM. On crucial.com it says 4Gb. In PcWizard, an Acer application and > I > think the DirectX programs that scan the hardware: They say my mobo can > actually take 12Gb or RAM. > > I understand that a 32-bit OS only recognizes 4Gb, but it doesn't/can't > recognize all of it, usually 3Gb and something. > > People keep telling me: to fully utilize the RAM in my system, I should > switch to 64-bit. Now I don't care if I went with Windows Vista or 7. The > only thing I am unclear of is: Would a 64-bit platform recognize the 12Gb > limit? Or just the 4Gb? From the posts I have gotten back, the web-pages > given and the web-pages I found myself: Nothing has really said. Or the > reply > has said I can get the 4Gb. Nothing is really mentioned about this > discrepency. If it was, I missed it. > > In my BIOS, it shows something about 4Gb. I assume that is what the mobo > and > BIOS communicate. But is the OS communicating the 4GB to the BIOS? If so, > does that mean a 64-bit OS may potentially communicate the apparent 12Gb > limit of RAM? > > Is this related to overclocking? I do not intend to overclock. It appears > to > have to be too elaborate and potentially dangerous. I plan on not dealing > with that. But would like to know about it's potential relation to this > situation. > > Ideally, if my motherboard can handle such a high number of RAM, I should > be > able to access, it. Right? But if this is something typically done with > mobos > and other hardware: to protect the components, a limitation of somesort or > as > a scam or whatever: I just want to know. > > Thank you.
From: SC Tom on 5 Feb 2010 07:42 "Brian V" <BrianV(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:68D0FF69-1C84-438D-829D-0FF2D48F6EE5(a)microsoft.com... > I'v asked a lot of questions about my pc and have gotten a lot of > responses. > I think this should be the last one in this regard. I have read some info > and > it seems to be a bit unclear to me. I may not be specific enough, and I am > happy with what answers I got so far. I hate to beat this topic to death. > Here goes. > > My motherboard is a EM61SM/EM61PM. In the manual it says it has 4Gb > capacity > with RAM. On crucial.com it says 4Gb. In PcWizard, an Acer application and > I > think the DirectX programs that scan the hardware: They say my mobo can > actually take 12Gb or RAM. > > I understand that a 32-bit OS only recognizes 4Gb, but it doesn't/can't > recognize all of it, usually 3Gb and something. > > People keep telling me: to fully utilize the RAM in my system, I should > switch to 64-bit. Now I don't care if I went with Windows Vista or 7. The > only thing I am unclear of is: Would a 64-bit platform recognize the 12Gb > limit? Or just the 4Gb? From the posts I have gotten back, the web-pages > given and the web-pages I found myself: Nothing has really said. Or the > reply > has said I can get the 4Gb. Nothing is really mentioned about this > discrepency. If it was, I missed it. > > In my BIOS, it shows something about 4Gb. I assume that is what the mobo > and > BIOS communicate. But is the OS communicating the 4GB to the BIOS? If so, > does that mean a 64-bit OS may potentially communicate the apparent 12Gb > limit of RAM? > > Is this related to overclocking? I do not intend to overclock. It appears > to > have to be too elaborate and potentially dangerous. I plan on not dealing > with that. But would like to know about it's potential relation to this > situation. > > Ideally, if my motherboard can handle such a high number of RAM, I should > be > able to access, it. Right? But if this is something typically done with > mobos > and other hardware: to protect the components, a limitation of somesort or > as > a scam or whatever: I just want to know. > > Thank you. Depending on your system, here's what you can get: http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=Aspire%20T180 or http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=Aspire%20E380 These seem to be the 2 most popular systems with that MB. So, no, a 64-bit OS will not see more than the board itself will recognize. The diagnostic programs you use may be recognizing a chipset that can, with the right supporting chips, recognize 12GB, but the way your MB is constructed 4GB is the limit. Many PC and MB manufacturer's limit their max to 4GB for cost reasons. Since a 32-bit OS can only see 4GB max, and most PC's ship with a 32-bit OS, why waste money on something the majority of buyers isn't going to use? -- SC Tom
From: Paul on 5 Feb 2010 12:35 Brian V wrote: > I'v asked a lot of questions about my pc and have gotten a lot of responses. > I think this should be the last one in this regard. I have read some info and > it seems to be a bit unclear to me. I may not be specific enough, and I am > happy with what answers I got so far. I hate to beat this topic to death. > Here goes. > > My motherboard is a EM61SM/EM61PM. In the manual it says it has 4Gb capacity > with RAM. On crucial.com it says 4Gb. In PcWizard, an Acer application and I > think the DirectX programs that scan the hardware: They say my mobo can > actually take 12Gb or RAM. > > I understand that a 32-bit OS only recognizes 4Gb, but it doesn't/can't > recognize all of it, usually 3Gb and something. > > People keep telling me: to fully utilize the RAM in my system, I should > switch to 64-bit. Now I don't care if I went with Windows Vista or 7. The > only thing I am unclear of is: Would a 64-bit platform recognize the 12Gb > limit? Or just the 4Gb? From the posts I have gotten back, the web-pages > given and the web-pages I found myself: Nothing has really said. Or the reply > has said I can get the 4Gb. Nothing is really mentioned about this > discrepency. If it was, I missed it. > > In my BIOS, it shows something about 4Gb. I assume that is what the mobo and > BIOS communicate. But is the OS communicating the 4GB to the BIOS? If so, > does that mean a 64-bit OS may potentially communicate the apparent 12Gb > limit of RAM? > > Is this related to overclocking? I do not intend to overclock. It appears to > have to be too elaborate and potentially dangerous. I plan on not dealing > with that. But would like to know about it's potential relation to this > situation. > > Ideally, if my motherboard can handle such a high number of RAM, I should be > able to access, it. Right? But if this is something typically done with mobos > and other hardware: to protect the components, a limitation of somesort or as > a scam or whatever: I just want to know. > > Thank you. To satisfy an inquiring mind, you must have deep pockets. ******* I found another upgrade report here. At the top, it mentions the motherboard is EM61SM/EM61PM, but other details about the computer may differ from yours. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/243570-30-upgrade About 60% of the way down that web page, it says "bennieblanco 07-11-2007 at 03:12:40 AM ok guys. even the specs say it is pc2 4200 it end up being pc2 5300 so the ones I purchased fit perfectly. the problem was BAD MEMORY SLOTS. I had to exchange the computer , placed new memory and reads 4gigs. Even though Vista sees only 3313 I am happier than before" So in that case, a replacement motherboard was able to see a 4x1GB configuration, and the 32 bit OS reported about what you'd expect in terms of addressable memory. I'm willing to bet the memory slots were not bad, and the difference between the old motherboard and the replacement, is a different version of BIOS onboard. ******* As I explained in a previous post, in the case of this computer, your main enemy is the BIOS that comes with the computer. The architecture is supportive of large memory configurations. And that is why you are seeing reports of "12GB" as being possible. The thing that has to support the memory configuration, is the processor itself. The memory controller and memory interfaces are on the processor, and not the Northbridge. The processor determines the actual hardware limits, and AMD processors like yours are known to support larger memory configurations. The largest DDR2 sticks I know of, were 4GB ones, so that is likely to be an upper limit per slot (in terms of what you could buy to test with). Athlon64 X2 3800+ - revision F2, uses DDR2 RAM, socket AM2. http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUDetail.aspx?id=63 AMD never admits to memory support quantity, in their advertising material. Which makes determining the upper limit that much tougher. You need to consult a document about "BIOS writer's guide" from the AMD site, to get the information, and the document is not in "plain English". The problem with the BIOS writer's guide, is mapping actual processor product info, like "X2 3800+ rev F2", into an actual definitive statement about limits. (Example of their incomplete advertising...) http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/athlon/Pages/amd-athlon-processors-key-architectural-features.aspx This is an example of an Asus motherboard from the same era, with socket AM2 and Geforce 6150. It supports 8GB total. So I think the platform and hardware in your computer, is capable of supporting more. It is a matter of what the BIOS does, when the memory is installed, that counts. If all the computer will do is "beep" and not boot, then it doesn't matter how many architecture documents I show you. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131014 ******* No matter who you are, Albert Einstein or Alfred E. Neuman, it all eventually boils down to plugging in some memory and testing it. You could always take it to a local computer shop and tell them to "upgrade it to as much memory as it'll take" and that would remove the need for you to buy, test, and return RAM in your quest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_E._Neuman Paul
From: Brian V on 5 Feb 2010 22:03
Thank you everyone. Questions answered. I looked on Acers site, and emailed them. There is another BIOS from 2008 I believe. It's the one that pops up for my system. I'm thinking I will eventually flash the BIOS. It's from the manufacturer. Microsoft apparently supports those BIOS's. They will apparently still support my OEM - XP if I flashed a BIOS. But if there are technical issues, I have to pay the fee to Microsoft once everything is up and running. Maybe that one would recognize more. I don't know. I can't get any technical help, unless I pay a fee to Acer, warrenty is done and there is no Acer forum. I found an Acer forum, but don't know if it's an official forum. I havn't looked at the BIOS zip file. I don't even know where to put this file. I don't think it is self-placing. Anyone know where to find a BIOS too?....Windows folder? Program files? Hidden files? Can a person make a BIOS? Is this mapping out the stuff from AMD site you speak of Paul? This would be programming. This is writing software, etc. That isn't exactly what I want to do. So consulting that file, means mapping into a definitive statement with coding. I just want to use the file from the manufacturers site. Flashing a BIOS: I was told by the microsoft rep that I'd need to re-enter my product key. Does flashing BIOS's potentially tend to create problems? If it's for a specific computer make and model, I don't see why I'd have to contact Microsoft technical support and pay the fee to get everything going. But maybe it's how OEM's work? The windows licensing situation? |