Windows 7 - RAM in XP Pro ?

Asked By scbs29 on 28-Jul-12 05:35 AM
Hello all
I am considering upgrading my pc, Pentium 4 dual core 3GHz, 2GB DDR
ram to something a bit faster.If I do upgrade  I have pretty well
decided on an AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition and an Asus
MSA78L/USB3 mobo. Another requirement is to increase the amount of
RAM. My mobo at the moment, ASRock P4VM890 will only accept up to 2GB
DDR, and I would like to go to 4GB DDR3 since I have started doing
some video editing.
I have been looking at RAM in XP and have found various reports that
XP 32Bit will only handle 2Gb, 3Gb, 4Gb depending where you look.
Can anyone shed light on this? Would XP Pro 32Bit handle 4 GB RAM with
the above processor and mobo. I do not want to switch to Windows 7
because I prefer XP and some software that I use will not run on Win7.

remove fred before emailing
Registered Linux User 490858


JJ replied to scbs29 on 28-Jul-12 06:39 AM
32-bit Windows can use up to 4GB of RAM, but only 3GB is available
for user applications. By default, the upper 2GB of address space
(0x80000000-0xFFFFFFFF) is reserved for system (kernel, drivers,
cache) and left the lower 2GB of address space (0x00000000-
0x7FFFFFFF) for user applications.

This can be "tuned" to make 3GB of address space (0x00000000-
0xBFFFFFFF) available for user applications with one condition: the
applications must support memory addresses between 0x80000000-
0xBFFFFFFF, since some programs may hardcode memory addresses above
0x7FFFFFFF as invalid. This tuning thus, decreases the address
space used for system to only 1GB.

I have not personally tested this, but VMWare v4 allocates memory
for VMs in system memory space (you can see it via Task Manager),
so you will have less memory for them.

More details:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778
(v=vs.85).aspx

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb613473
(v=vs.85).aspx
Paul replied to scbs29 on 28-Jul-12 08:50 AM
I have WinXP Pro X32 and also 4GB of RAM installed (2x2GB).

Task Manager reports 3,144,748 bytes of RAM.

If I installed a second video card, that requires some address space,
and the Task Manager report would be reduced.

Now, a second question would be, how can I use that RAM ?

A typical application here, can only use about 1.8GB of RAM via
normal allocation. So a single program might not use all of the
RAM. I might need to run two programs to use 3,144,748. So your
video editor program, might not get that much more than it has
currently.

Setting a switch in boot.ini, and using a LARGEADDRESSAWARE application,
would allow a single application to get closer to using 3GB. Otherwise,
with ordinary programs, you would  likely need to use two of them to use
all the RAM.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/gg487508.aspx

It is not worthwhile for me to change how I have physically configured
my RAM. With the price of RAM, it is just easier to install 2x2GB and
be done with it. At one time, smaller DIMMs were more popular and more
available. Now, DIMMs tend to larger sizes. So 2x2GB is just convenient.

*******

As for your current motherboard, a little known thing, is some of the
last VIA chipsets, could actually use 2GB DIMMs. Using a hacked BIOS,
my motherboard that normally accepts 2x1GB as its config, would also work
with 2GB+1GB or 2GB+2GB. The problem with it was, the BIOS did not know how
to set the timing in a stable manner, so the 2GB DIMMs were throwing errors.
I had to return to the 2x1GB config. And the funny part of it as well,
is the support of 2GB on the chipset, was not even noted on the VIA website.
But some hacker tried it out, and the support must already have been in
the BIOS. It just was not tuned properly for actual usage. The 2GB DIMMs
ended up in my current motherboard. The VIA chipsets also run the RAM
rather slowly, in terms of clock rate, but that turned out to not be
a big deal. The best setting was DDR2-533, as DDR2-667 was a little
unstable. But the 533 setting was "like a rock". That machine is my

When you see the prices of RAM, like the price of DDR3 RAM, you might
consider just buying 2x4GB DIMMs, and ignoring the wasted RAM. The thing
is, the price of RAM *will* rise, sooner or later, and dirt cheap 4GB
modules will not stay as dirt cheap forever. For example, this 2x4GB kit
is only $46. How can you say no to that ? :-) If my machine supported
DDR3, I'd have a set like that two days from now. There is always some
experiment, that will use it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231416

If you want to use that extra RAM, you can install this. it will make
a RAMDisk for you. The free version, will use up to 4GB of unused
memory. And this works with WinXP. So you can have a 4GB RAMDisk and
still have 3,144,748 bytes free. That is an example of an experiment
you can try.

http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/software/ramdisk

This is a benchmark of the RAMDisk when I tested it. Then you can
tell people, the RAM was not "wasted". You ought to be able to get
a better benchmark than I got. An example of something to use the
RAMDisk for, is a scratch disk for Photoshop.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/8694/hdtunedataram2gbabove.gif

Paul
scbs29 replied to Paul on 28-Jul-12 03:15 PM
snip


Thanks for the answers.
What about 64Bit XP Pro ?
Is it any good ?  Worth considering ?

remove fred before emailing
Registered Linux User 490858
Paul replied to scbs29 on 29-Jul-12 12:34 AM
Newegg used to sell copies of the 64 bit version.

Under the Feedback tab, you can find customer comments on
what a PITA the software was.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116378


Cons: -slow
-tons of bugs

Other Thoughts: I bought this OS last year, and since then I have
found numerous problems. I had a problem where I
could not get any Windows updates, (and the huge list
of troubleshooting suggestions did not help) I cannot
play Dirt 2 due to a bug that only occurs on
Windows XP 64 bit, and this operating system has been
generally slow for me, even with an Intel Core 2 Duo
E8500 3.16 GHz and 4 GB DDR3 ram. (I typically cannot
moothly run two programs at once)

It can also be a problem, with the drivers. You'd want to check
the motherboard site, and see if that OS has driver support on
the site or not.

HTH,
Paul
scbs29 replied to scbs29 on 29-Jul-12 04:48 AM
snip


Thanks for all of the advice.
I think that at present I will do a hdd wipe and reinstall and see how
that goes for a while.
Eventually I think I  wil have to consider upgrading and switching to
Windows 7 :-(


remove fred before emailing
Registered Linux User 490858
Tim Slattery replied to Paul on 30-Jul-12 08:53 AM
Only by going to a 64-bit system. A 32-bit system has 4GB of address
space, that has to be used for video RAM and BIOS as well as main RAM.
The more video RAM you have, the less system RAM you will be able to
access.


Now you are into virtual memory. Each 32-bit program thinks that it has
4GB of memory, the upper 2GB of which is reserved for the system. The
virtual memory system makes sure that this works properly, keeping
track of what pages are in physical RAM and which on disk for each
process and swapping things in and out accordingly.

--
Tim Slattery
Slattery_T@bls.gov
Tim Slattery replied to scbs29 on 30-Jul-12 08:59 AM
I am using it here at work. We had been using 32-bit XP Pro, we now use
the same hardware but with 64-bit Win7. Even though we still use
almost all 32-bit programs, things work considerable faster than they
used to.

If you go to a 64-bit system, you will be able to use all your system
RAM and all your video memory. In 64-bit Win7 You'll be able to use up
to 192 GB of RAM (16GB in Home Premium), probably much more than your
motherboard will handle.


--
Tim Slattery
Slattery_T@bls.gov
scbs29 replied to scbs29 on 30-Jul-12 03:03 PM
Thanks again for all of the help and advice.
Unfortunately, I have just discoverd that a program I use quite often
will only run on a 32-bit system, so I will have to stay with XP.

remove fred before emailing
Registered Linux User 490858
Paul replied to scbs29 on 30-Jul-12 03:22 PM
Purely for your amusement, these are available and work until around Jan.15,2013.

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-8/iso

64-bit (x64)  Windows8-ReleasePreview-64bit-English.iso    Download (3.3 GB)
32-bit (x86)  Windows8-ReleasePreview-32bit-English.iso    Download (2.5 GB)

Product Key:   TK8TP-9JN6P-7X7WW-RFFTV-B7QPF

That gives you a way to test a 32 bit and a 64 bit OS, for fun.

After it is installed, you can install this, and give the new OS some menus.

http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/features.html

Then, it will look more like something you have used before.

The difference there is, there is a claim they allow 16-bit installers
to work. So it is just possible more legacy stuff will install while
using one of those. (Old drivers would still be a problem of course)

It all depends, on whether you have a good broadband connection,
whether that is a worthwhile option or not.

When testing that, I used a spare hard drive, and disconnected the
other hard drives. To reduce complications that might arise.

There is even a tool, for copying the ISO9660 file contents to
a USB key. But it is kinda tricky to use. It took me several tries
to figure out why it would not work, and get it running. If you
could not get this to work, you would  have to burn a DVD. (Windows7-USB-DVD-tool.exe)

http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msstore/html/pbPage.Help_Win7_usbdvd_dwnTool

Paul
Dominique replied to scbs29 on 01-Aug-12 09:13 PM
scbs29 <scbs29@fred.talktalk.net> écrivait


I guess you mean 32 bit "OS" (not "system"). I successfully run many 32
bits applications on Win7-64 bits

In your original post you said you wanted to do video and you planned to
buy new hardware, in that case go with Win7-64 Pro and buy as much RAM as
you can afford; if you are serious about video work, you will not regret it.

Why Pro? because you will be able to install XP Mode and try your

HTH
scbs29 replied to Dominique on 01-Aug-12 06:13 PM
snip

Probably should have said. The programs that I use and want to keep
are
Ulead VideoStudio 9 (yes I have Sony Vegas but VideoStudio to read
from vhs tape through vcr and conextant 2388x internal capture card)
Ulead PictureShow 3
Paint Shop Pro 9
PhotoImpact 12
pdf to png converter from pdf-diff-tools.com
pdf to jpg converter from pdf-diff-tools.com
batch png to jpg from design-lib.com

Also various programming tools.

I do not want to spend a few hundred gbp to upgrade and then find that
I have to spend more to replace programs which do exactly what I want,
especially since some are not available any more.

email to pdf-diff-tools resulted in a reply that their software will
only run on 32-bit OS.

Cannot upgrade my pc without new mobo, processor, ram. If I do then XP
will not handle more that about 3GB ram. I already have 2GB. No point
going to another 32-bit OS, need to go to 64-bit.

All in all I think that I will stick with XP.

remove fred before emailing
Registered Linux User 490858