Upgrading to Windows 7

[BillW50]

In

It's not just XP (and it it's not exactly 3.33GB on all computers).
It's *all* 32-bit client versions of Windows; you will have the same
issue with Windows 7 unless you go to a 64-bit version of it.

All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP/Vista/7) have a 4GB
address space (64-bit versions can use much more). That's the
theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

But you can't use the entire address space. Even though you have a
4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM. That's
because some of that space is used by hardware and is not available to
the operating system and applications. The amount you can
use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can
range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around
3.1GB.

Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual
RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM
goes unused because there is no address space to map it to.

That is *only* true for those that doesn't know any better.

Physical Address Extension - PAE Memory and Windows
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg487503

Operating System Support. The PAE kernel is not enabled
by default for systems that can support more than 4 GB
of RAM.

To boot the system and utilize PAE memory, the /PAE
switch must be added to the corresponding entry in the
Boot.ini file. If a problem should arise, Safe Mode may
be used, which causes the system to boot using the
normal kernel (support for only 4 GB of RAM) even if
the /PAE switch is part of the Boot.ini file.

The PAE mode kernel requires an Intel Architecture
processor, Pentium Pro or later, more than 4 GB of RAM,
and Windows 2000, Windows XP, or Windows Server 2003.

 

[Tim Slattery]

A 32-bit system has a 4GB (2**32) address space. Some of that must be
used to access your video RAM, BIOS, etc. What's left can then be used
for your system RAM. That's what you're seeing, and it's quite common.
Modern video cards have a *lot* of onboard memory, and that will
decrease the amount of system RAM that can be accessed.


The solution is 64-bit computing. Its much larger address space will
allow access to many gigabytes of RAM. If you go to 64-bit Win7, you
should have no problem. This page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/lib...=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_7
gives memory limits for various versions of Win7.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

In

That is *only* true for those that doesn't know any better.

Physical Address Extension - PAE Memory and Windows
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg487503

Operating System Support. The PAE kernel is not enabled
by default for systems that can support more than 4 GB
of RAM.

To boot the system and utilize PAE memory, the /PAE
switch must be added to the corresponding entry in the
Boot.ini file. If a problem should arise, Safe Mode may
be used, which causes the system to boot using the
normal kernel (support for only 4 GB of RAM) even if
the /PAE switch is part of the Boot.ini file.

The PAE mode kernel requires an Intel Architecture
processor, Pentium Pro or later, more than 4 GB of RAM,
and Windows 2000, Windows XP, or Windows Server 2003.

As I understand it, the above only applies to Windows XP SP1 and
previous. XP SP2 and later, including Vista and Windows 7 non-server
editions, restrict access to physical memory above 4GB even if PAE is
enabled. A really good write up can be found at
http://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/license/memory.htm

FYI

 

[Albert]

You're seeing what you should see. Part of of RAM is always reserved for
system overhead. What you're seeing is "usable" RAM, so to speak.

HTH
Wolf K.

The motherboard (Asus P5Q Pro) that I have in my rig has "4X DIMM,
Max, 16GB, DDR2 1300/1200/1066/800/667 MHz, non-ECC, un-buffeted
memory. Dual channel memory architecture.
Albert

 

[Wolf K]

The motherboard (Asus P5Q Pro) that I have in my rig has "4X DIMM,
Max, 16GB, DDR2 1300/1200/1066/800/667 MHz, non-ECC, un-buffeted
memory. Dual channel memory architecture.
Albert

Yeah, well, as others have pointed out, a 32-bit OS (XP in this case)
will see only the first 4GB, and a largish chunk of that is used by the
system (unless your BIOS can chnage a setting). So available RAM is a
little over 3GB. A 64-bit OS can see 1TB of RAM, which is the only real
advantage of using it (until more programs tweaked for 64-bit come along).

HTH
Wolf K.

 

[BillW50]

In

A 32-bit system has a 4GB (2**32) address space. Some of that must be
used to access your video RAM, BIOS, etc. What's left can then be used
for your system RAM. That's what you're seeing, and it's quite common.
Modern video cards have a *lot* of onboard memory, and that will
decrease the amount of system RAM that can be accessed.

That is *only* true for those that doesn't know any better. Windows 2000
(all 32 bit) and Windows XP SP1 or under (32 bit) can use more than 4GB
with the /PAE switch in your Boot.ini file.

Physical Address Extension - PAE Memory and Windows
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg487503

 

[Wolf K]

On 18/01/2012 4:14 PM, Albert wrote: [...]

The motherboard (Asus P5Q Pro) that I have in my rig has "4X DIMM,
Max, 16GB, DDR2 1300/1200/1066/800/667 MHz, non-ECC, un-buffeted
memory. Dual channel memory architecture.
Albert

Yeah, well, as others have pointed out, a 32-bit OS (XP in this case)
will see only the first 4GB, and a largish chunk of that is used by the
system (unless your BIOS can chnage a setting). So available RAM is a
little over 3GB. A 64-bit OS can see 1TB of RAM, which is the only real
advantage of using it (until more programs tweaked for 64-bit come along).

HTH
Wolf K.

I wrote:
(unless your BIOS can chnage a setting)

Sorry, I intended to refer to the boot.ini file. See BillW50's post on this.

Wolf K.

 

[Char Jackson]

In

That is *only* true for those that doesn't know any better. Windows 2000
(all 32 bit) and Windows XP SP1 or under (32 bit) can use more than 4GB
with the /PAE switch in your Boot.ini file.

This is a Windows 7 group. If your advice only applies to 2000 and XP
SP1 then it probably doesn't belong here and doesn't add to the
discussion. Besides, XP is up to SP3 now, so there's very little
reason for anyone to be running SP2 or older.

 

[BillW50]

In

This is a Windows 7 group. If your advice only applies to 2000 and XP
SP1 then it probably doesn't belong here and doesn't add to the
discussion.

Yeah... for the dim-witted perhaps. But for the well-read, you can stop
and learn something. Like what changed? And how do you hack around this
limitation in Windows 7? Yes it can be done. ;-)

Besides, XP is up to SP3 now, so there's very little
reason for anyone to be running SP2 or older.

Really? Perhaps you don't know that older versions of Windows (which
doesn't get patches anymore) actually get hacked less often. Think about
it! If you were a hacker, would you write malware for older versions of
Windows? Hell no! You are going to hack for the latest and the greatest!
;-)

Recent study shows that Windows 98 and Windows 2000 are the safest
Windows OS to deter malware vulnerabilities.
http://net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=1863

 

[Char Jackson]

In

Yeah... for the dim-witted perhaps. But for the well-read, you can stop
and learn something. Like what changed? And how do you hack around this
limitation in Windows 7? Yes it can be done. ;-)

I don't know why I bother with you.

 

[BillW50]

In

I don't know why I bother with you.

I don't know why a dim-wit would bother with a well read one either? As
they are just not smart enough to keep up anyway.

 

[Ken1943]

Hello all,

I have been resisting going to Windows 7 but it looks like the
inevitable has to take place. I'm contemplating getting a new laptop
which will in all probability have Windows 7 on it.

With XP I'm using a 32-bit installation but I would like to go to a
64-bit installation with Windows 7. I don't know all that much about
W-7 so I'm asking if I should install W-7 Pro?

Which would be your choice to install and why.

I thank you,
Albert

The program in Pro and above, missing in Home, is Local Security Policy.
Not that I use it often, but you can't even install it in Home.


KenW

 

[Albert]

On 18/01/2012 4:14 PM, Albert wrote: [...]

The motherboard (Asus P5Q Pro) that I have in my rig has "4X DIMM,
Max, 16GB, DDR2 1300/1200/1066/800/667 MHz, non-ECC, un-buffeted
memory. Dual channel memory architecture.
Albert

Yeah, well, as others have pointed out, a 32-bit OS (XP in this case)
will see only the first 4GB, and a largish chunk of that is used by the
system (unless your BIOS can chnage a setting). So available RAM is a
little over 3GB. A 64-bit OS can see 1TB of RAM, which is the only real
advantage of using it (until more programs tweaked for 64-bit come along).

HTH
Wolf K.

I wrote:
(unless your BIOS can chnage a setting)

Sorry, I intended to refer to the boot.ini file. See BillW50's post on this.

Wolf K.

That's okay, hello this is over my head anyway . The main thing is
that I have received a lot of information that I didn't have before
started and I think everyone.
Albert

 

[Albert]

snipped

That's okay, hello this is over my head anyway . The main thing is
that I have received a lot of information that I didn't have before
started and I think everyone.
Albert

First off I should proofread secondly I'm using Dragon
NaturallySpeaking it has a tendency to act just like my better half
and that it puts words in my mouth that I didn't say, so
I don't know where the hell "hello" came from and it should have been
"I thank" and instead of "I think" :-( so you see 77-year-olds also
make mistakes ;-).
Albert

 

[Tim Slattery]

Yeah, well, as others have pointed out, a 32-bit OS (XP in this case)
will see only the first 4GB, and a largish chunk of that is used by the
system (unless your BIOS can chnage a setting). So available RAM is a
little over 3GB. A 64-bit OS can see 1TB of RAM, which is the only real
advantage of using it (until more programs tweaked for 64-bit come along).

Hmm???

Other things being equal, a 64-bit address space would be able to
address 2**64 bytes, which is 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 - some 18
billion terabytes.

But other things aren't equal, and current 64-bit systems won't go
that far. As the table I referenced the other day said, the various
64-bit Win7 versions allow from 8GB (Home Basic) to 192GB (Pro,
Enterprise, Ultimate). Home Premium will use 16GB. All well short of a
terabyte.

 

[Wolf K]

Hmm???

Other things being equal, a 64-bit address space would be able to
address 2**64 bytes, which is 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 - some 18
billion terabytes.

But other things aren't equal, and current 64-bit systems won't go
that far. As the table I referenced the other day said, the various
64-bit Win7 versions allow from 8GB (Home Basic) to 192GB (Pro,
Enterprise, Ultimate). Home Premium will use 16GB. All well short of a
terabyte.

OK, I typed before putting brain gear. ;-) Thanks for your clarification.

Wolf k.

 

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

I don't know why I bother with you.

Huh.

This comment:
Was by far the most useless in this thread.
We are all more than capable of deciding for ourselves what is and is not
relevant to us and we don't need anyone to tell us.

 

[mechanic]

Recent study shows that Windows 98 and Windows 2000 are the safest
Windows OS to deter malware vulnerabilities.
http://net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=1863

Hey! Let's get out those old windows98 disks! How is it for wifi
support?

 

[mechanic]

Recent study shows that Windows 98 and Windows 2000 are the safest
Windows OS to deter malware vulnerabilities.
http://net-security.org/malware_news.php?id=1863

That's not what the article says at all! All it says about Windows
98 is that not a lot of people use it!

 

[BillW50]

In

That's not what the article says at all! All it says about Windows
98 is that not a lot of people use it!

Sure it does. During the study doesn't say it in the text (which ran for
almost 3 months). But it says in the graph that zero percent of Windows
98 users got infected by malware (out of 13,210 Danish users). And
Windows 2000 users came in a close second at 2%.