|
Lana
Head Banana


Registered: 10/27/99
Posts: 3,109
Loc: www.MycoSupply.com
|
Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2
#8732633 - 08/06/08 07:59 AM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
So I have a little question...
I've read that Windows XP can only recognize 3gb of memory. Yet I see machines with 4gb and some high end gamming machines with 8gb or more.
So correct me if I'm wrong but if you're really in the need for A LOT of memory, Windows XP isn't the OS to use?
Any gamers, video/music editor out there who are familiar with this? I'm not a gamer or into video/music. I'm just wondering how many people get a computer with a ton of memory, install Win. XP and see that their machine isn't as souped up as they'd thought.
Lana
-------------------- Myco Supply - Distributors of Mycological Products http://www.MycoSupply.com The Premiere Source for Mushroom Growing Supplies. Visit us online or call us toll free
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Lana]
#8732796 - 08/06/08 09:15 AM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You are touching on several different problems...
1) 32 bits can create a number between 0 and 2^32 minus 1 (which is 4GB). Thus a 32-bit CPU can only address 4GB of memory, max. However, Intel added PAE (physical address extension) to their CPUs a while back. If the OS changes to use PAE, then the OS can address more than 4GB of memory, but a single application is still limited to a maximum of 4GB. (PAE basically creates an index of 4GB chunks, only one of which can be the 'active' chunk at any given time. The OS switches between active chucks as needed. PAE does not increase the address size of an application, thus applications are still limited to 4GB)
2) Most logic boards are only able to address 4GB of ram... however, many hardware devices "borrow" address space for their own purposes. A graphics card, for example, will need to map the graphics card memory into an address space the CPU can access. Thus, even if your logic board is capable of holding 4GB of memory, it is unlikely to be able to use all 4GB.
3) Another problem with large memory sizes is the page table size grows astronomically large. For example, the page table for 4GB of physical memory can almost 1GB in size. To get around this, we use larger sized pages (1M pages instead of 4K pages). Now we suffer long delays to swap out 1M chunks rather than 4K chunks, but our overhead to track page usage is much smaller. More memory isn't always better...
With all of this in mind...
Never max out the memory on a logic board, as you will be wasting some of it due to hardware constraints. This is why you will often see 3GB rather than 4GB.
An application running on a modern 32-bit OS CANNOT address more than 4GB of memory, even if the OS can. The only way to get around this issue is to upgrade to a 64-bit OS.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
RuNE
bomberman



Registered: 09/23/00
Posts: 2,331
Loc: tartarus
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Lana]
#8735207 - 08/06/08 05:50 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I think it's just another cheap epeen booster a lot of companies rely on to sway customers. (that is, non-power user customers). Even most PC illiterate consumers know that more ram = better. I know most would opt for a system A over system B because its got 3gb vs 2gb for example. This however says nothing about the quality of the ram, or the overall system. Bigger =/= better.
As Seuss has pointed out, if you're in the video/image editing scene, a 64bit OS with lotsa ram (that the board can handle) is your best bet. But generaly, for gaming and such, 2GB of high quality ram will get you further. A good idea is to set a 'set' page file size right after windows install, before any other programs are installed. This puts the page file at the start of the drive (closer to the middle) and will have better access times. There's no set rule to how much your page file size should be....and putting a set amount might screw you with very large applications. But generaly, very few people run into these problems. For 2gb, I personaly set a 1.5gb pagefile, which is more than enough. Too large is not good either. Whether this is the optimal size or not....well, I'm not sure.
-------------------- ~Happy sailing~
|
Lana
Head Banana


Registered: 10/27/99
Posts: 3,109
Loc: www.MycoSupply.com
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: RuNE]
#8737917 - 08/07/08 08:13 AM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Hey guys, thanks for the input. I have a strong interest in general computing technology. I'm not in an expert and any field, but I do like learning something new daily.
RuNE, thanks for you synopsis.
Seuss, I've read many of your posts and I think if I were to walk through your brain for just a few minutes, I'd be amazed and afraid as to how smart you really are
Thanks, Lana
-------------------- Myco Supply - Distributors of Mycological Products http://www.MycoSupply.com The Premiere Source for Mushroom Growing Supplies. Visit us online or call us toll free
|
Visionary Tools



Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Lana]
#8738245 - 08/07/08 10:15 AM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, most games for now won't effectively use more than 2gb of ram. In the future some will, and that 3gb might come in useful, especially if you want lots of programs running in the background.
Go for faster ram over more of it, 2gb being your goal.
--------------------
|
supra
computerEnthusiast
Registered: 10/26/03
Posts: 6,446
Loc: TEXAS
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Lana]
#8740597 - 08/07/08 08:02 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I recently built a computer with a quad core processor and 4gb of ram. I also installed the 32-bit version of windows XP. In the computer information (window key + pause|break) it shows 3.25 GB. The reason I went ahead and went with 4gb was because 2x2gb kits of ddr2 are inexpensive and a dime a dozen, if you build, i recommend Mushkin ram. Also, I figure this will be my computer for the next 5 or so years, and by then I will definitely be running a 64 bit os, so the extra will come in handy, also, most boards come with only 4 slots for ram, with the 2x2gb, i only have to buy another single kit to upgrade to 8gb, without having to throw any out.
Lastly, more ram is almost always better than faster ram, up to a limit of course. For windows XP, anything over 2gb is really overkill, but couldn't hurt anything.
peace
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: supra]
#8742474 - 08/08/08 04:11 AM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
> also, most low end boards come with only 4 slots for ram
There... fixed that up for you. 
> The reason I went ahead and went with 4gb was...
One more reason; matched pairs of memory will run faster on most computers. Even though you are wasting 3/4 of a GB, you are getting a tiny bit of extra speed on memory access.
> Lastly, more ram is almost always better than faster ram, up to a limit of course.
I disagree completely with the above statement. It completely depends upon what kind of applications you are running. Even then, more memory is not always better. The overhead to manage large memory pools can be massive.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
supra
computerEnthusiast
Registered: 10/26/03
Posts: 6,446
Loc: TEXAS
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Seuss]
#8744975 - 08/08/08 04:05 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well, according to benchmarking programs, which i do know are not fully indicative of real world usage, show me getting much more throughput with more ram than faster ram. Even testing a faster set of 2gb ram (2x1gb dual channel) vs. slower 4gb ram. Anyways, buying any board with more than 4 slots without a specific need for it would be a waste of money IMO.
peace
|
Visionary Tools



Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: supra]
#8745149 - 08/08/08 04:47 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
But, if the game/program one wishes to run only uses 1gb at most, then having 3gb surplus won't be of use.
Hell, if money is no object, just go for the fastest, biggest sticks monies can buy.
--------------------
|
DieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Visionary Tools]
#8745161 - 08/08/08 04:49 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I think 2 gigs is the sweet spot right now. I have 2 gigs in all three of my computers.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Visionary Tools]
#8745553 - 08/08/08 06:24 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
> But, if the game/program one wishes to run only uses 1gb at most, then having 3gb surplus won't be of use.
Except, the OS will use free memory to cache file system access during game play. Just because the game doesn't use the memory doesn't mean the memory isn't being used.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Gamers, memory and Windows XP Pro SP2 [Re: Seuss]
#8746394 - 08/08/08 09:15 PM (15 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
yeah, that's what I wonder....
My friend tried to run everything from memory and use no swap file.
He didn't seem to get any performance advantage, but who knows... maybe given his memory size the computer did that on its own anyways... but then why did he have a large swap file before he disabled it? The file was a "computer set size" in XP...
I would think it would be faster using all memory to host system files...
|
|