Question about 4GB Ram + Intel Turbo Memory

Message

k2canezsd · #1 Post by **k2canezsd** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:41 am

I have 2 2GB memory chips and the Intel 1GB Turbo Memory but my computer details say I have 2.99 GB of Ram.

Is this because 1GB is allocated to the Turbo Memory or something of the sort?

Thanks.

#2 Post by **ryengineer** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:54 am

k2canezsd wrote:snip.......Is this because 1GB is allocated to the Turbo Memory or something of the sort?......snip

Sir, no.

You would 64 bit OS to utilize the 4 GB of memory on your X61t.

k2canezsd · #3 Post by **k2canezsd** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:12 am

I don't understand.

Are you saying that 32 bit Vista has a max ram of 3GB?

steve-oo · #4 Post by **steve-oo** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:15 am

Yes, 32 bit Windows can only address ~3GB of RAM. If you want to access more than that (e.g. 4GB you have) then you need 64 bit Windows.

#5 Post by **ryengineer** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:16 am

Any 64 bit OS will do.

k2canezsd · #6 Post by **k2canezsd** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:17 am

I see...got it....thanks guys!

How much is an upgrade from 32 bit Vista to 64 bit?

steve-oo · #7 Post by **steve-oo** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:32 am

Unfortunately, AFAIK, there is no 32-bit-Vista --> 64-bit-Vista upgrade path.

mgags7 · #8 Post by **mgags7** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:53 am

Yes, that is because you can't simply change everything about how the computer functions that easily....

WinXP can address up to 4gb, you just have to be crafty with it.

crashnburn · #9 Post by **crashnburn** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 10:20 am

mgags7 wrote:Yes, that is because you can't simply change everything about how the computer functions that easily....

WinXP can address up to 4gb, you just have to be crafty with it.

Elaborate? Link?

taylorwilsdon · #10 Post by **taylorwilsdon** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:07 pm

crashnburn wrote:
mgags7 wrote:Yes, that is because you can't simply change everything about how the computer functions that easily....

WinXP can address up to 4gb, you just have to be crafty with it.
Elaborate? Link?

Its a bit of an urban legend and idiots like to spurt it up every time this discussion happens.

Its something called PAE: Personal Address Extension

You can read about it here:
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/pl ... AEdrv.mspx

There is supposed to be a code that allows 32 bit Windows OS to address 4GB RAM but it has never worked for me across 5 systems with 4GB RAM.

thaug · #11 Post by **thaug** » Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 am

PAE works quite well with Windows 2003, but I certainly wouldn't try it with XP.

Alternate media can be ordered directly from MS that would contain the 64-bit files. Of course, as an OEM install, it may not work, but you can certainly try.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/1 ... fault.mspx

jgsx · #12 Post by **jgsx** » Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:07 pm

My first x61s model without turbomemory supported 4gb (2x2gb sticks). My new x61s that shipped with turbo memory only sees 3gb with 2x2gb sticks. Both units run Vista Ultimate.

steve-oo · #13 Post by **steve-oo** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:36 am

jgsx wrote:My first x61s model without turbomemory supported 4gb (2x2gb sticks). My new x61s that shipped with turbo memory only sees 3gb with 2x2gb sticks. Both units run Vista Ultimate.

Assuming you mean 32-bit Vista, as it's the 32/64 that dictates the memory capabilities, not the Ultimate-ness...

There's a difference between "supports" and "uses" - just because the X61s can hold 4GB, doesn't mean the OS can access it. You need a 64-bit OS.

jgsx · #14 Post by **jgsx** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:27 am

I reviewed what I had. I actually had a 2gb + 1gb stick in my last x61s. The current x61s only saw 3gb of the 2+2 (like everyone said), so now I'm running 2+1. Too bad. It's not worth running Vista 64 just for the extra gb.

steve-oo · #15 Post by **steve-oo** » Fri Sep 07, 2007 11:39 am

Heh... this is the battle I fight too - if XP 64-bit was more supported, I'd use that, but as things are I run Vista just so I can use my 4GB RAM (which in itself is ridiculous, because XP probably runs just as well in 3GB as Vista in 4GB... but there we go

)

mrgetalife · #16 Post by **mrgetalife** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:57 am

Its deifintely not worth switching out the OS just for 1 GB (yet). 64-bit apps and drivers just aren't mature enough.

Without any tricks XP can recognize 3.4gb of memory or so.
On other computers if you put 4GB in the machine you will always get at least 3 GB of memory out of what you put in. It depends on how the motherboard's bios was written on what come out and shows up in windows. The video card takes up the memory for addressing space along with other components. And the resulting leftovers are able to show up in Windows.

With the X61.

I did it two ways. I put in 2GB + 2GB and 1GB + 2GB.
The result was in vista ultimate i got was.

2GB+2GB = 3062MB
1GB+2GB = 3046MB

So I gain 16MB of memory.

I "HOPE" its because its using the inacessible memory for the Shared Memory from the x3100 shared memory graphic controller. I haven't had a chance to test it extensively. But if this is the case. It really is worth it that you get 4gb of memory. Because if you really ran any graphically intense program. You can Max out shared ram and have 3gb still available.

docinthebox · #17 Post by **docinthebox** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 11:42 am

Just curious... how come the non-PAE version of the 32-bit linux kernel can support up to 4GB but the non-PAE version of Windows can only support 3GB?

stallen · #18 Post by **stallen** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 4:54 pm

You can go from 32-bit to 64-bit Vista for free by following this guide:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=144783

bhtooefr · #19 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:45 pm

There's another option, although it won't work for tablet users.

Windows Server 2003.

It supports 4 GB of USABLE RAM, with the 32-bit version, in PAE mode. (Windows XP and Vista 32-bit specifically ignore anything over 4 GB, and in PAE mode give 2 GB for hardware purposes - leaving 2 GB free. In non-PAE mode, 1 GB is taken up for hardware purposes, leaving 3 GB free.)

#20 Post by **tomh009** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:30 pm

docinthebox wrote:Just curious... how come the non-PAE version of the 32-bit linux kernel can support up to 4GB but the non-PAE version of Windows can only support 3GB?

Even with Linux, the ThinkPad chipset I/O implementation requires most of the memory in the 3-4 GB range.

This is really a hardware/firmware issue, not an OS one.

bhtooefr · #21 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:22 pm

Except PAE was created specifically to work around that barrier. Turn PAE on in Linux (or Windows Server,) and you can go as far as 32 GiB, IIRC. And that's in a 32-bit OS - the 64-bit ones have no need for PAE.

It's just, Microsoft didn't want the 32-bit CONSUMER versions (note that the server versions are unaffected) to get past it, for whatever reason.

stallen · #22 Post by **stallen** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:29 pm

Every time a newb asks a question about using 4GB of RAM it turns into a discussion about PAE. Seems like it would be best to keep it simple with a little education about 32-bit vs. 64-bit. Then go with 64-bit if they want the simple way of utilizing 4GB of RAM.

bhtooefr · #23 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:32 pm

PAE = 36-bit memory addressing, plus a few more extensions. (Those extensions are necessary for Data Execution Prevention, too, IIRC, so if you've got the NX-bit support enabled, you've got PAE enabled.)

And, even 33-bit would be enough to give 4 GiB RAM. (Actually, it'd give 7.4 GiB in a best case scenario.)

It's not the simplest solution, no, but given a server version of Windows, it's the only way to get a 32-bit Windows OS (which many things NEED) and 4 GiB usable RAM.

#24 Post by **tomh009** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:50 am

PAE may well work for you, but when a ThinkPad user asks about getting access to more than 3 GB in Windows, neither PAE+Windows Server 2003 or PAE+Linux is a real answer. As stallen said, it's really a 32-bit vs 64-bit question.

Not to mention that PAE is a hack on the order of the original 8086 segment architecture, does not allow individual apps to access all the memory (unless they are written for PAE, and practically none are) and will have far worse performance for memory-intensive apps than a 64-bit OS.

Just think back to how nicely "large" apps ran on a 286 -- Word for Windows 1.0 was painful at the time with the Intel segment architecture.

bhtooefr · #25 Post by **bhtooefr** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:24 am

Still, it is the ONLY valid answer when the user requires, say, hardware that only has 32-bit drivers, AND 4 GiB RAM. And, IIRC, in a PAE system (or for 32-bit apps on a 64-bit system,) each app can take up to 3 GiB RAM if it's enabled for it.

stallen · #26 Post by **stallen** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:38 am

The OP has Turbo Memory and he is in a thinkpad forum. That means he has a thinkpad that has 64-bit drivers for all of his internal hardware. There is also about a 95% chance that any hardware he will attach has 64-bit drivers as well. Regardless, that is what I was talking about with 32-bit vs. 64-bit education. You don't go with 64-bit unless you have all the drivers you need and all of your "must have" software will operate on a 64-bit system.

PAE just isn't a realistic alternative for the average user. I'm just saying that everytime someone asks "Why doesn't Vista/XP see all 4GB of RAM?" A bunch of people chime in to show how much they know about PAE. It's a bunch of jargon that the OP will never understand of benefit from. Just my .02

So to the original poster, the easiest way to utilize 4GB of RAM is to have a 64-bit OS. Here is a good article about 32-bit vs 64-bit so you can decide if it is right for you: http://zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/5709

If you decide you want to go from 32-bit to 64-bit, you can do it for free/$5 at the most (it involves a clean install using your 32-bit product key with a 64-bit installation disk) by following the guide that I previously posted.

If you decide 64-bit isn't right for you, your system should run nicely with 3GB of RAM.

Question about 4GB Ram + Intel Turbo Memory

Question about 4GB Ram + Intel Turbo Memory

Who is online