Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 9 Sep 2007 10:14:10 -0700 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 8 Sep 2007 at 13:33, Mark Rode wrote:
> Your statement is still wrong. This has been extensively tested, and
> written about in Maximum PC in the last two years. 2GB is the sweet
> spot for RAM in XP PRO, as far as performance is concerned, so when
> Maximum PC builds their annual God Box they stay with 2GB for
> machines running XP PRO. Their tests have shown that above 2GB
> gaming, and normal use shows very little improvement in performance.
>
> However, XP PRO will support 3.25 GB RAM, and without doing anything
> to the boot.ini file.
> I am running 4GB of RAM in XP PRO SP2 on a dual 3.06 Xeon Workstation.
>
> Windows reports the use of 4GB of RAM in System information, but in
> both Task Manager, and >>control panel>> System, it shows 3.25 GB of RAM.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
The text he quoted referred to a 2GB maximum VIRTUAL address space per
process, unless the /3GB flag is used.
The other numbers -- 3.25GB, 4GB, 16GB and so on -- all refer to the total
amount of PHYSICAL RAM installed int the box. 4GB is a hard physical limit
for a 32-bit CPU (or 64-bit CU running in 32-bit mode) without external
memory-management hardware and OS support for it.
David Gillett
The NOSPIN Group has added a new feature on our website,
web based bulletinboard for questions and answers:
Visit our sister website at http://nospin.com
|
|
|