4GB RAM reported as 2GB in XP SP2 (32bit)

[1117]

Hence why I said not to shut off page file completely. The ideal thing would be to have a large page file on a separate physical drive altogether, but that's another story. And even then, I'd still leave a small 128MB for paging on the OS drive, for the reason you just said.

[lORD lUCAN]

Just an idea,

I'm running a 3500 amd winchester
with dual graphics cards, couple of 6800gt s
2 gig of ram with all the trimmings, no problems
at all.

Why not just run 2 gig, at least you'll have a
stable system to run on.

You really shouldn't need to run 4 gig of memory.

[qsrk]

Just an idea,

I'm running a 3500 amd winchester
with dual graphics cards, couple of 6800gt s
2 gig of ram with all the trimmings, no problems
at all.

Why not just run 2 gig, at least you'll have a
stable system to run on.

You really shouldn't need to run 4 gig of memory.

I personally use CAD and graphics applications that can use all of the RAM. I recently came close to using 2GB on a 3D CAD model of simple-moderate complexity, while running a graphics app, Outlook, and IE at the same time.

[qsrk]

I was quiet for a few days while I made sure that I had good RAM. I replaced all 4 sticks with new ones, and had the same problem. I tried a mix of old & new RAM (all identical brand etc.), and still the same problem.

I tried 1117's suggestion of reducing VM, and set a static size of 200MB, since Windows wanted that as a minimum for debugging purposes. Still the same problem. Windows XP Pro SP2 reports 2.00GB with 4.00GB installed.

Everest Home Edition 2.20 can see all 4 sticks at 1024MB each. The RAM is rated at 2-3-2-5-2T, and I have the motherboard set similarly, with Everest confirming the settings.

SpeedFan 4.27 sees all 4 sticks at 1024MB each.

CPU-Z 1.31 reports 1024MB in each of the 4 slots, and NOTHING ELSE on the rest of the tab. The memory tab reports 2048MB (not 4096MB !!!), Dual Channel, the correct timings, plus TRC at 11, and the DRAM idle timer at 16. It has no entry for Bank Interleave, although I have selected Auto in the BIOS (the only other option is "Disabled"). It isn't reported anywhere, but the BIOS also has a memory setting for 4 Beats.

Any new insights?

[DimPrawn]

Glad it's not just me then.

So weird. As I said before.

1 stick Win XP reports 1GB
2 sticks Win XP reports 2GB(dual channel mode)
3 sticks Win XP reports around 3GB (single channel mode)
4 sticks Win XP reports 2GB (dual channel mode)

Bill Gates you are a tosser.

I'm running this box with just two sticks in at the moment.

[qsrk]

Tune in soon.

I've got it mostly figured out and can see about 2.9GB now. I have to go now, but I'll post the details soon. In the meantime, if you have a lot of memory on your video card, reduce the AGP Aperture Size in your BIOS settings to 32MB if possible!

[qsrk]

Memory Hole!

Quick Summary: This a Memory Hole problem, but it's made worse with an AMD dual core CPU and an AGP video card with a lot of memory.

Here is my understanding. I may be off, so please correct me if I am wrong:

AMD CPU: One of the selling features with many of their new CPUs is hardware-enforced Data Execution Prevention (DEP), which prevents some malicious code from executing from system memory. See here.

Windows XP SP2: When you have hardware-enforced DEP, Windows MUST run in PAE mode (Physical Address Extension), so it is automatically loaded, even without the /PAE switch. PAE mode is meant to take advantage of large amounts of RAM, but to improve driver compatibility, it now has a lower limit on RAM address space. So if you have a new AMD CPU, you may have access to less memory, possibly 3.5GB (EDIT: possibly 3.3GB), not 4GB. See here, and here, and let me know if that makes sense.

Memory Hole: The BIOS on your motherboard automatically reserves address space for 32-bit devices and drivers, further reducing the 3.5GB available. That reserved space is called a memory hole. See here.

Video RAM: As Kallex pointed out in an AMD forum, Video RAM seems to be the biggest culprit. It may increase the memory hole by 2 x Video RAM with a dual-core processor (I think it may only be 1 x Video RAM with a single processor). If you have 256 MB video RAM, system address space will be reduced by 512MB. So 3.5GB - 0.5GB = 3.0GB available.

AGP Aperture Size: This is the amount of system RAM that you allow the video card to use. It does not need to be the same as your video RAM size. Whatever amount you select here (between 32MB and 256MB) will increase the size of the Memory Hole by the same amount. With a 256MB Aperture, increase the memory hole by 256MB to 768MB. So 3.5GB - .75GB = 2.75GB available.

Dual-Channel Memory: As suggested by Kallex (again!), the memory that you lose above will be doubled if you use Dual-Channel Memory. So with Dual-Channel memory, you lose 2 x .75GB = 1.5GB! Big Memory Hole. Now you have 3.5GB - 1.5GB = 2.00GB RAM! Is all this doubling of address space really needed?

The information above is simplified, since other devices eat up address space too.

ASRock BIOS: It is missing the option to disable / remap the Memory Hole. Until that is resolved, you will be stuck at 2.00GB (2.50GB if you reduce the AGP Aperture to 32MB). Now the big news. I have had the opportunity to test a beta BIOS that allows me to disable the Memory Hole, and I now see 2.48GB with a 256MB AGP Aperture size, and 2.92GB with a 32MB Aperture . Hopefully you guys will see one soon. Please don't get upset, but ASRock helped me out with the beta, so I think it is fair to let them release it to the public when they are ready (please don't ask me for a copy ). BTW, thanks ASRock! I hope that ASRock tweaks the BIOS more so that entire Memory Hole issue disappears, so we can see the entire 3.5GB that Windows allows. Apparently some motherboard BIOS' have a feature to set "memory hole porting to software", allowing Windows to see all 4GB (3.5GB in our case). I think Tyan K8WE is one, and maybe DFI is another.

I doubt that the remaining 0.5GB will ever return, since Microsoft is now moving on to 64-bit Windows.

Phew!

[Mordac]

So it's AMDs fault. What do you expect with Mickey Mouse CPUs?
Get the real thing. Get an Intel.

Mordy in "Pentium D 830 Dual-Core Heaven" Mode.

[darmstadt]

So it's AMDs fault. What do you expect with Mickey Mouse CPUs?
Get the real thing. Get an Intel.

Mordy in "Pentium D 830 Dual-Core Heaven" Mode.

Really - I build Dual Core Opteron 'cos they're faster

[Mordac]

You're probably right, but the last PC to die on me was an Athlon and it caused me no end of grief (dodgy chipset, driver issues etc.), even before it finally went. My backup server is an old P133 (circa 1995) which has never let me down (much wood-touching). I may be wide of the mark here, but my perception of AMD is that their CPUs are built to be cheaper (than the Intel equivalent). I don't want cheaper, I don't even want faster, I just want reliability. That's why I buy Intel.