Why not 4 Gb RAM used?

[gis_mapper]

I am considering building a new AMD 4400X2 system using either the ASUS A8N-32 SLI Deluxe, GIGABYTE GA-K8NXP-SLI, or MSI K8N Daimond Plus motherboards. My leaning is towards the ASUS board though.

I do a lot of GIS work with large raster images and vector databases; thus I'd like to install 4 Gb RAM - the maximum allowed.

However I note that on each motherboards manual (that I downloaded) it states that "the system may detect less than 3 Gb RAM because of address space limitations for other critical functions. The limitation applies to Windows XP 32 bit version operating system since it does not support PAE (Physical Address Extension) mode".

This doesn't seem too good ... are there any workarounds to use all 4 Gb RAM? Don't know if going to Windows XP 64 would solve it, but then my other software will probably not run (from other posts I've read).

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

I am considering building a new AMD 4400X2 system using either the ASUS A8N-32 SLI Deluxe, GIGABYTE GA-K8NXP-SLI, or MSI K8N Daimond Plus motherboards. My leaning is towards the ASUS board though.

I do a lot of GIS work with large raster images and vector databases; thus I'd like to install 4 Gb RAM - the maximum allowed.

However I note that on each motherboards manual (that I downloaded) it states that "the system may detect less than 3 Gb RAM because of address space limitations for other critical functions. The limitation applies to Windows XP 32 bit version operating system since it does not support PAE (Physical Address Extension) mode".

This doesn't seem too good ... are there any workarounds to use all 4 Gb RAM? Don't know if going to Windows XP 64 would solve it, but then my other software will probably not run (from other posts I've read).

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

windows xp 64 will run all the 32bit programs you have now.

 

[gis_mapper]

So will Windows XP64 also solve this apparent memory limitation?

Also then, what is all the fuss I read about with people hesitant to move to Windows 64? Is it just an issue with the Antivirus programs, or come to think of it, the drivers for the various pieces of hardware?

Thanks again.

 

[mpjesse]

Windows XP 64bit Edition (x64) supports up to 128GB of system memory. There are minor issues w/ driver support on x64 edition with lesser known hardware manufacturers, however they're continuing to improve daily. Some people report it as a bit buggy, but others seems to have no problems. Generally speaking, if you stick to popular name brand products you're going to have good driver support for WinXP Pro x64 edition.

There's almost no performance difference between 32bit and 64bit editions (unless of course you're using >4GB of memory).

I assume that you are using a Quadro or FireFL card. Both ATI and nVidia fully support x64 bit edition in their drivers (Quadro, FireGL, Catalyst, and ForceWare).

You're other option is to use one of these OS's which have PAE (up to 16GB of system memory) support:
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Advanced Server
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server
• Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition
• Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition

However, those are all extremely expensive. Your best bet is WinXP Pro x64 bit edition. It will solve your memory limitations issues. However your motherboard is still going to hold you back to some degree... it all depends on how much the board itself supports and not the OS (if using WinXP x64).

Makes sense?

-mpjesse

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

what mpjesse says is all true, the only reason i went with xp pro was i heard if you overclock hard use 32bit edition for stability reasons. overclocked computers crash alot, 95% stability is good for a massively overclocked system.

 

[gis_mapper]

Thanks guys.

Using Win XP 64 makes sense and I'll go that route.

I had only heard of the GeForce cards ... had not heard of either Quadro or FireFL. Had a brief search on Google and have a bit better idea about them.

Will post a query on the Graphics forum asking about card recommendations regarding my application.

Thanks again.

 

[Heyyou27]

That's sort of true. It's harder to stay stable on 64-bit overclocked.

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

Thanks guys.

Using Win XP 64 makes sense and I'll go that route.

I had only heard of the GeForce cards ... had not heard of either Quadro or FireFL. Had a brief search on Google and have a bit better idea about them.

Will post a query on the Graphics forum asking about card recommendations regarding my application.

Thanks again.

feal free to ask in this thread.

 

[gis_mapper]

Ok, what Quadro or FireFl card would be recommended?

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

Ok, what Quadro or FireFl card would be recommended?

lol what is the use is what i ment.

 

[gis_mapper]

Work with MapInfo - a GIS (Geographic Information System) ultilising numerous vector layers in conjunction with raster imagery, some of which is up to 200 Meg in size.

 

[scoobertscoobydoo]

Work with MapInfo - a GIS (Geographic Information System) ultilising numerous vector layers in conjunction with raster imagery, some of which is up to 200 Meg in size.

hey do you live in upstate newyork? we have the map info headquaters here i believe.

ok grab a ati card with 512megs of ram, also make sure you get atleast 4gigs of ram.

if you really want a nvidia they have hacks for the 7800gt's that turn them into quadro cards, thats something for that fourm, how to hack it.

 

[kyleawesome]

...
• Microsoft Windows 2000 Datacenter Server

I didnt think this was even available to consumers let alone the fact the Microsoft doesnt offer support on it, rather support is through the OEM's correct?
I might be mixing up version's though...

 

[mpjesse]

Well of course it's available to consumers.... very resourceful consumers that is. I have a copy of right here in my desk... :twisted:

-mpjesse

 

[mpjesse]

Find out if you're program is optimized for Quadro or FireGL. It will usually say so on the box. Like "optimized for nVidia Quadro workstation graphics". something like that. or check the website.

if you can't find out whether or not it's supported, then getting a consumer level graphics card might be ok too.

find out and get back to me.

-mpjesse

 

[barlag]

Thanks guys.

Using Win XP 64 makes sense and I'll go that route.

...

Thanks again.

Yo,

XP64 will use twice as much RAM because the allocation blocks are twice as wide. Unless you are planning to go 8Gigs of RAM I wouldn't recommend it.
What Im saying is that 4Gigs on XP32 effectively is the same as 8Gigs in XP64. That is one of the main reasons I am not running 64 yet even though I had a 64 bit CPU for 2 years. The other reason is the status of drivers is still medium to bad if you can find them.

Here is an example system requirments for XP64:
Windows XP 64-Bit Edition
The 64-bit version of Windows XP has a minimum requirement of 1 GB RAM. Microsoft® usually recommends double the minimum, although for now there's no recommended amount. From past experience, having twice of what Microsoft recommends is necessary for typical use. Therefore 4 GB of RAM may be necessary to properly run WinXP 64-Bit Edition.

Also the RAM limitation of your motherboard should still apply with XP64.

Cheers,
Gabor

 

[Heyyou27]

That's bull shit. I've been running Windows XP 64-bit for about 6 months now and have had no such problem with 2GB.