If you have 4GB, are you getting 4GB?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by David J Taylor, Jan 26, 2006.

  1. If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?

    Thanks,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 26, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David J Taylor

    Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:

    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?


    The address space is 32 bits, and the operating system takes a half a
    bit (or a full bit) of that, so so it's just not possible to "see" all
    of it at once. Buy a 64 bit CPU.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit
     
    , Jan 26, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <XFbCf.9780$>, david-
    -this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid says...
    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?


    Eh? Windows uses the physical memory it needs, then some more, and once
    it's run out it uses the disk as well.

    --

    Hywel
    http://kibo.org.uk/
     
    Hywel Jenkins, Jan 26, 2006
    #3
  4. David J Taylor wrote:

    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your
    > image editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?


    http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx

    Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 Memory Support. The maximum
    amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and
    Windows Server 2003 is also 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003, Enterprise
    Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows Server 2003, Datacenter
    Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.

    The virtual address space of processes and applications is still limited to
    2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file. When the physical
    RAM in the system exceeds 16 GB and the /3GB switch is used, the operating
    system will ignore the additional RAM until the /3GB switch is removed. This
    is because of the increased size of the kernel required to support more Page
    Table Entries. The assumption is made that the administrator would rather
    not lose the /3GB functionality silently and automatically; therefore, this
    requires the administrator to explicitly change this setting.





    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Jan 26, 2006
    #4
  5. David J Taylor

    G- Blank Guest

    In article <XFbCf.9780$>,
    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:

    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > David


    The image you see on screen is a cached representation of
    any much bigger file. I think your referring to ram memory
    but can't be too sure as you have stated this awkwardly.

    Photoshop can assign any disk as the scratch disk. Therefore
    I have access to the 250 GB on my firewire drive.


    --
    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

    greg_____photo(dot)com
     
    G- Blank, Jan 26, 2006
    #5
  6. David J Taylor

    Beach Bum Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:XFbCf.9780$...
    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?


    Mostly. I mean Windows takes some space to run, and there are some other
    things going on besides the photo editing software. On the other hand,
    virtual memory gives me another 10 gig, but it's obviously much slower when
    accessing it.

    --
    Mark

    Photos, Ideas & Opinions
    http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
     
    Beach Bum, Jan 26, 2006
    #6
  7. David J Taylor

    Beach Bum Guest

    "Beach Bum" <> wrote in message
    news:HkcCf.24023$...
    > "David J Taylor"
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote

    in
    > message news:XFbCf.9780$...
    > > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your

    image
    > > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?

    >
    > Mostly. I mean Windows takes some space to run, and there are some other
    > things going on besides the photo editing software. On the other hand,
    > virtual memory gives me another 10 gig, but it's obviously much slower

    when
    > accessing it.


    Sorry, typo.. that's another 1 (one) gig of virtual memory.

    --
    Mark

    Photos, Ideas & Opinions
    http://www.marklauter.com/gallery
     
    Beach Bum, Jan 26, 2006
    #7
  8. David J Taylor

    JohnR66 Guest

    "Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your
    >> image editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?

    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
    >
    > Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 Memory Support. The
    > maximum
    > amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and
    > Windows Server 2003 is also 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003, Enterprise
    > Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows Server 2003, Datacenter
    > Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the PAE feature.
    >
    > The virtual address space of processes and applications is still limited
    > to
    > 2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file. When the
    > physical
    > RAM in the system exceeds 16 GB and the /3GB switch is used, the operating
    > system will ignore the additional RAM until the /3GB switch is removed.
    > This
    > is because of the increased size of the kernel required to support more
    > Page
    > Table Entries. The assumption is made that the administrator would rather
    > not lose the /3GB functionality silently and automatically; therefore,
    > this
    > requires the administrator to explicitly change this setting.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Rita
    >

    To expand on this, even with the 3 GB switch set, each 32 bit application
    gets 2 GB of space max. So one app would have 2 GB and the other could have
    the remaining 1GB.

    If you put 4GB in a non server machine, it is important to use the switch or
    you are wasting memory as the OS never uses anywhere near 2GB in a
    workstation.

    Also, with 4GB, the chipset may use some address space and you will only get
    something like 3.4GB.
    John
     
    JohnR66, Jan 27, 2006
    #8
  9. David J Taylor

    Guest

    BEEN DREAMING OF LIVING THE GOOD LIFE, ON YOUR TERMS? YOU CAN DO
    THIS!


    You will now become part of a Mail Order business. In this business
    the
    product is not solid or tangible, it's a service. You are in the
    business
    of developing Mailing Lists. You deal with information, and
    information is
    power. Many large corporations are happy to pay vast amounts for
    quality
    lists. However, the money made from the mailing lists is secondary to
    the
    income which is made from people like you and me asking to be included
    on
    such a list.


    I used to work my butt off for someone else, but not any more. Getting
    on
    to the internet changed everything. I came across an article that said
    you
    could make thousands of dollars within weeks with a once only
    investment of
    $6.00! "Yeah, right, what a scam," is what I thought. I was skeptical
    to
    say the least. Still, I was curious. I figured I could stand to lose
    six
    bucks, so I kept reading.


    I'm pretty glad I did. All you had to do was send $1.00 to the 6 names
    at
    the addresses listed in the article. Then, you placed your name and
    address
    at the bottom of the list at position #6, and posted the article to at
    least
    200 newsgroups.


    I felt pretty silly after I'd sent the letters, and it took a bit of
    time to
    post the message to all those newsgroups. To be honest, I pretty much
    forget about the whole deal there and then. "It's only six dollars. No
    big
    deal."


    Was I in for a surprise. GUESS WHAT! Within 7 days, I started getting
    money
    in the mail! It was amazing! I figured it would end, but it didn't.
    The
    money just kept rolling in. I made about $18.00 in the first week. By
    the
    end of the second week I'd made a total of over $980. $10,328 in week
    three, and it just went on and on. This is now my fifth month and I'm
    sitting on about $273,000. Needless to say I quit my job a while back.
    (I
    used to work as a computer software manager)


    It was certainly worth the $6.00 and change for the stamps. I've spent
    more
    than that on the lottery, without a cent to show for it!!


    Print a copy of this article, so you can refer back to it, or cut and
    paste
    it to Notepad or Word. The process is very simple and is comprised of
    3
    easy steps. If you're wondering why I'm letting you in on this, I'll
    explain it to you shortly. Bear with me. This works.


    STEP 1: Get 6 separate sheets of paper and write the following on each;

    "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST."


    Get 6 US$1.00 bills (or the equivalent in your local currency) and
    place a
    dollar and a note in each of the 6 envelopes. Fold the bill into the
    paper
    in order to prevent it from being seen, and possibly stolen.


    You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each containing a dollar and
    the
    note. Don't forget to add your name and address.


    Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:


    #1 R. Arambasic, 9 Ashmore St, Brunswick, VIC, Australia 3056
    #2 S. Vouge, P.O. Box 5173, New York, N.Y. 10163, USA
    #3 R. Dumancic, Mlinarska 22A, Zagreb, 10000, Croatia
    #4 D. Lozina, 128 Nicholson St, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia 3065
    #5 B. Spaleta, 39 Stewart Gve, Campbellfield, VIC, Australia 3061
    #6 J. Wurdemann, P.O. Box 912, North Branch, MN. 55056, USA


    STEP 2: Take name #1 off the list above, move the other names up (6
    becomes
    5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and add YOUR name as number 6 on the list.
    STEP 3: Post your amended article to at least 200 newsgroups. (There's
    heaps
    out there) All you need is 200, but the more you post, the more money
    you
    make!


    ********* HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS (It's easy) *********


    1. You don't need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting.
    Cut
    and paste this letter to your Notepad. 2. Remember to eliminate the #1

    position, move everyone up a spot (re-number everyone else's
    positions),
    and add yourself as #6. 3. Save your new notepad file as a .txt file.
    If
    you want to do your postings in different sittings, you'll always have
    this
    file to go back to.


    *** NETSCAPE USERS ***


    Step 4. Within the Netscape program, go to the pull down window
    entitled
    'Window' select 'NetscapeNews'. Then from the pull down menu
    'Options',
    select 'Show all Newsgroups'. After a few moments a list of all the
    Newsgroups on your server will show up. Click on any newsgroup you
    desire.
    >From within this newsgroup, click on the 'TO NEWS' button, which should

    be
    in the top left corner of the newsgroups page. This will bring up a
    message
    box.


    Step 5. Fill in the Subject. This will be the header that everyone sees
    as
    they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group.


    Step 6. Highlight the entire contents of your .txt file, and cut and
    paste
    it the letter into the body of your posting.


    Step 7. Hit the 'Send' Button in the upper left corner. You're done
    with your
    first post! Congratulations...


    *** INTERNET EXPLORER USERS ***


    Step 4. Go to newsgroups and select 'Post an Article'.
    Step 5. Fill in the subject.
    Step 6. Same as #6 above
    Step 7. Hit the 'Post' button.


    Alternatively, you can use a program like Forte Agent, which you can
    find on
    the Web.


    THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post
    away,
    after you get the hang of it. It takes about 30 seconds for each
    newsgroup!


    **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST TO, THE MORE MONEY YOU'LL
    MAKE!!
    POST A MINIMUM OF 200**


    There you go! You'll begin receiving money from around the world
    within
    days! You may eventually even want to rent a P.O. Box due to the large

    amount of mail you'll receive. Should you wish to stay anonymous, you
    may
    use a pseudonym, as the postman will deliver it just the same.


    **MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.**


    So, why am I letting you in on this. Let me explain.


    Out of 200 postings, say I receive only 5 replies. I make $5.00 with
    my
    name at #6 on the letter. Now, if each of the 5 individuals who sent
    me
    $1.00 make the minimum 200 postings, with my name at #5, and only 5
    people
    respond to each of the original 5, that's another $25.00 for me. Now
    those
    25 each make 200 posts with my name at #4, and with 5 replies each, I
    earn
    an additional $125.00! Those 125 turn around and post the minimum 200
    with
    my name at #3 and receive 5 replies each, I make $626.00 more! Get the
    picture? Five responses is actually a below norm response rate. The
    average is about 15 to 25. For example, here's what you can expect to
    earn from 15 responses:


    at #6 $15.00 at #5 $225.00 at #4 $3,375.00 at #3 $50,625.00 at
    #2
    $759,375.00 at #1 $11,390,625.00


    When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the latest
    posting in
    the newsgroups, and send out your $6.00 to names on the list, putting
    your
    name at number 6 again (which is what I'm doing), and start posting
    again.


    The thing to remember is that thousands of people all over the world
    are
    joining the internet and reading these articles everyday, just as you
    are
    now!!


    Can you afford $6.00? I believe so. (I just didn't buy lunch that day)



    People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you
    the
    money? Doesn't matter. There are tons of new honest users and new
    honest
    people who are joining the internet and newsgroups everyday, willing to
    give
    it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users daily.


    This will work for you. Be honest, be fair. Remember, what goes around

    comes around.
     
    , Jan 27, 2006
    #9
  10. David J Taylor

    m II Guest

    PORN! J. Wurdemann, P.O. Box 912, North Branch, MN. 55056, USA

    wrote:

    > Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
    >
    >
    > #1 R. Arambasic, 9 Ashmore St, Brunswick, VIC, Australia 3056
    > #2 S. Vouge, P.O. Box 5173, New York, N.Y. 10163, USA
    > #3 R. Dumancic, Mlinarska 22A, Zagreb, 10000, Croatia
    > #4 D. Lozina, 128 Nicholson St, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia 3065
    > #5 B. Spaleta, 39 Stewart Gve, Campbellfield, VIC, Australia 3061
    > #6 J. Wurdemann, P.O. Box 912, North Branch, MN. 55056, USA
     
    m II, Jan 27, 2006
    #10
  11. JohnR66 wrote:
    > "Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> David J Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >>> If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your
    >>> image editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?

    >>
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx
    >>
    >> Windows XP Professional and Windows Server 2003 Memory Support. The
    >> maximum
    >> amount of memory that can be supported on Windows XP Professional and
    >> Windows Server 2003 is also 4 GB. However, Windows Server 2003,
    >> Enterprise Edition supports 32 GB of physical RAM and Windows Server
    >> 2003, Datacenter Edition supports 64 GB of physical RAM using the
    >> PAE feature. The virtual address space of processes and applications is
    >> still
    >> limited to
    >> 2 GB unless the /3GB switch is used in the Boot.ini file. When the
    >> physical
    >> RAM in the system exceeds 16 GB and the /3GB switch is used, the
    >> operating system will ignore the additional RAM until the /3GB
    >> switch is removed. This
    >> is because of the increased size of the kernel required to support
    >> more Page
    >> Table Entries. The assumption is made that the administrator would
    >> rather not lose the /3GB functionality silently and automatically;
    >> therefore, this
    >> requires the administrator to explicitly change this setting.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Rita
    >>

    > To expand on this, even with the 3 GB switch set, each 32 bit
    > application gets 2 GB of space max. So one app would have 2 GB and
    > the other could have the remaining 1GB.
    >
    > If you put 4GB in a non server machine, it is important to use the
    > switch or you are wasting memory as the OS never uses anywhere near
    > 2GB in a workstation.
    >
    > Also, with 4GB, the chipset may use some address space and you will
    > only get something like 3.4GB.
    > John


    Thanks, John. That's the first on-topic answer I've seen.

    Is there any chipset (and/or graphics card) which allows Windows XP to see
    the full 4GB?

    Thanks,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 27, 2006
    #11
  12. G- Blank wrote:
    > In article <XFbCf.9780$>,
    > "David J Taylor"
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your
    >> image editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> David

    >
    > The image you see on screen is a cached representation of
    > any much bigger file. I think your referring to ram memory
    > but can't be too sure as you have stated this awkwardly.


    OK, I mean "does Windows report all the 4GB of physical memory as being
    available to the operating system".

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 27, 2006
    #12
  13. David J Taylor

    Ron Hunter Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your image
    > editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > David
    >
    >

    No HD or memory card gets the full rated space. There is 'overhead' to
    the format process. Live with it.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 27, 2006
    #13
  14. David J Taylor

    ASAAR Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 02:56:59 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote:

    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >> If you are fortunate enough to have 4GB of physical memory for your
    >> image editing with Windows XP, are you actually seeing 4GB?

    > . . .
    > No HD or memory card gets the full rated space. There is 'overhead' to
    > the format process. Live with it.


    Do you really think that David is talking about secondary storage
    instead of 4GB of RAM? You must have missed replies from Rita,
    JohnR66 and then David's followup. They're all in the thread,
    unless your newsreader messed up (it happens sometimes).
     
    ASAAR, Jan 27, 2006
    #14
  15. David J Taylor

    Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:

    > Is there any chipset (and/or graphics card) which allows Windows XP to see
    > the full 4GB?


    Yes. They are called "64 bit CPU's".
     
    , Jan 27, 2006
    #15
  16. wrote:
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> Is there any chipset (and/or graphics card) which allows Windows XP
    >> to see the full 4GB?

    >
    > Yes. They are called "64 bit CPU's".


    The "seeing less than the installed 4GB" issue is also present with 64-bit
    CPUs.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 27, 2006
    #16
  17. Rita Ä Berkowitz, Jan 27, 2006
    #17
  18. Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
    > David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> The "seeing less than the installed 4GB" issue is also present with
    >> 64-bit CPUs.

    >
    > Not if you are using an OS that supports it. If you want to stick
    > with MS, Windows XP Pro 64-bit will support 128GB of RAM and show it.
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/evaluation/overviews/overview.mspx


    Rita,

    Yes, that is an alternative OS, which will support 4GB. However, my
    question was about Windows XP as I don't yet wish to move to Win64,
    although that will most likely be my next OS upgrade.

    I am dealing with some quite large images - 130Mpix - which take up some
    400MB of memory each. Coupling with this with doing software development,
    plus running a 500MB+ production system, is taxing my current 1GB system
    rather!

    It seems that with Win32 today's systems don't give you access to all of
    the 4GB physical memory which many motherboards will allow, and this fact
    doesn't seem to be common knowledge.

    Thanks,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 27, 2006
    #18
  19. David J Taylor

    Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:

    > I am dealing with some quite large images - 130Mpix - which take up some
    > 400MB of memory each. Coupling with this with doing software development,
    > plus running a 500MB+ production system, is taxing my current 1GB system
    > rather!


    Sounds like you need another computer, not necessarily more memory. At
    least get that "production" stuff off your development machine.

    > It seems that with Win32 today's systems don't give you access to all of
    > the 4GB physical memory which many motherboards will allow, and this fact
    > doesn't seem to be common knowledge.


    This is not limited to Windoze. No 32b OS will provide all 4GB to a
    single process: a comparitively large swath of the address space is
    taken by the OS. You can play tricks with the page tables etc to give
    sets of processes 4GB (less PTE overhead) in aggregate, but text+data
    for each process is doing to be 2 (or 3) GB. It's unfortunately easy
    to come up against this limit nowadays. Even if 4GB were available,
    it's still not enough. Maybe Intel/AMD/et al can make processors that
    automatically grow address and data lines on the fly?
     
    , Jan 27, 2006
    #19
  20. David J Taylor wrote:


    > Yes, that is an alternative OS, which will support 4GB. However, my
    > question was about Windows XP as I don't yet wish to move to Win64,
    > although that will most likely be my next OS upgrade.


    If you *must* use XP than your easiest solution is to use the /3GB switch in
    your Boot.ini file. Plus, if the application(s) you are using aren't
    written for the 64-bit platform you won't be getting the full benefit from
    Win64, so I see your point of not wanting a 64-bit platform.

    > I am dealing with some quite large images - 130Mpix - which take up
    > some 400MB of memory each. Coupling with this with doing software
    > development, plus running a 500MB+ production system, is taxing my
    > current 1GB system rather!


    Then it seems like you are at the crossroads of making some changes in
    hardware if this is a system that you'll be making money off of using it as
    a tool. If this is a hobby machine than it might be worth suffering with.
    In the end, it might be more cost effective to upgrade, especially if you
    are wasting money on lost production time.

    > It seems that with Win32 today's systems don't give you access to all
    > of the 4GB physical memory which many motherboards will allow, and
    > this fact doesn't seem to be common knowledge.


    Sure it's common knowledge. Not everyone buys a MB that can use 16GB of
    memory and not expect to run an OS that doesn't support it. You just got
    bit by an afterthought on your part you didn't researched.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Jan 27, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Frisbee®
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    791
    Frisbee®
    Oct 22, 2007
  2. TBone
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    827
    TBone
    Oct 30, 2007
  3. shoplifes

    You have come? Definitely you have not gone

    shoplifes, Nov 25, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    589
    shoplifes
    Nov 25, 2007
  4. Geronimo
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    369
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Oct 28, 2004
  5. pez
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,518
    Dragon Without Wings
    Mar 15, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page