Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: 32bit 4Gb Memory Limit Explained

12 Oct 2009   #31
whs
Microsoft MVP

Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
 
 

I think we have beaten this horse to death.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
12 Oct 2009   #32
chev65

Windows 7 Ult, Windows 8.1 Pro,
 
 

Which is why I don't bother taking part in these theoretical conversations.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
12 Oct 2009   #33
Digerati

Windows 7 Profession 64-bit
 
 

Probably good - since this is physics, not theory.

As far as dead horses, there's many more.

But personally, I think it is up the OP, or admin to stifle contributions.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

12 Oct 2009   #34
Corpsecrank

Win7 64bit Ultimate
 
 

Yeah we should probably have stopped a few pages back after all the post with actual facts to back them up and such. It is now starting to turn into something completely different from the original point.

Thanks to those who did contribute additional useful facts to all of this.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
06 Dec 2009   #35
Geoff Chappell

Windows Vista
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by H2SO4 View Post
Completely agree. That article is entirely misguided. I think the conspiratorial tone was meant to raise his profile, as opposed to actually explaining the issue properly.
Properly? Well, the article's issue is licensing. It's in a section of my website that deals with other aspects of licensing. Its central claim is simply that 32-bit Windows Vista has the operating-system support for using memory above 4GB but that tamper-protected license values prevent the operating system from putting that support into use. Windows Vista is the first 32-bit (client) version of Windows for which this is true. That's the article's issue. If you have a different issue that you want explained, then that's your problem. If you think my chosen issue is not explained properly, then show where I'm factually incorrect or where I overlook something I ought not.

Conspiratorial tone? If Microsoft had a clear statement even roughly similar to my article's claim, then of course I would have no article. I don't say that Microsoft planned anything wicked. I don't go further than saying that Microsoft finds it at least convenient to have a limit that matches a widely held misunderstanding. I note that Microsoft says strikingly little, that some of what little it does say is absurd, and that none of what it says is open to testing (on Windows Vista). I suspect that marketing considerations have some play in this, given that Microsoft and others gain if consumers move to 64-bit Windows faster than they might otherwise. What's your problem with any of that?
Quote:
The dilemma faced by MS came down to two choices:
That is essentially what the article says Microsoft says, too. But the article dismisses it as disingenuous and gives a reason. The dichotomy you present is false. In your phrasing, the falsity is that your #2 can be met only by a license restriction. There were other solutions, with backwards compatibility, which could have been implemented using existing facilities.
Quote:
The guy's a ranter.
OK, I don't know that when you presented Microsoft's argument, above, you were offering it as criticism of my article, but if you were, then you would appear to have at least one of the distinguishing characteristics of ranting, namely of not acknowledging, let alone attending, to the other party's counter-arguments.

Generally, if someone writes that X is false because of Y, then fair criticism is that you argue something like that Y is false or that its truth would not invalidate X. If you just reassert X without even acknowledging that Y has been put as a counter-argument, then you're certainly not aiming for fair criticism.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Dec 2009   #36
tcsenter

Windows XP
 
 

Quote:
Conspiratorial tone? If Microsoft had a clear statement even roughly similar to my article's claim, then of course I would have no article. I don't say that Microsoft planned anything wicked. I don't go further than saying that Microsoft finds it at least convenient to have a limit that matches a widely held misunderstanding. I note that Microsoft says strikingly little, that some of what little it does say is absurd, and that none of what it says is open to testing (on Windows Vista).
There was plenty coming from Microsoft (through developer channels) about this issue six years ago when Microsoft decided that 64-bit would be its only path to > 4GB on client/desktop OS due to well-documented driver issues in consumer space, and subsequently assured developers they needn't be concerned about whether their drivers for 32-bit MS client/desktop OS could cope with addresses larger than 4GB because there would never be a MS client/desktop OS where this would happen or be supported (but vendors of server/enterprise/professional hardware would). e.g.

Part 3: Memory Protection Technologies (See discussion under Driver Compatibility)

Physical Address Extension - PAE Memory and Windows

Operating Systems and PAE Support

The RAM reported by the System Properties dialog box and the System Information tool is less than you expect in Windows Vista or in Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later version

The system memory that is reported in the System Information dialog box in Windows Vista is less than you expect if 4 GB of RAM is installed

More recent discussion:

Mark's Blog : Pushing the Limits of Windows: Physical Memory (See section titled Windows Client Memory Limits)

Lastly, why would Microsoft neuter PAE on client/desktop space to a maximum 4GB? If you don't like Microsoft's explanation why, maybe you'll better prefer Linus Torvald's explanation why Microsoft would do this....

Because "PAE really really sucks"
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Dec 2009   #37
pallesenw

Windows
 
 

Who cares what Linus once said while he was drunk?
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Dec 2009   #38
zigzag3143

Win 8 Release candidate 8400
 
 

Guys

Hi and welcome

A- you are replying to someone who isnt even on this site anymore (10/2009) thread.

B- If you search you will find this topic has been beaten to death regularly for months.

C- Linus when drunk is slightly off topic dont you think.

Just an FYI for you all.

Again welcome and have fun

Ken J+
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Dec 2009   #39
pallesenw

Windows
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by zigzag3143 View Post
C- Linus when drunk is slightly off topic dont you think
tcsenter linked to an amusing story from a guy called Linus.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
11 Dec 2009   #40
tcsenter

Windows XP
 
 

The person I was replying to posted four days ago.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 32bit 4Gb Memory Limit Explained




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
MTU Limit - Test and change your connection's MTU limit
An MTU limit that is set too high can cause fragmented packets and packet loss on your connection. This tutorial will explain how to test if your MTU limit is sending fragmented packets and will explain how to find what value you should be using. 1) Open an elevated command prompt and type: ...
Tutorials
Uncertain about memory changes - 32bit to 64bit;
Greetings, people! :thumbsup: After moreless a year making this idea into a decision, I came to the conclusion I was really silly not to ever upgrade or change my basic OS stats, and thus, always suffered with this under-the-average performance, overall - which led me to see I really need more...
Installation & Setup
memory limit on 32-bit applications running on 64-bit windows?
It is my understanding that, with Windows 32-bit, the OS can only access up to 4gb of Ram. To get access to larger amounts of Ram (such as 8, 16, or 32gb), one must have Windows 64-bit installed. Regarding applications though... if running a 32-bit application on 64-bit Windows, is the...
Performance & Maintenance
Can't see all my memory - not a 4GB limit problem.
I have an old HP A1030N with a PGTD1-LA (Goldfish3) motherboard and a P4 3GHz HT processor. I have an Audigy Soundblaster something-or-other sound card and an NVidia GeForce 9400GT video card. I'm running Windows 7 32-bit Ultimate. For a long time I've been running with 1.5GB DDR2 RAM (2x256 +...
Hardware & Devices
Windows 7 memory limit
Does anyone know if the 32bit version of windows 7 is going to have the 4GB memory limit that previous installs have? Installed onto Dell Latitude D630 with no issues. LOVE the new control panel. I think windows has finally done something real good here, as long as they write drivers like a mother....
General Discussion
mem test finding errors outside my memory limit...
is this normal??? yes or no http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/sotorious2000/IMG00018-20091129-1328.jpg
Performance & Maintenance


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App