Hello all !

Just recently I upgraded my PC to 4GB of DDR2 RAM --- 2 X 2GB DDR2 RAM
Modules.

But when I plugged in the memory modules and powered up my PC, I got
an unpleasant surprise !!

Somehow the 4GB of RAM only shows up as 3587072K of Memory !! That's a
whooping 600MB of memory ****missing**** !!!

The motherboard for my PC is Biostar's P4M890-M7-SE and so far it
hasn't given me any problem.

The motherboard has a built-in vga, which I use. I allocate 16MB of
RAM as "shared memory" for VGA, and the "AGP-Aperture" I give it 32MB,
all min figure.

When I first built the PC, I used a 1GB DDR2 memory module. The mobo
showed me the correct mem figures, ie., 1GB (1024MB) MINUS the 16MB
(of shared memory) and a 1MB of "T-Seg memory".

When I purchased a second 1GB DDR2 memory and plugged it in, again the
mobo didn't give me any problem. It correctly gave me the 2GB (2048MB)
MINUS the 17MB of shared and T-Seg memories.

However, when I plugged in the recently purchased 2 X 2GB DDR2 mem
modules, the problem occurred !!

Instead of giving me 4GB (4096MB) MINUS 17MB, all I got is 3587072K
(around 3.42GB) of memory, plus the 17 shared and "T-Seg" memories.

What's going on???

What can I do to get back the 600MB of my RAM that is
****MISSING**** ????

PLEASE HELP !!!

Thank you !!

On Aug 13, 1:30*am, Hari Hari Mau <harimau....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello all !
>
> Just recently I upgraded my PC to 4GB of DDR2 RAM --- 2 X 2GB DDR2 RAM
> Modules.
>
> But when I plugged in the memory modules and powered up my PC, I got
> an unpleasant surprise !!
>
> Somehow the 4GB of RAM only shows up as 3587072K of Memory !! That's a
> whooping 600MB of memory ****missing**** !!!

It's normal for a 32-bit system.

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

In article <353c0ef0-43ce-484c-881f-d2c7f88609e3
@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Paul Montgomery says...
> On Aug 13, 1:30*am, Hari Hari Mau <harimau....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello all !
> >
> > Just recently I upgraded my PC to 4GB of DDR2 RAM --- 2 X 2GB DDR2 RAM
> > Modules.
> >
> > But when I plugged in the memory modules and powered up my PC, I got
> > an unpleasant surprise !!
> >
> > Somehow the 4GB of RAM only shows up as 3587072K of Memory !! That's a
> > whooping 600MB of memory ****missing**** !!!
>
> It's normal for a 32-bit system.
>
> http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html
>
Stupid ****...that's the POST amount he's showing and its got **** all
to do with 32bit.

--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article <c9b44d15-81e3-4940-837e-8a91e6d92800
@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, Hari Hari Mau says...
> Hello all !
>
> Just recently I upgraded my PC to 4GB of DDR2 RAM --- 2 X 2GB DDR2 RAM
> Modules.
>
> But when I plugged in the memory modules and powered up my PC, I got
> an unpleasant surprise !!
>
> Somehow the 4GB of RAM only shows up as 3587072K of Memory !! That's a
> whooping 600MB of memory ****missing**** !!!
>
> The motherboard for my PC is Biostar's P4M890-M7-SE and so far it
> hasn't given me any problem.
>
> The motherboard has a built-in vga, which I use. I allocate 16MB of
> RAM as "shared memory" for VGA, and the "AGP-Aperture" I give it 32MB,
> all min figure.
>
> When I first built the PC, I used a 1GB DDR2 memory module. The mobo
> showed me the correct mem figures, ie., 1GB (1024MB) MINUS the 16MB
> (of shared memory) and a 1MB of "T-Seg memory".
>
> When I purchased a second 1GB DDR2 memory and plugged it in, again the
> mobo didn't give me any problem. It correctly gave me the 2GB (2048MB)
> MINUS the 17MB of shared and T-Seg memories.
>
> However, when I plugged in the recently purchased 2 X 2GB DDR2 mem
> modules, the problem occurred !!
>
> Instead of giving me 4GB (4096MB) MINUS 17MB, all I got is 3587072K
> (around 3.42GB) of memory, plus the 17 shared and "T-Seg" memories.
>
> What's going on???
>
> What can I do to get back the 600MB of my RAM that is
> ****MISSING**** ????
>
Go into the BIOS, probably in the Advanced section and see if there's a
"Memory Remap" or "Memory Hole 15M-16M" option and enable it.


--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

Conor wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):

> Stupid ****...that's the POST amount he's showing and its got
> **** all to do with 32bit.

Wrong, as usual, coonertard. It has everything to do with 32-bit.
Everything.

--
Cod Almighty

On 2008-08-13, Brian Cryer <not.here@localhost> wrote:
>
> Its got everything to do with it being a 32bit system. A 32bit system has a
> 4GB address space. Out of that address space comes all memory mapped

Careful there - even the 386 had a 64Gb logical address space,
although admittedly it could only be directly connected to 4Gb
physical memory. Using this logic the 286 and predecessors would
have been limited to 64Kb memory as 16 bit machines.

> There is a work around (on Windows) to access the remaining RAM, its known
> as Physical Address Extension. I suggest the OP researches PAE. Basically it
> takes advantage of the fact that the all modern PCs are actually running on
> 64 bit hardware even if the OS is only 32bit. The following article should

PAE predates x86-64 - it was introduced with the Pentium Pro. It
isn't Windows-only either. What you lose is the flat memory model
since 32 bits can't directly address more than 4Gb memory, at least
on a byte-addressed architecture. However, the OS can hide much
of the muckiness from an application perspective provided no single
app needs more than 4Gb memory. If that doesn't hold things get
more interesting. It is essentially similar to the segmentffset
idea used to get the old 16 bit machines to address 1Mb memory.

--
Andrew Smallshaw
(E-Mail Removed)

On Aug 13, 9:58 am, "Ian D" <tau...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> "Conor" <conor_tur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > In article <c9b44d15-81e3-4940-837e-8a91e6d92800
>
> > Go into the BIOS, probably in the Advanced section and see if there's a
> > "Memory Remap" or "Memory Hole 15M-16M" option and enable it.
>
> > --
> > Conor
>
> If Memory Remap is enabled with a 32 bit OS, odds are that only
> 2GB will be available to the OS. The top 2GB will be locked out,
> so you're effectively back to a 2GB system. Memory Remap is for
> 64 bit OSs only.
>
> The Memory Hole 15M-16M setting is for certain ISA cards only,
> and reserves that space for those cards specifically. PCIe MBs
> don't have that setting.

I find this rather amusing, because I was at Fry's buying a
motherboard and system and we couldn' t get it to post 4GB of RAM.
The best it would do is 3.3 GB. During reboots it would change. We
tested 4 ECS motherboards. Finally tested an ASUS MB and it posted
4GB. I bought it instead of the ECS.

In all we tested 7 MB. We fried one video card and one south bridge.

Brian Cryer wrote:
>
> Its got everything to do with it being a 32bit system. A 32bit system
> has a 4GB address space. Out of that address space comes all memory
> mapped devices, the largest of which is normally the graphics card.
> For example if you had a 512MB graphic card then that would leave
> just 3.5GB of address space for the RAM. (I think the OP stated he
> was using 16MB of shared memory which would indicate that the
> graphics card isn't the main culpret.) There are other devices which
> also have to fit into the address space, all of which reduce the
> addressable range left for the RAM. So its normal to expect to see
> only about 3.5GB of RAM even though the system has 4GB of RAM
> installed. Looking at Paul's post, all of this and more is covered in
> the link he provided.
So why don't my or my g/f's PCs show 1.5gig out of 2 gig of installed
memory, considering we both have 512meg video cards?
--
SteveH

SteveH wrote:
> Brian Cryer wrote:
>
>> Its got everything to do with it being a 32bit system. A 32bit system
>> has a 4GB address space. Out of that address space comes all memory
>> mapped devices, the largest of which is normally the graphics card.
>> For example if you had a 512MB graphic card then that would leave
>> just 3.5GB of address space for the RAM. (I think the OP stated he
>> was using 16MB of shared memory which would indicate that the
>> graphics card isn't the main culpret.) There are other devices which
>> also have to fit into the address space, all of which reduce the
>> addressable range left for the RAM. So its normal to expect to see
>> only about 3.5GB of RAM even though the system has 4GB of RAM
>> installed. Looking at Paul's post, all of this and more is covered in
>> the link he provided.
>
> So why don't my or my g/f's PCs show 1.5gig out of 2 gig of installed
> memory, considering we both have 512meg video cards?

Because the address space is large enough to address both your own
memory and the video memory.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

On Aug 13, 3:07*am, Conor <conor_tur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Stupid ****...that's the POST amount he's showing and its got **** all
> to do with 32bit.

WRONG, bozo.