PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

I did not find answers about it. I would like to build my old system with Mint as a playback solution and other light uses.

If it is 32bit, then it would support 4GB. It's the same limits as on Windows and on MAC.

Using Mint 17.2 64-bit would give you access to more than you can buy right now.

Thanks for that answer. Ok, so we are in the same road in regard to RAM, Windows or Linux have the same restrictions, that's clear, thank you.

jksuperstar wrote:If it is 32bit, then it would support 4GB. It's the same limits as on Windows and on MAC.

In Win XP (32bit) SP3, there are only 3.25GB out of 4GB recognized ... but that´s better than 2GB which is the theory.

Does Win 7 32bit see full 4GB of RAM ?

Bud

I understand that every version of windows 32 bits is the same.

Bud Weiser wrote:

jksuperstar wrote:If it is 32bit, then it would support 4GB. It's the same limits as on Windows and on MAC.

In Win XP (32bit) SP3, there are only 3.25GB out of 4GB recognized ... but that´s better than 2GB which is the theory.

Does Win 7 32bit see full 4GB of RAM ?

Bud

3.25GB IS 4GB. not all ram is available to be used as you wish. your computer is using all 4GB.

garyb wrote: 3.25GB IS 4GB. not all ram is available to be used as you wish. your computer is using all 4GB.

Interesting !

What was the PAE switch XP for then ?

B.t.w., I reported because system apps like SIW or Everest and even the task manager doesn´t see more than 3.25GB.
I understood I can use 2GB of RAM at max w/ every application running.

Bud

well, the switch isn't so necessary in sp3, as i remember, but i think it's mainly for memory access in systems with greater than 4GB memory. some older server boards handled more than 4GB of memory even though at the time there were only 32bit systems because some 32bit server os can handle more memory. the switch is for apps that can handle extra memory when using XP. i've never had the switch make any difference in any 32bit system with 4GB.

...or that's how i understood it...

It's 3.25GB because pci peripherals are mapped here, and treated like memory to the system (in the way a device gets accessed by the CPU, or the OS protects peripherals from bad code (which is why you need to run scope as administrator...so you have access to that memory address space and the peripherals that are addressed there.)

That explains why we can only use up to 4GB in either Linus or Windows, as long as they are 32 bit OSs, cheers for the light.

Now, I have just installed Linux Mint 17.2 Xfce and it runs very well, very cool to say the least. This OS installs all required programs from scratch, all you may possibly need, this is really impressive for a free app, but it is not really faster than a copy of Windows XP properly worked out to be light. I expected a substantial difference in performance, but there is not such a difference. Of course, installing XP, compared with Linux Mint, is a pain, it is a long process while Linus Mint takes about 40 minutes in a slow system to install the OS, all drivers, all programs, and after a reboot you are ready to go.

Well, I have finally mixed impressions about Mint… I think it could be great if you were to really use these much features offered, but I want this system for general playback purposes for my multimedia presentations, I don’t want to bother myself learning a different OS without getting a real advantage. As I said, the speed difference is negligible for what I want to do. Back to Windows.

Ahaha, yes linux really hasn't gotten any better in 20 years that I've been 'trying' it out.

I started with Slackware 7.1 on a 486 with 8MB of RAM. X windows was incredibly slow.

Seems like everyone is using Ubuntu for the servers nowadays. Yes, it seems to be stable. My cloud server never crashes. I used to have a server in my basement, but it would corrupt itself after a while. I was still able to get all my data back. The drive/SD card was fine, it just wouldn't want to boot.

-Tom