Boot Camped Win Xp Pro Dont "see" 6gb Ram

[enoughsaid]

Hi there

I recently installed 6gb of ram to my Macpro 2,8.
But for some reason windows cant see more than 2gigs, i also upgrade my
mac book pro memory to 4gigs, and win xp pro can see 3 of theme (as i was told)
Why mac pro win xp sees only 2 out of 6?
Is anyone have any suggestion ??

Thanx in advance for any response

PS i heard that this \3gb switch on xp doesnt do much.

 

[AndyC]

I think you need the 64bit version of XP to get anymore than 3.5gb

 

[enoughsaid]

Thank you for you response

you mean that there is a way for my already
installed xp pro 32 to "see" 3,5gigs??

And if i upgrade to 64bit (xp or vista) i wont have
software compatibility issues ?? (running Adobe, Corel, Autocad, Roxio etc.)

 

[richard.mac]

32 bit operating system can only see 3.2 GB of RAM. youll have to upgrade to either XP 64-bit or Vista 64-bit to see the rest.

ask the developers of your software to see if they will work under 64-bit.

 

[Stridder44]

Thank you for you response

you mean that there is a way for my already
installed xp pro 32 to "see" 3,5gigs??

And if i upgrade to 64bit (xp or vista) i wont have
software compatibility issues ?? (running Adobe, Corel, Autocad, Roxio etc.)

No, there is no way for a 32-bit OS to see any more than 4 GB of RAM (500-800 MB of which you never even see, so really more like 3.2 - 3.5 GB).

As far as compatibility issues goes? Yes with XP 64. XP, despite what many seem to feel on this forum (Mac forum mind you), is dead. Moreover, XP 64 was never any good to begin with. Vista 64 is the opposite. It's very solid, fast, and compatible with a vast majority of software.

 

[enoughsaid]

thank you for your response
i got the part for upgrading to 64bit
but about the 3,2 limit how can i get there ? my xp sees only 2gb

 

[Neil321]

No, there is no way for a 32-bit OS to see any more than 4 GB of RAM (500-800 MB of which you never even see, so really more like 3.2 - 3.5 GB).

As far as compatibility issues goes? Yes with XP 64. XP, despite what many seem to feel on this forum (Mac forum mind you), is dead. Moreover, XP 64 was never any good to begin with. Vista 64 is the opposite. It's very solid, fast, and compatible with a vast majority of software.

I'm sorry to go off topic here but why do you have such a hard time dealing with the FACT that allot of people & not just on this forum think Vista is a crap OS

 

[TBi]

I'm sorry to go off topic here but why do you have such a hard time dealing with the FACT that allot of people & not just on this forum think Vista is a crap OS

I know an equal amount of people who thinks Mac's are crap. It's amazing what people think when they haven't tried it much or had a bad experience.

For me Vista has been totally rock solid and i'm very happy with it.

XP 64 was never any good to begin with

I have to disagree with this too. XP-64 is very good and very stable. It's problem is the lack of support by third party companies. Unfortunately the market spoke so MS haven't supported it as much as it should have. Vista 64 is all XP 64 should have been and more.

 

[enoughsaid]

please guys i need an answer on how can i reach 3,5 or 4 gigs with my already installed xp pro 32

 

[richard.mac]

thank you for your response
i got the part for upgrading to 64bit
but about the 3,2 limit how can i get there ? my xp sees only 2gb

i think 32-bit sees between 2-4 GB. try a reboot it might change. but ultimately you want to take advantage of all your RAM.

 

[TBi]

please guys i need an answer on how can i reach 3,5 or 4 gigs with my already installed xp pro 32

I think the 2GB limit is imposed by the Mac's BIOS. I've read about this before. You can't see the normal 3.5GB's that you see on normal PC's.

Your best bet is to install 64bit windows, that way you'll see all 6GB.

 

[enoughsaid]

thank you TBi & all responses were very useful

 

[Neil321]

I know an equal amount of people who thinks Mac's are crap. It's amazing what people think when they haven't tried it much or had a bad experience.

For me Vista has been totally rock solid and i'm very happy with it.



I have to disagree with this too. XP-64 is very good and very stable. It's problem is the lack of support by third party companies. Unfortunately the market spoke so MS haven't supported it as much as it should have. Vista 64 is all XP 64 should have been and more.

Yep i understand that allot of people think Mac's are crap, but I'm one of the many people who have to deal with daily issues with it, i work for a college teaching IT and it drives me nuts, granted i don't have access to alot of admin privileges so this may be part to blame

 

[ayeying]

On Boot Camp, we use a method where we can emulate BIOS so Windows can boot off of it. However, our BIOS is flawed in which installing a 32-bit OS results in 2GB (for Mac Pro), 2.98/3GB (MacBook/MacBook Pro/MacBook Air).

 

[deltaiscain]

I know an equal amount of people who thinks Mac's are crap. It's amazing what people think when they haven't tried it much or had a bad experience.

For me Vista has been totally rock solid and i'm very happy with it.



I have to disagree with this too. XP-64 is very good and very stable. It's problem is the lack of support by third party companies. Unfortunately the market spoke so MS haven't supported it as much as it should have. Vista 64 is all XP 64 should have been and more.

Not to crack down the mojave experiment, but they were given high end pc's, that were specially configured by professionals to run vista as best as possible.

 

[Eidorian]

I'm sorry to go off topic here but why do you have such a hard time dealing with the FACT that allot of people & not just on this forum think Vista is a crap OS

Maybe because Vista is the best 64-bit Windows solution right now?

Not to crack down the mojave experiment, but they were given high end pc's, that were specially configured by professionals to run vista as best as possible.

I'm sure hard pressed to find a quad core Windows desktop for less then the price of a Mac Pro.

 

[TBi]

Not to crack down the mojave experiment, but they were given high end pc's, that were specially configured by professionals to run vista as best as possible.

As opposed to those cheapo laptops/PCs people buy which run Vista (and XP) as bad as possible...

I can't stand running Vista on 1GB of ram, nor can i stand running OSX on 1GB of ram.

 

[Consultant]

XP 64bit is awful. If you want 64bit windows, you probably want to go with Vista.

64bit Vista > 32bit Vista
32bit xp > 64bit XP

No, there is no way for a 32-bit OS to see any more than 4 GB of RAM (500-800 MB of which you never even see, so really more like 3.2 - 3.5 GB).

As far as compatibility issues goes? Yes with XP 64. XP, despite what many seem to feel on this forum (Mac forum mind you), is dead. Moreover, XP 64 was never any good to begin with. Vista 64 is the opposite. It's very solid, fast, and compatible with a vast majority of software.

Actually PowerMac G5 and Tiger (32bit OS) can see >4gb of ram.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/stats/powermac_g5_dual_2.0.html

Just because it's NOT possible for microsoft windows (without MS making you pay for an inferior OS that is XP 64bit which lack driver support), doesn't mean it's impossible.

In addition, isn't there a restriction on RAM availability on the less expensive versions of Vista?

I'm sure hard pressed to find a quad core Windows desktop for less then the price of a Mac Pro.

Nothing as QUIET as a Mac Pro at the same price anyway.

 

[ayeying]

Not to crack down the mojave experiment, but they were given high end pc's, that were specially configured by professionals to run vista as best as possible.

they were running it on dual core HP laptops. similar to the specs on the MacBook Pros.

 

[ayeying]

Actually PowerMac G5 and Tiger (32bit OS) can see >4gb of ram.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powermac_g5/stats/powermac_g5_dual_2.0.html

Just because it's NOT possible for microsoft windows (without MS making you pay for an inferior OS that is XP 64bit which lack driver support), doesn't mean it's impossible.

In addition, isn't there a restriction on RAM availability on the less expensive versions of Vista?

It is not the OS that can't see the total 4GB, it is the BIOS. We use an EFI method and for the older G5s, it uses also something different from BIOS. This is a hardware restriction, not software. 32bit can read upto 4GB but if your hardware can';t read it, it wouldn't matter what OS you're running

 

[Eidorian]

Nothing as QUIET as a Mac Pro at the same price anyway.

I'll admit that the Mac Pro has some fine internal design and thermal controls but is it REALLY worth it when my PC tower is quiet enough? Keep in mind this is for running Windows only.

The only time I notice the sound is when gaming or at 100% CPU load.

 

[Stridder44]

I'm sorry to go off topic here but why do you have such a hard time dealing with the FACT that allot of people & not just on this forum think Vista is a crap OS

I'm not going to reiterate what others here have put so well already, but you are denying that Vista 64 is the best 64-bit Windows OS? What's your background on Vista? Have you used it recently (within the past couple months) on a decent system for more than 5 minutes?

I have no problem if someone would rather not run Vista; it's their money/personal preference, of course they can do whatever they want. The "hard time" I have here is all the bulls@#t and FUD people spread about it (and being this is a Mac forum, it happens shows up a lot more often).

This is coming from someone who runs Leopard for pretty much everything (except gaming, which I do in Vista 64, save a few games that run on OS X).

 

[Neil321]

I'm not going to reiterate what others here have put so well already, but you are denying that Vista 64 is the best 64-bit Windows OS? What's your background on Vista? Have you used it recently (within the past couple months) on a decent system for more than 5 minutes?

I have no problem if someone would rather not run Vista; it's their money/personal preference, of course they can do whatever they want. The "hard time" I have here is all the bulls@#t and FUD people spread about it (and being this is a Mac forum, it happens shows up a lot more often).

This is coming from someone who runs Leopard for pretty much everything (except gaming, which I do in Vista 64, save a few games that run on OS X).

No I'm not denying Vista is the best 64bit OS,yes i have plenty of experience using it ( on up to date machines ) as like i posted i teach IT, and as i stated my grip is if you don't have admin privileges then its a PITA

I don't get where your coming from with this FUD thing if people try Vista & think its crap then they have tried Vista and think its crap

 

[TBi]

It is not the OS that can't see the total 4GB, it is the BIOS. We use an EFI method and for the older G5s, it uses also something different from BIOS. This is a hardware restriction, not software. 32bit can read upto 4GB but if your hardware can';t read it, it wouldn't matter what OS you're running

The BIOS is a program so it is software, thus the problem is a software issue and not hardware. The hardware can do it, it's just limited by the BIOS and the BIOS is limiting the OS.

No I'm not denying Vista is the best 64bit OS,yes i have plenty of experience using it ( on up to date machines ) as like i posted i teach IT, and as i stated my grip is if you don't have admin privileges then its a PITA

Try running OSX without admin privileges and see how fun that is

I don't get where your coming from with this FUD thing if people try Vista & think its crap then they have tried Vista and think its crap

It's amazing how much peoples preconceptions can affect their experience with something. If you use Vista thinking "Oh god this is a load of crap", then you'll probably walk away thinking "Oh god that was a load of crap". That was the whole point of the Mojave experience. People went in thinking they were using a whole new version of windows, I.E. not Vista, and were amazed by it.

Actually just thinking about it, it's a bit like racism. People hate a person of a certain colour, but have no reason why they hate them. Even if they meet the nicest person in the world but that person is that certain colour then they will still hate that person.

 

[Stridder44]

It's amazing how much peoples preconceptions can affect their experience with something. If you use Vista thinking "Oh god this is a load of crap", then you'll probably walk away thinking "Oh god that was a load of crap". That was the whole point of the Mojave experience. People went in thinking they were using a whole new version of windows, I.E. not Vista, and were amazed by it.

Actually just thinking about it, it's a bit like racism. People hate a person of a certain colour, but have no reason why they hate them. Even if they meet the nicest person in the world but that person is that certain colour then they will still hate that person.

Exactly. I used to dislike Vista myself. I gave it a shot, and didn't like it (granted this was before SP1 was released). Then I got my MBP in February and tried it again because I understood that there are actually a lot of under the hood improvements in Vista, and hoped most of the bugs had been worked out by then. I tried XP (32-bit) & Vista (both 32 and 64 bit). In the end, Vista 64 turned out work out much better.

Can I ask why, Neil321, you think Vista is crap? ('it takes up more resources' is not really an answer; the same could be said about Leopard)