XP Boot Camp not useing 4gbs of ram

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by PapaGino, Apr 18, 2016.

  1. PapaGino macrumors member

    PapaGino

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Location:
    Londonderry NH
    #1
    I missed the days of XP so for a bit fun I installed XP Media Center Edition 2005 on my mid 2009 17in Macbook Pro 3.06ghz 8GB. First off I am aware that 32bit systems only can access 4gbs as a max. I always used x64 systems (even back in the day XP x64 Edition) so when it comes to x86 I'm not the best at it. The system reports only total of 2.72Gbs available. I know that in "boot camp" my 9600m GT is being used. Since at first I amused that 9400m GT was being used and it was just using some of the system memory for graphics. So what would cause XP to report only 2.72Gbs? As you can see my screen shot.
    upload_2016-4-18_17-9-0.png
     
  2. iMacDragon macrumors 65816

    iMacDragon

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    the GPU ram has to be assigned a memory address space that the cpu can write to, which takes away from the 4gb, unlike with 64 bit OS where the gpu ram can have it's address space anywhere, and a bunch of other book keeping stuff in the BIOS that gets assigned to various ROM's. It's perfectly normal for XP to only have access to between 2.7-3.3gb of ram on a 4gb system.
     
  3. RevToTheRedline macrumors 6502a

    RevToTheRedline

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
  4. PapaGino thread starter macrumors member

    PapaGino

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Location:
    Londonderry NH
    #4
    I wish they had drivers for XP X64 edition, but sadly apple doesnt provide them. Also that is strange i would think if the 9600m GT is running it wouldn't need any to reserve any ram for 9400m GT.
     
  5. iMacDragon macrumors 65816

    iMacDragon

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    It's not reserving ram for the 9400, the 9600's own ram has to be inside the 4gb addressible ram area for the OS to be able to use it.

    Well, it might also allocate the 9400's ram and not use it for all I know too.
     
  6. PapaGino thread starter macrumors member

    PapaGino

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Location:
    Londonderry NH
    #6
    Oh, But i thought the 9600GT had desecrate 512mb GDDR3 which wouldn't
    Oh, But the 9600GT has discrete 512mb of GDDR3 that it uses only for graphics. So it must just be the 9400 still allocating memory for some reason i would assume.
     
  7. duervo macrumors 68000

    duervo

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    #7
    The 9600 has dedicated GDDR3. The 9400 has shared memory. If you have a 9400 in there (you won't have both that and a 9600), then it's using 256MB of system RAM, so the 2.7GB makes sense after factoring that in along with the rest.

    Interesting little trip down memory lane (no pun intended), but I wouldn't go beyond that if it were me. Get that mess off your system, if it were me. Keep it to the 32bit limits (the trip down memory lane, I mean ... ok that one was on purpose), and get rid of it. I'm calling it a "mess" because it hasn't been receiving any security updates for years at this point. So, it's like a corpse that's been rotting in the sun for ages by now.
     
  8. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #8
    - The Mid 2009 MBP has both integrated 9400M and discrete 9600M GT.
     
  9. PapaGino thread starter macrumors member

    PapaGino

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2015
    Location:
    Londonderry NH
    #9
    Exactly what I was going to say haha.
     
  10. duervo macrumors 68000

    duervo

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    #10
    If that's the case, then that's even more data to support the numbers that you are seeing.

    That's how much memory you have left for your programs when running that crap.

    Haha
     

Share This Page