32 bit vs 64 bit: How it relates to video cards

[rampage]

ohh how i love having 8 gig of ram, especially if i decide to go sli

as mussels has told me over the phone this brings into question a lot of reviews, whether it be gfx of software reviews, and even benchmarks..

for example .... today we are going to test tri sli with gtx280's on out windows Xp 32 bit PC with 2 gig of ram (even 4 gig will suffer) nutkick:

 

[95Viper]

Lastly, you have to do a complete install, as 64bit uses 64 bit drivers and such.

(Save all your stuff you want to keep, then install or install on a new partition - transfer your data and info - dual boot)

I don't believe you can use the premium key with ultimate. Someone correct, if I am wrong.

 

[jamupnorth]

Lastly, you have to do a complete install, as 64bit uses 64 bit drivers and such.

(Save all your stuff you want to keep, then install or install on a new partition - transfer your data and info - dual boot)

I don't believe you can use the premium key with ultimate. Someone correct, if I am wrong.

I will need to think about this as i am not sure if it will be worth it for 1 gig of ram extra ?

Or will i just wait for windows 7 ?

 

[hat]

may as well... it's just around the corner

 

[Mussels]

I have tried this and it does not seem to like the product keys on the back of 2 of my laptops ? any ideas ?

I think the offer has expired

aptops have the OEM version and i beleive MS only ships disks to retail users.

You can still get an x64 disk from somewhere and install with your key on it, just that MS wont send you one.

wat bout if i have
2gb of ram and a 512mb vid ?

Then you aren't affected.

Unless your using dx9 which shadows the ram and so in effect the game would only have 1.5gb minus sstem processes?

2GB of ram + 512MB video card means 512MB (at most) is taken by your video card leaving you 1.5GB of ram available for whatever you're doing. as to whether or not thats a problem, entirely depends on how much ram your games need.

Is it that hard to figure it out yourself, based on the provided examples?

 

[FryingWeesel]

with a laptop i assume you got one from a major OEM, run over to mydigitallife forums, they got the info you need to setup you OEM system with vista64.

 

[crazy pyro]

Blergh, I forgot about it mirroring into the RAM, sorry.

 

[jamupnorth]

with a laptop i assume you got one from a major OEM, run over to mydigitallife forums, they got the info you need to setup you OEM system with vista64.

thanks for the info

 

[Alv]

The RAM mirroring issue in dx9 only happens when gaming, right?

 

[FryingWeesel]

yes, or apps that use dx9c like some 3d modeling apps, anything using dx is going to mirror to ram.

As I understand it with sp2's updates and updates to dx9L(the vista version of dx9) this may nolonger be an issue under vista/server 2008/win7, BUT theres no guarntees, i know ms is moving to run the desktop on dx10 insted of dx9 when possible so it has even less performance impact.

 

[Mussels]

yes, or apps that use dx9c like some 3d modeling apps, anything using dx is going to mirror to ram.

As I understand it with sp2's updates and updates to dx9L(the vista version of dx9) this may nolonger be an issue under vista/server 2008/win7, BUT theres no guarntees, i know ms is moving to run the desktop on dx10 insted of dx9 when possible so it has even less performance impact.

It is still an issue. What was changed was changed in vista SP1, and that only made content in use mirrored.

For example if you have a 1GB video card, prior to this update 1GB was mirrored and unavailable, even if you were only using 512MB. Now it only mirrors what is actually in use, on the card. (This was a bug - it didnt occur under XP, and hasnt in vista for some time)

The RAM mirroring issue in dx9 only happens when gaming, right?

As was said above, its anything that uses system ram. For example aero might well take up 10-20MB of your ram, for its transparency effect.

 

[iBeer&Knife]

so for my config i should better get the x32 vista right ?

 

[FryingWeesel]

not if ur planing to run more then 3gb of system ram any time b4 you do a full reinstall, x64 is just the better choice.

 

[Mussels]

x64 is still a better choice. The thing is you dont gain *ANYTHING* going back to x86. there is ZERO benefit to it, while at least going x64 you dont have to worry about formatting again when you finally get more ram.

 

[Hayder_Master]

very nice thread mussels , that's decrease duplicate posts and questions
wow i don't know about dx technology how dx9.0 waste the memory , so at this state win xp32 + 2G ram + 1G video card = complete waste performance

 

[Mussels]

very nice thread mussels , that's decrease duplicate posts and questions
wow i don't know about dx technology how dx9.0 waste the memory , so at this state win xp32 + 2G ram + 1G video card = complete waste performance

XP with 2GB of ram and a 1GB video card is the same as vista with 2GB of ram and a 1GB video card. THe system ram is eaten up by the video cards higher settings, so you get stuttering.

Remember that it only mirrors whats in USE, so if you're using an older game designed for 256MB cards, its only going to use 256MB of the video cards ram (and therefore 256MB of system ram)

Its a loose rule, but one i've always followed is to have at least 3 times as much system ram as you do video card ram.

 

[Hayder_Master]

XP with 2GB of ram and a 1GB video card is the same as vista with 2GB of ram and a 1GB video card. THe system ram is eaten up by the video cards higher settings, so you get stuttering.

Remember that it only mirrors whats in USE, so if you're using an older game designed for 256MB cards, its only going to use 256MB of the video cards ram (and therefore 256MB of system ram)

Its a loose rule, but one i've always followed is to have at least 3 times as much system ram as you do video card ram.

so i should be more clear by changing the word "xp" to "dx9" depending as vista use dx10 and sure it is depending on video card series

 

[Mussels]

so i should be more clear by changing the word "xp" to "dx9" depending as vista use dx10 and sure it is depending on video card series

yes. DX9 and DX10 is the difference, not vista and XP.

 

[jamupnorth]

I decided to put Vista 64 bit in and dual boot with Vista 32 bit and i must say it does feel better and faster with my set up & so far i am glad i did it (but only after reading this thread from you guys )

 

[a_ump]

um....is this something that is not seen with usuable ram? i have a vista sidebar application that show's my ram and how much is being used(system monitor) and when i had my 8800GT it only showed 2.8gb/4gb and now with my 7800GTX 256mb it shows the same, 2.8gb/4gb. If this holds true i would think i'd have gained 256mb or 512mb of usuaable ram? am i wrong

 

[Mussels]

um....is this something that is not seen with usuable ram? i have a vista sidebar application that show's my ram and how much is being used(system monitor) and when i had my 8800GT it only showed 2.8gb/4gb and now with my 7800GTX 256mb it shows the same, 2.8gb/4gb. If this holds true i would think i'd have gained 256mb or 512mb of usuaable ram? am i wrong

remember that the ram decreases only as its used. If you run a game that only uses 128MB of ram, you're only losing 128MB of ram. Its realtime, it goes up and down.

There is also no rule that says that the video card has priority - in the example of a 2GB system with a 1GB video card, you could end up with 1GB of usable ram and 1GB used by the card - or you could have 1.9GB of usable ram, and 128MB used on the video card.

 

[ricoh]

If you had 4GB of system ram and a 1GB video card under a 32 bit operating system, each individual program could only use 3GB of that system ram (due to the video card using 1GB of address space) However there is something else most people are NOT aware of.

32bit apps running under a 32bit OS can only use up to 2 GB at all (unstable PAE-Hacks not included).
32bit apps running under a 64bit OS can also only use up to 2 GB at all.
32bit apps running under a 64bit OS can access up to 4 GB if they are flagged with the /LargeAdressAware (LAA for short) flag. Use your favourite search engine for more information.

And the video card's RAM is mirrored into the system RAM with an address window size of 256 MB, no matter how large the VRAM actually is.

Btw, the 3.25 GB limit in XP 32bit is artificially set by MS to ensure stability even with poorly written drivers.

2GB system ram
1GB video card
1GB system ram usable, The last 1GB would fight with the video card ram. This kind of PC is the one where people claim vista x64 has no real advantage, or slower due to 64 bit using slightly more ram than 32 bit in windows itself.

2 GB RAM usable. The VRAM is mapped above the 4 GB wall when using a 64bit OS.


Quite a nice guide you've written, but quite buggy too.

 

[Mussels]

32bit apps running under a 32bit OS can only use up to 2 GB at all (unstable PAE-Hacks not included).
32bit apps running under a 64bit OS can also only use up to 2 GB at all.
32bit apps running under a 64bit OS can access up to 4 GB if they are flagged with the /LargeAdressAware (LAA for short) flag. Use your favourite search engine for more information.

And the video card's RAM is mirrored into the system RAM with an address window size of 256 MB, no matter how large the VRAM actually is.

Btw, the 3.25 GB limit in XP 32bit is artificially set by MS to ensure stability even with poorly written drivers.



2 GB RAM usable. The VRAM is mapped above the 4 GB wall when using a 64bit OS.


Quite a nice guide you've written, but quite buggy too.

not sure what you're saying i've missed there.

This was only relative to video cards, so the 2GB per app limit doesnt really matter (but i might add it anyway).

"And the video card's RAM is mirrored into the system RAM with an address window size of 256 MB, no matter how large the VRAM actually is."
Thats wrong. MS released a patch for vista when it was new to set that as the minimum instead of Vrams size, due to crashing bugs.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940105

If it was locked at 256MB, they'd hardly have needed to release something like this now would they.

A modern graphics processing unit (GPU) can have 512 MB or more of video memory. Applications that try to take advantage of such large amounts of video memory can use a large proportion of their virtual address space for an in-memory copy of their video resources. On 32-bit systems, such applications may consume all the available virtual address space.

Note the "in-memory copy of their resources" and how they say a 512MB or greater card can use all the address space (which is 2GB) - if it was capped at 256MB, this would not apply.

 

[Hap]

A description of the 4 GB RAM Tuning feature and the Physical Address Extension parameter
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/291988

 

[GSG-9]

Thanks for this post Mussels. I knew video memory was duplicated but I did not know the circumstances or details.