NVIDIA to End Support for 32-bit Operating Systems After R390 Drivers

[Solaris17]

Good.

 

[Paganstomp]

Thanks for that info. Thinking it's time for a downgrade to those drivers. Just customized the install and left them out, but would prefer they not be there at all.

You're welcome!

 

[newtekie1]

Ok. Install Windows Xp on compatible hardware with more than 4GB of ram, disable the swapfile, enable PAE and properly config it, then try filling up ram. And as this is a debate way off topic, we're calling it done.

Ok, thanks for the trip down memory lane, XP has such an old homey feel to it. Anyway, I installed XP Pro SP3 with 8GB system RAM available to it, enabled PAE, and disabled the page file. I then loaded two instances of Orthos which brought the memory usage very near the 3GB limit Windows was showing. I then started opening instances of IE. Sure enough, when I tried to open the 6th IE window I get:

Programs simply do not have access to anything beyond the 3GB mark, regardless of if PAE is enabled. PAE alone does not allow 32-bit versions of Windows desktop OSes to use more than 4GB total RAM. Period. I think were done here.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Ok, thanks for the trip down memory lane

You're welcome.

I think were done here.

You're right about that.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I think there was a configuration problem with PAE in your test. Windows 7 (32 bit only), Windows Server 2008 (32-bit only), Windows Vista (32-bit only), Windows Server 2003 (32-bit only), Windows XP (32-bit only) properly support PAE.

It amazes me that even MS put out a 32 bit Windows 10 option. I guess that was just because they were hell-bent on getting everyone possible onto Win 10 at that point.

Mostly older systems running Vista, 7, and 8 that are getting updated to 10. They generally don't have NVIDIA nor AMD GPUs though.

WinXP 64bit had problems because no one really supported it properly with drivers. Vista was whole different story. I also started using 64bit with Vista.

XP x64 was on Server 2003 R2 x64 Edition's driver WHQL program which a lot of device manaufacturers didn't target. In order to get WHQL logo'd in Vista and newer, manufacturer had to provide drivers for both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of their device.

 

[newtekie1]

I think there was a configuration problem with PAE in your test. Windows 7 (32 bit only), Windows Server 2008 (32-bit only), Windows Vista (32-bit only), Windows Server 2003 (32-bit only), Windows XP (32-bit only) properly support PAE.

Supporting PAE and allowing access to more than 4GB of memory are two different things.

Just like Windows 64-bit should be able to access and use massive amounts of RAM, but Windows 10 Home can only use a maximum of 128GB and the Win10 Pro is 2TB. Windows 8 was limited to 512GB. Heck Windows 7 Home was limited to only 16GB while the Pro version was 192GB.

Enabling PAE does not override the memory size limit Microsoft has imposed, that is the issue. And on any 32-bit Windows desktop OS, Microsoft has imposed a 4GB memory limit(or less). There is no easy way to get around it, and PAE alone doesn't do it.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Looks like you're right: According to this article, not even Server 2003 Standard would exceed 4 GiB. You'd have to jump up to Server 2003 Enterprise or Datacenter for 64 GiB. Definitely looks like Microsoft shouldn't have put Windows XP on that PAE article at all.

 

[newtekie1]

Looks like you're right: According to this article, not even Server 2003 Standard would exceed 4 GiB. You'd have to jump up to Server 2003 Enterprise or Datacenter for 64 GiB. Definitely looks like Microsoft shouldn't have put Windows XP on that PAE at all.

PEA allowed for other things besides just expanded memory size, which is why it was still useful on XP even if the memory limit was 4GB. It allowed XP 32-bit access to the NX bit, which was used by DEP.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, article speaks to that extensively. Still, it's misleading. There should be asterisks all over that article saying that the expanded space is not user addressable.

 

[newtekie1]

Yeah, article speaks to that extensively. Still, it's misleading. There should be asterisks all over that article saying that the expanded space is not user addressable.

Yeah, Microsoft made the memory limits a real mess. They tried to make the memory limit a reason for upgrading to a more expensive version of Windows. Like making Windows Vista/7 Home limited to 16GB and Windows Vista/7 Home Basic limited to 8GB. Worse was Vista Home Starter though, it was limited to only 1GB! At least Windows 7 Starter Edition allowed 2GB, but that was still ridiculous IMO.

Using the license as a tool to limit memory and try to force people to upgrade to more expensive versions is stupid. But they are still doing it with Windows 10. But at least the Windows 10 limit is 128GB, while Windows 10 Pro is 24TB.

 

[lexluthermiester]

@newtekie1
BTW, Was well aware Server 2003 Enterprise was the only 32 bit "XP" gen OS that could do up to 64GB of ram. Started that debate as a joke, and it seemed like you were joking along too, but it seems it was either to subtle, or perhaps another unforeseen situation progressed it forward. It did turn into something interesting though.