Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

My new computer so far....


  • Please log in to reply
155 replies to this topic

#151 Mr. Hobo

Mr. Hobo
  • 8,152 posts


Users Awards

Posted 11 January 2010 - 02:02 PM

Ya, I remember back when I was reading some Civ4 forums that 32 bit can only use 3.2 (or something gb or ram) even though you'd have 4 plugged in. I don't think what iagrue said is correct about ram

#152 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 January 2010 - 12:02 PM

Ya, I remember back when I was reading some Civ4 forums that 32 bit can only use 3.2 (or something gb or ram) even though you'd have 4 plugged in. I don't think what iagrue said is correct about ram



....

What I said about ram is correct....

#153 Mr. Hobo

Mr. Hobo
  • 8,152 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 January 2010 - 12:23 PM

....

What I said about ram is correct....


So 4 sticks of 1gb = 4gb but it's only coming out to 3.2 which is a 20% variation and you say that's because it's hard to be 100% accurate
What I've seen from all the computers I've seen is like 99% accuracy (ram-wise). If you have a gig, it'll say at least .99. Not .8
Your statement contradicts all my observations, so I'm leaning towards you're wrong

#154 Rambo

Rambo
  • 833 posts

Posted 12 January 2010 - 12:24 PM

I have 3 2gig sticks in now...



It's three 1gb sticks and all are DDR3.



Ah, I'll retract my offer, sorry! I was looking for 2x 2gb's but was going to settle for 1x2gb and 1x1gb.

Sorry Nick!



#155 iargue

iargue
  • 10,048 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 January 2010 - 12:31 PM

So 4 sticks of 1gb = 4gb but it's only coming out to 3.2 which is a 20% variation and you say that's because it's hard to be 100% accurate
What I've seen from all the computers I've seen is like 99% accuracy (ram-wise). If you have a gig, it'll say at least .99. Not .8
Your statement contradicts all my observations, so I'm leaning towards you're wrong



I never said that it was the cause, but it still isnt perfect. Ram is never perfect. I've seen alot more computers then you.

His real limitation comes from using a 32 bit operating system, which is incapable of being able to see numbers that are not 32bit, and thus cannot see his ram at being at 4gb because he doesnt have 4gb (Probably 3.8 or 3.9) and thus it sees a 32bit number less then that.

#156 Fatal

Fatal
  • 3,615 posts


Users Awards

Posted 13 January 2010 - 05:12 PM

I never said that it was the cause, but it still isnt perfect. Ram is never perfect. I've seen alot more computers then you.

His real limitation comes from using a 32 bit operating system, which is incapable of being able to see numbers that are not 32bit, and thus cannot see his ram at being at 4gb because he doesnt have 4gb (Probably 3.8 or 3.9) and thus it sees a 32bit number less then that.



You're somewhat right iagure. It is true that it won't display all 4GB in a 32bit OS no matter what. It will only display ~3.2-3.5gb , but I don't believe it's because of the ram being smaller than stated and adding up to less..... it's just because its the limitation of a 32bit OS and 3.2GB or whatever it may be is the number it cuts off at. If he switched to a 64bit OS it would show all of the ram he has if he is over the 3.2GB 32-bit limit.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users