Installed Usable Memory

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Calcagno
  • Start date Start date
P

Paul Calcagno

I'm running Windows Vista Home Premium (SP2), with 2 GB of RAM, Firefox, CA
Security Suite, MBAB, SuperAntiSpyware Professional, Cleaner and Spybot
search and destroy on an Acer Aspire T180 desktop. All WU's are current and
the machine is working just great.
About 6 months ago I noticed a reduction in the amount of usable installed
memory. I have 2048 MB of installed RAM in 3 slots (512 MB, 512 MB and 1024
MB-with one slot empty), but only 1792 MB of usable memory. The usable
installed/unusable installed difference is 256 MB. The difference may mean
that some of it has gone bad or whatever.
Is there anyway to ascertain why I'm not able to take advantage of the full
2024 MB of RAM? Is it possible one of the memory sticks is not plugged in
correctly or there's a dirty contact somewhere?
I realize that this may be a `don't fix it if it ain't broken' situation
since the computer runs just fine but if there's something I can actually do
to get back the missing 256 MB of RAM that'd be nice.
I'm posting this here and also at:
Microsoft.public.windows.vista.performance_maintenance since I'm not sure of
the
correct post location.
Thanks...PaulC.
 
Hi,

Could simply be ram used/shared by video if your system is set that way.
256MB is a common amount.

What does the system BIOS report as being installed?

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Is it possible that the graphics chip in the system is using 256MB of shared
memory.?
How much memory does the BIOS say your system has?
 
Rick, I'm not sure how to check the BIOS report. Perhaps you could guide me.
When I used `Belarc Advisor' it reported that there was 2048 MB installed.
Not sure if Belarc gets it's information from the BIOS. PaulC.
 
Thanks Curious. I'll try to verify that. PaulC.

Curious said:
Is it possible that the graphics chip in the system is using 256MB of
shared memory.?
How much memory does the BIOS say your system has?
Click to expand...
 
Ok, I wasn't sure this was a hardware or a performance/maintenance issue but
I'll avoid multi posting in the future. PaulC.
 
It is also possible that your MOBO or your BIOS limits addressable memory to
2GB and therefore 256MB of address space is being used by Vista to support
your graphics card even if it is not using shared memory. Not all of this
memory is not available to you since it is just pre-reserved.
 
Hi,

The BIOS reports memory during the initial system POST when you boot up,
prior to Windows loading. If you see a manufacturer logo at that point, hit
<escape> to see what's on the screen.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Curious,
I just noticed that if I use `winver' in Start==>Run I get a panel saying my
OS version (Vista Home Premium version 6.0, build 6002: SP2) AND says that I
have `1833.90 MB available for Windows'. Does this conflict with the 1792 MB
that's reported by Belarc Advisor as the available installed memory. Any
comments as to which number is `correct'? Or maybe there both right, meaning
there's nothing `wrong' with the RAM. Paul C.
 
Hi, Paul.

Rather than multi-post, please cross-post.

That is, don't send two separate messages (even if they are identical) to
separate newsgroups. Just compose a single message and put BOTH NG names in
the "Newsgroups" address box. That way, the single message will appear in
both NGs. Any Reply to either will appear in both NGs. Several responses
in both NGs will appear in a single coherent thread in both NGs. Readers in
one NG will see all the responses, cutting down on duplication of effort.

Another payoff for you is that you won't have to check both NGs for
responses to your post. ;<)

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP
Windows Live Mail 2009 (14.0.8089.0726) in Win7 Ultimate x64
 
R C.

Thanks for the tip. I'll try taking your suggestion with this post.
Most others just think it's sufficient to just yell at me for double
posting. You were the only one to actually be helpful about it. Paul C.
 
Curious,
Without putting too fine a point on it, `Winver' reports 1,833,800 KB
(which is 1833.8 MB, which is 1.8338 GB). Multiplying 1024 MB times 1792 MB
as you did does not yield 1834 GB's. It yields 1834 Million GB's, which is a
whole lot more than 1834 MB. So I don't think that's going to explain the
differences reported by my machine.
Thanks for your input. Paul C.
 
Ok Curious. Now I get what you were trying to say. Sorry for being so dense.
You're correct that one place reporting usable memory might be using a
different number for how big a GB is. I'll try to read your posts more
carefully the next time before responding. Paul C.
 
Back
Top