Memory leaks?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I have a core 2 duo machine running Vista 32.
I recently upgraded my RAM with another stick totaling in 2048MB.

The task manager shows that 57% of the physical memory is used, when I
calculated the sum of all the applications' RAM usage it was only 459MB!

Where did 500MB of RAM go?
 
Hi,

In addition to that being used, memory reserved by applications and
processes recently closed will remain cached until the memory space
allocated to them is required for other uses. This is by design.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
 
I have a core 2 duo machine running Vista 32.
I recently upgraded my RAM with another stick totaling in 2048MB.

The task manager shows that 57% of the physical memory is used, when I
calculated the sum of all the applications' RAM usage it was only 459MB!

Where did 500MB of RAM go?
Click to expand...

Same problem here, 4GB Crucial only shows 3GB. Asus mobo.
many similar complaints on Asus forum. Theories going the
rounds are "It's a Vista problem", It's an Asus BIOS problem",
and that Asus are grabbing some RAM for sound, LAN, and video support.
Well not the latter in my case as I'm temporalily using an old
Millennium II 4GB PCI card for video.
AIUI some PCI Express cards can grab part of the installed RAM,
but a PCI card shouldn't.
I presume onboard audio needs RAM, and probably LAN support
also needs some, but not a whole GB of expensive Crucial.
 
Hi,

This is a different issue, not a memory leak, and actually it's not an issue
at all. It's a limitation of 32-bit Windows, as it only normally provides
for 4GB of address space. Some of this space is used by the system for the
hardware, the rest is allocated to memory addresses. What you see reported
by Windows is the difference, and this can vary greatly by system, generally
being between 2.7 and 3.3GB. Search google on the use of the pae switch for
methods of a workaround.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
 
Please set me straight if I'm wrong, but I think the 4GB limit is not a
Windows issue - it affects any 32bit O/S. As I understand it 4GB is the
32bit addressable limit so it doesn't matter if it's Windows, Linux, BeOS,
Unix, etc - if it's a 32bit O/S it can't map more than 4GB of address space.
Somewhere I read something about address limit extensions or something, but
what I remember reading wasn't clear about whether it was a way to get around
the 4GB addressability limit or if it dealt with some other issue.

My apologies in advance if I'm completely bonkers about the 32bit
addressability issue.
 
Hi,

That's essentially correct. It's not a memory limit, it's an address space
limit. Physical Address Extensions can be used by most modern OS's to get
past this limit, but this does not totally solve the problem as the
applications themselves cannot run from above the 4GB mark, so they must be
loaded (or reloaded) into this area of address space before use. The extra
memory can be used for caching and other performance enhancements, but there
are limitations.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
 
Back
Top