-
Steam recently changed the default privacy settings for all users. This may impact tracking. Ensure your profile has the correct settings by following the guide on our forums.
Make Windows 7 and Vista 32-bit (x86) Support More Than 4GB Memory
- Thread starter Sullivan
- Start date
Yeah, let's make Microsoft look bad for disabling a feature to make sure some shitty drivers don't break the user experience with BSoDs. They disable it for driver compatibility reasons, rather than to sell server licenses to normal desktop users (why would they do that anyway?).
EDIT:
EDIT:
Physical Address Extensions adds fancy 8 bits to memory addresses, giving them a total of 40 bits
explosions
Member
This.
Correctomundo. 32-bit is limited to whatever he said(~3.5gb).
This, right here, is a very good point.
I don't know anything that doesn't run on 64-bit.
I agree, but the counterargument is that not all programs/drivers are compatible with 64-bit. The author also argues that Microsoft is forcing you to buy a 64-bit licence or something, which I don't think is true, seeing as my Vista box came with a slip speaking about how to trade in the 32-bit disc for a 64-bit disc.
I've installed a bunch of 32-bit stuff on my x64 installation. I have **never** had any compatibility issues.
There's a lame workaround for getting a 32-bit OS to recognize 4GB+ RAM. This exists on Linux too, think it's called PAE. I suggest not to use it.. it'll slow down your machine considerably.
I've been running a 64 bit OS for a few years now (since XP x86_64 was released) and never had compatibility issues btw...
I've been running a 64 bit OS for a few years now (since XP x86_64 was released) and never had compatibility issues btw...
SilverSpring
New Member
PAE support in Windows has always existed since Windows2K. Physical Address Extension is just a new memory-mapping mode that Intel introduced in their x86 CPU's (ever since Pentium Pro). It allows physical memory upto 64GB on x86 and 1024GB on x64 CPU's.
You can use the /PAE and /NOPAE boot options to enable/disable it which forces Ntldr to boot the PAE enabled kernel Ntkrnlpa.exe instead of the normal kernel Ntoskrnl.exe.
Also, if you have the No Execute Page protection enabled, the system automatically boots the PAE kernel (Ntkrnlpa.exe).
Btw, the PAE kernel (Ntkrnlpa.exe) only exists on 32bit systems.
EDIT:
I think what this patch is doing is actully patching the PAE kernels (not the normal kernels) of Vista etc. and other versions of Windows that still limit to 4GB even under PAE. Eg. like he mentions, 2003 & 2008 PAE kernels support over 4GB however the XP and Vista PAE kernels still limits to 4GB (allegedly according to him due to licensing issues).
So to make use of these patches you would still need to boot into the PAE kernel of Windows.
As for Linux, PAE support was added in 2.6 kernel enabling the full 64GB on PAE-supported x86 CPU's.
You can use the /PAE and /NOPAE boot options to enable/disable it which forces Ntldr to boot the PAE enabled kernel Ntkrnlpa.exe instead of the normal kernel Ntoskrnl.exe.
Also, if you have the No Execute Page protection enabled, the system automatically boots the PAE kernel (Ntkrnlpa.exe).
Btw, the PAE kernel (Ntkrnlpa.exe) only exists on 32bit systems.
EDIT:
I think what this patch is doing is actully patching the PAE kernels (not the normal kernels) of Vista etc. and other versions of Windows that still limit to 4GB even under PAE. Eg. like he mentions, 2003 & 2008 PAE kernels support over 4GB however the XP and Vista PAE kernels still limits to 4GB (allegedly according to him due to licensing issues).
So to make use of these patches you would still need to boot into the PAE kernel of Windows.
As for Linux, PAE support was added in 2.6 kernel enabling the full 64GB on PAE-supported x86 CPU's.
Hellcat
Contributor
I'd say: win at post #2 of this thread.
Only looks like a way to spread sniffing and backdoor tools - just like the virus scanners warn about on these files.
Yeah, the "32-bit" Vista key works just fine with a x64 disc. Actually, I had a Finnish 32-bit Vista but the same key works with 64-bit English Vista ;-)
It's weird how an OS can limit your hardware capabilities ..
Nonetheless, there isn't much of a difference on the spending aspect of 32-bit vs 64-bit. There may be some 64-bit limitations, but with today's technology and the sleep-deprived developers out there, there are, and always will be workarounds to limitations.
Nonetheless, there isn't much of a difference on the spending aspect of 32-bit vs 64-bit. There may be some 64-bit limitations, but with today's technology and the sleep-deprived developers out there, there are, and always will be workarounds to limitations.
It doesn't explicitly limit it, it's how far the 32-bit addressing can go.
64-bit, from personal experience, makes a HUGE difference in terms of performance.