Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Memory type
User-mode virtual address space for each 32-bit process
Limit in on X86
2 GB Up to 3 GB with IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE and 4GT
Not applicable
1 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
8 TB
Paged pool
Limited by available kernel-mode virtual address space or the PagedPoolLimit registry key value. Windows Vista and above: Limited only by kernel mode virtual address space. Starting with Windows Vista with Service Pack 1 (SP1), the paged pool can also be limited by the PagedPoolLimit registry key value. Windows Home Server and Windows Server 2003: 530 MB Windows XP: 490 MB Windows 2000: 350 MB
128 GB Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: Up to 128 GB depending on configuration and RAM. Windows 2000: Not applicable
Nonpaged pool
Limited by available kernel-mode virtual address space, the NonPagedPoolLimit registry key value, or physical memory. Windows Vista: Limited only by kernel mode virtual address space and physical memory. Starting with Windows Vista with SP1, the nonpaged pool can also be limited by the NonPagedPoolLimit registry key value. Windows Home Server,
75% of RAM up to a maximum of 128 GB Windows Vista: 40% of RAM up to a maximum of 128 GB. Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: Up to 128 GB depending on configuration and RAM. Windows 2000: Not applicable
2 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Windows Server 2003, and Windows XP/2000: 256 MB, or 128 MB with 4GT.
System Limited by available kernel-mode virtual cache virtual address space or the SystemCacheLimit address registry key value. space Windows Vista: Limited (physical size only by kernel mode virtual limited only address space. Starting with by physical Windows Vista with SP1, memory) system cache virtual address space can also be limited by the SystemCacheLimit registry key value. Windows Home Server, Windows Server 2003, and Windows XP/2000: 860 MB with LargeSystemCache registry key set and without 4GT; up to 448 MB with 4GT.
Always 1 TB regardless of physical RAM Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP: Up to 1 TB depending on configuration and RAM. Windows 2000: Not applicable
Version
Windows 7 Ultimate
Limit on X86
4 GB
Limit on X64
192 GB
Windows 7 Enterprise 4 GB Windows 7 Professional 4 GB Windows 7 Home Premium 4 GB Windows 7 Home Basic 4 GB Windows 7 Starter 2 GB 2 GB 8 GB 16 GB 192 GB 192 GB
3 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Version
Windows Server 2008 R2 Datacenter
Limit on X64
2 TB
Limit on IA64
Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise 2 TB Windows Server 2008 R2 for Itanium-Based Systems 2 TB Windows Server 2008 R2 Foundation 8 GB Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard 32 GB Windows HPC Server 2008 R2 128 GB Windows Web Server 2008 R2 32 GB
Version
Windows Server 2008 Datacenter
Limit on X86
64 GB
Limit on X64
1 TB
Limit on IA64
Windows Server 2008 Enterprise 64 GB Windows Server 2008 HPC Edition 128 GB Windows Server 2008 Standard 4 GB Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-Based Systems 2 TB 32 GB 1 TB
4 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Version
Windows Vista Ultimate
Limit on X86
4 GB
Limit on X64
128 GB
Windows Vista Enterprise 4 GB Windows Vista Business 4 GB Windows Vista Home Premium 4 GB Windows Vista Home Basic 4 GB Windows Vista Starter 1 GB 8 GB 16 GB 128 GB 128 GB
Version
Windows Server 2003 R2 Datacenter Edition
Limit on X86
64 GB (16 GB with 4GT)
Limit on X64
1 TB
64 GB
1 TB
Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 2GB with 4GT) (16 (SP2)
5 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
The following table specifies the limits on physical memory for Windows Server 2003 with SP2. Limits over 4 GB for 32-bit Windows assume that PAE is enabled.
Version
Limit on X86
Limit on X64
1 TB
Limit on IA64
2 TB
64 GB
1 TB
2 TB
4 GB
32 GB
Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 1 (SP1)
The following table specifies the limits on physical memory for Windows Server 2003 with SP1. Limits over 4 GB for 32-bit Windows assume that PAE is enabled.
Version
Limit on X86
Limit on X64
X64 1 TB
Limit on IA64
1 TB
X64 1 TB
1 TB
4 GB
32 GB
6 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Version
Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition
Limit on X86
64 GB (16 GB with 4GT)
Limit on IA64
512 GB
512 GB
4 GB
2 GB
4 GB
32 GB
8 GB
4 GB
Version
Windows XP
Limit on X86
4 GB
Limit on X64
128 GB
Limit on IA64
128 GB (not supported)
Version
Limit on X86
7 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Windows 2000 Professional 4 GB Windows 2000 Server 4 GB Windows 2000 Advanced Server 8 GB Windows 2000 Datacenter Server 32 GB
Version
Windows XP Embedded
Limit on X86
4 GB
Limit on X64
4 GB
4 GB
192 GB
Related Topics
4-Gigabyte Tuning IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE Physical Address Extension
8 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Community Content
Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit 16GB Memory Limit - RAM or VRAM + RAM?
I found out yesterday something that is not listed in any online store selling Windows 7 (even Microsoft) or any comparison charts. Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit has a memory limit of 16GB, Professional and Ultimate have 192GB. I would have liked to have known this prior to makin purchasing decision. Comparison charts at Microsoft store have no mention of memory limits, anyway.... This 'Physical Memory' limit of 16GB, does that also include VRAM? If I install 4 sticks of 4GB Ram, and have 2 x 1.5GB Video Cards (as home enthusiasts may have, probably more-so than a professional guy in an office using Excel), does this count as 16GB physical RAM (4 x 4GB RAM) or 19GB physical RAM (4 x 4GB RAM + 2 x 1.5GB VRAM)? Thanks. Answer (Gaidheal): No, as I mentioned in my comment below, no video card is going to map all of its own physical memory into your system's virtual address space and the installed physical system memory is nothing at all to do with any physical memory on an expansion card. In other words, just as you don't see memory from soundcards and network adapters (both do have memory, of course) you don't see the memory belonging to your video card, except those ports it explicitly maps. 6/6/2011 Gaidheal 6/3/2011 HairyLozenge
9 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
probably} for example, a 64 bit pointer allows 16 EiB (Exbibyte - 2^60). The physical memory that this will be mapped onto is utterly irrelevant - it could be a hard disk, flash disk or SDRAM installed as system memory. Your expansion cards, whether video cards, network adaptors, sound cards or anything else are also utterly irrelevant to your installed physical memory; their onboard memory is visible only to them and nothing whatsoever to do with your 'RAM' (physical system memory). Of course, they can make this memory visible to other device by mapping it into the virtual address space and various ports will also take up some of the address space BUT no video card I know of (and I use the 'big boys') maps anything approaching its entire onboard physical memory into the virtual address space. Installing a "1 GB video card" will not take 1 GiB away from your available virtual memory. http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=notes/windows/license/memory.htm may be of some interest to readers and covers some of what I have stated here. 6/6/2011 Gaidheal
Very Strange: Server edition is less powerfull than the client edition
Windows 7 Pro: 192 Gb - Windows 2008R2 standard (= windows 7 server): 32 Gb, so the client version can address 6 times the memory of the server version Windows Vista Business x64: 128 Gb - Windows 2008 x64 standard (= windows vista server): 32 Gb, so the client version can address 4 times the memory of the server version Strange; when you pay more, you get less? A server should alway be equal or more powerfull than a client! So please, releas a fix that changes max memory of the server versions to (minimal) match the max memory of the client versions. 5/31/2011 atverweij
10 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
4/29/2011 digdeep
Memory Limits
Shouldn't the chipset dictate how much memory the system can handle, I believe the current limit is 2.81474977 1014 byte of memory. which is 2^48, at least this is what Linux currently supports, i would think a big complex, expensive system like Windows would at least match the world best Operating System. 2/10/2011 Docmur
11 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
We have bought a Windows 2008 R2 64bit standard edition.. our machine have a memory capacity of 36 GB.. But this server only can handle 32 GB !? And a client OS alike Win7 pro 192 GB??
10/14/2010 A. Haeser
Facts
A 32 bit OS can only use 4GB of memory total, that means if you have 4GB of ram and your gr aphic card has 1GB of ram, you have a total of 5GB of memory. Out of that 5GB of memory, you can only use 4GB total. 1GB the graphic card will take up, so n ow the 32bit OS can only use 3GB. Enabling PAE, will limit to the OS to 2GB total. What PAE does is dedicate 2GB to OS and the ot her 2GB to anything other then the OS. Apparently some people don't understand how PAE wor ks and think that some how it can magically make a 32bit XP use more then 4GB, which is impo ssible, so after noticing my explanation is not getting through, I thought a visual from MS itself might help sink it in, you can see it here: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform /server/PAE/PAEdrv.mspx The 'fact' above is the perfect example of this misunderstanding. PAE has nothing to do with the user and kernel pool being seperated. Many confuse virtual memory with physical memory. All requests for memory by appli cations; that is running processes, such as explorer.exe, wmplayer.exe, dwm.exe, iexplor e.exe, etc; are furfilled using virtual memory. Virtual memory is just an abstraction which includes physical memory and your pagefile(s). Yes, virtual memory includes physica l memory! Vista 32bit can see only 3.5GB of ram total. The new sp1 only reports how much memory you h ave installed, not how much memory you can use. Whomever wrote this ^. You should actually read the article you posted a link to. I quote: "
Introduction
PAE is an Intel-provided memory address extension that enables support of greater than 4 GB of physical memory for most 32-bit (IA-32) Intel Pentium Pro and later platforms. This article provides information to help device driver developers implement Windows drivers that support PAE." Sounds to me like your FACTS, might not be FACTS? AH! I was going to post these 'inconvenient facts' myself. the 'PAE' (please READ about your acronyms
12 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
, people!) means 'Physical Address Extension' Why is that important? the last word, really. 'Extension'. this does NOT enable you to use more than 4GB ram. Face facts people. This is a form of some memory management features, more than anything else. This isn't even a 'Microsoft thing'. it's a 32-bit computing limitation. the 'Mic rosoft thing' part comes in because they've somehow given people the idea that using this boot flag can somehow magically let your computer address more ram than a ny 32-bit OS is capable of. I blame their marketing department. Stupid buggers. And yes, there's a page on microsoft that DOES say that it allows you to use more than 4GB ram. TH AT's where people got this idea. If you want and bought more than 4GB of ram. suck it up and get a real 64-bit OS already. You could afford the RAM, so go do it. If it's the cost of windows 64-bit that's stopping you, go download the 64-bit version of ubuntu or something it's free. And if you hate MS, you should want to do that anyway. But above all, quit ranting. MS isn't going to 'fix' anything because the users rant. This should be pain fully obvious to us all by now. I mean jesus, just look at IIS if you hope that they will one day 'fix' thier OS....
8/6/2010 karatedog
10/14/2008 MS4U
13 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
12 GB (7.99 GB usable)
12 GB (7.99 usable) is displayed under computer properties / system / installed memory (RAM). How do i get the all 12 GB working?? Specs.-OS Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Intel i7 950 evga x58 sli classified 12 GB corsair DDR3 xms3 platinum series
4/17/2010 EOCP
14 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
price of memory has dropped creating this little conundrum. And while I have my opinions as to why Vista was such a train wreck. It has definitely become more refined over time. Windows 7 is hands down, again in my own opinion, the best OS Microsoft has launched to date. And there are definite advantages to 64bit processing. A majority of the software is still written for 32 bit processing negating most of the advantage you would get with using a 64bit operating system. Besides, doesn't seem to matter which computer or what Microsoft OS I jump onto. The closer I get to utilizing 2 gig of RAM, the crappier the computer seems to run. Kind of like a glass wall there. 3/29/2010 Display Name_1 3/27/2010 rvndmnmt
15 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
But, fact in the few past. If talking only by design even XP x64 can treats 32TB. 2 socket hardware, such as Opteron 2000 number processor platform had maximum memory 128GB. Microsoft says support that only what it was possible to prove. And now, Xeon 5500 number processor platform can support maximum up to 144GB. Microsoft will do the proof examination of 144GB in the near future. 7/24/2009 GreenCat
64Bit CPU/32Bit application Which operating system will provide maximum memory
I need to select an operating system for a server that runs on Xeon 64Bit (5080) platform. I have an application that needs as much memory as possible. Which operating system version setup will provide the maximum memory to this 32 bit application? 6/24/2009 fabulous Fab
Facts in error
"Apparently some people don't understand how PAE works and think that some how it can magically make a 32bit XP use more then 4GB, which is impossible, so after noticing my explanation is not getting through, I thought a visual from MS itself might help sink it in, you can see it here: http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEdrv.mspx"
I also mistakenly thought a 32bit operating system could only use 4GB, having only 32 address bits to work with. But as you can see from the tables above, 32bit Windows Server 2008 can use up to 64GB of physical memory. Turning on the PAE feature modifies the virtual address mapping used by the processor hardware. There is a good explanation on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension Very basically, each process is still limited to 4GB because of the 32bit addresses, but the OS can use a processor control register to map that 4GB space above the 4GB. So process "A" might have it's 4GB virtual address space start in physical ram at 8GB, process "B" at 12GB, etc. Many people will doubt this because of their personal experience with Microsoft 32bit desktop operating systems. Microsoft has specifically limited the desktops to 4GB for driver compatibility reasons. Correction, read my facts again and you will see I specifically said "XP 32 bit", second I point to ms's own site and you take us to wiki which anybody can edit? since when is wiki's info more reliable then ms's own site when we discussing ms's OS? lol In short XP 32-bit can't see more then 4GB of ram total no matter what you do, and its clearly stated here by MS:http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEdrv.mspx yes other 32-bit OS-es can use more then 4GB of ram but not XP 32-bit
5/21/2009 Victor.S
16 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
Answers
6/9/2009 MS4U
"I running windwos Vista 64-bit with 8-GB of ram. Most of my applications are 32-bit applications. How much RAM can VISTA dedicates to 32-bit application?" 64 bit editions of Windows can only attribute a total of 4 GiB of RAM to any single 32 bit virtual memory instance (or application), regardless of your total RAM. The reason is simple, 64 bit editions of Desktop Windows run on the x86-64 architecture, which is a processor architecture capable of running both 64 and 32 bit instructions, limiting 32 bit instructions (or applications) to what 32 bit limits them to, thus, 4 GiB of RAM. Intel and AMD's specification of PAE does support the x86-64 architecture but the software layer of Microsoft's PAE (the API), called AWE, is not supported on 64 bit editions of Windows, so Windows Vista 64 bit cannot attribute more than 4 GiB of RAM for a 32 bit application. In fact, true 64 bit architectures like the Intel Itanium processor do not support 32 bit applications. The only reason 32 bit applications work on 64 bit editions of desktop Windows is because the very architecture at its core, called x86-64 (often erroneously shortened to x64), is a hybrid architecture capable of running both 32 bit and 64 bit instructions. It's also the reason why drivers may not work in 32 bit, but applications will, on Windows Vista 64 bit. The Windows Vista 64 bit kernel is written in 64 bit, and thus, drivers must also be written in 64 bit. If Microsoft would have made the kernel in 32 bit, expanded support would have had to rely on PAE, but drivers wouldn't have had to be re-written. In fact, Apple used that strategy with Mac OS X's transition to 64 bit processors and only its future Snow Leopard will have its kernel in 64 bit.
"I also mistakenly thought a 32bit operating system could only use 4GB, having only 32 address bits to work with. But as you can see from the tables above, 32bit Windows Server 2008 can use up to 64GB of physical memory." Note however that Windows Server 2008 32 bit uses PAE to achieve this.
"The limit for 64-bit XP is given as 128 GB, while on the support site, http://support.microsoft.com/kb/283247/en-us, it is given as 16 GB! What is correct, 16 GB or 128 GB?" Short answer is 128 GiB of RAM. While Windows XP Pro 64 bit can theoretically support 128 GiB of RAM, driver issues, lack of motherboard support and PAE's Intel technical spec limit to 64 GiB can limit this. Very few 32 bit systems will be built to handle 128 GiB of RAM as the use of a 64 bit operating system becomes much more advantageous in this situation.
I have an article on my blog, Pacoup.com, but you'll have to find it yourself as I cannot link to my own articles on MSDN. 5/27/2009 Pacoup 5/27/2009 Pacoup
17 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
XP / Vista x86
WROTE: XP and Vista can only truly manage ~3GB of Physical RAM. 4GB is misleading. Quote: Xp and Vista can truly manage ~4GB of physical RAM, but shows only the "available" ram. If you have a onboard vdeo with 512mb and something else on-board to complete 1gb, your manager will show only 3GB "available". QUOTE: PP Xp and Vista can truly manage ~4GB of physical RAM 5/6/2009 Thomas Lee 8/24/2008 DNoonon
Memory Limits
Well, that's not logical - 64-bit Vista Business can have up to 128GB RAM, while 64-bit Windows Server 2008 Standard can only have 32GB. Standard Edition is expensive enough to justify increasing the limit to 128GB in my opinion. Why should buying the next version up, Enterprise Edition, allow a 64-increase in memory (up to 2TB!) - unless Standard Edition is being gradually phased out? Hopefully this will be done with Windows Server 2008 Service Pack 1? I can understand Web Edition being limited to just 32GB though. That said, most of the memory limits make sound sense. 5/6/2009 Thomas Lee 6/19/2008 robitpro
2/27/2009 Chikitin
2/27/2009 Chikitin
18 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(VS.85).aspx#physical...
11/3/2008 eezvmt
19 of 19
08-06-2011 11:22 AM