3.96 usable memory?

[Seth]

Funny thing. On my computer I only see installed memory, nothing in
parentheses after.

I guess that means that the two numbers are the same on this computer
(4.00GB, if anyone cares). Win 7 Pro 64-bit.

I'll guess you have a graphics card with discrete memory? My (current system
that I am sitting at) system does (Windows 7 Ultimate x64) and same thing,
no "usable" value, just the installed.

 

[Paul]

Funny thing. On my computer I only see installed memory, nothing in
parentheses after.

I guess that means that the two numbers are the same on this computer
(4.00GB, if anyone cares). Win 7 Pro 64-bit.

Did you look at the Resource Monitor ?

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6581/wtfn.png

That's an example of a defective one.
Installed is 4096 (and one of the two DIMMs isn't actually working)
Hardware reserved is 2057.
Leaving 2039 for everything else.

In task manager (the window on the right), it verified the 2039 number
as "Total", as in actual usable memory.

The bogus parts, are the "Installed", which doesn't actually
recognize that the BIOS can't use one of the two DIMMs. And
the Hardware Reserved, which is worked out as (Bogus_Number minus Usable).
The fact the Hardware Reserved is so large, is kinda a giveaway something
is wrong.

I wasn't aware that Windows was so dumb about the Installed part. But
on thinking about it, I don't remember anything at the register level,
to point out what is going on. The BIOS offers a service, of defining
the "Usable" for the system, and the Windows designers should have
left well enough alone. Grabbing the DMI info, or reading the SPD
tables, isn't sufficient (the BIOS doesn't rely on SPD alone - it
actually tests the DIMMs to ensure they're sized properly, and
throws items out of the memory address map, that aren't working
as they should).

That is how, one poster who it turned out, had a DIMM with an incorrect
SPD chip on it, could still get the computer to start. The DIMM
claimed to be 256MB (according to SPD), but the BIOS did the usual
legacy test and determined only 128MB was present, and defined decodes
in the memory map for 128MB and the system did not crash. It was only
later, by him posting a CPUZ dump, I could figure out the SPD was wrong.

If Windows 7 was run on that system, it would use the 256MB number
(either recorded in the DMI, or via reading the SPD chip). And Windows 7
would not have realized the installed RAM was effectively 128MB. All
parties would agree on the "Usable" though, because the BIOS defines it,
and Windows uses what is loaded into the registers.

Paul

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I'll guess you have a graphics card with discrete memory? My (current system
that I am sitting at) system does (Windows 7 Ultimate x64) and same thing,
no "usable" value, just the installed.

No, built-in video with shared memory.

Again, we are confusing available and useable...

My *available* memory is < 4096 MB, found elsewhere; as I said, the
*useable* is not reported on the above mentioned screen.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Did you look at the Resource Monitor ?

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6581/wtfn.png

That's an example of a defective one.
Installed is 4096 (and one of the two DIMMs isn't actually working)
Hardware reserved is 2057.
Leaving 2039 for everything else.

No, I followed the same procedure as in the post I replied to.

If I do what you suggest, I see a screen with no entry for useable
memory, just as in the screen shot you posted.

If I add up all five numbers on my Resource Monitor screen, I get 4096
MB.

 

[Seth]

No, built-in video with shared memory.

Again, we are confusing available and useable...

My *available* memory is < 4096 MB, found elsewhere; as I said, the
*useable* is not reported on the above mentioned screen.

No, I'm not confusing anything. I was postulating one possible reason for
the omission of the usable memory value on the System Information screen.
Often the result of no memory hole due to a discrete adapter. Apparently
that theory is wrong or doesn't apply on your motherboard.

Remember, I'm the one (quoted above) stating the difference between usable
and available.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

No, I'm not confusing anything. I was postulating one possible reason for
the omission of the usable memory value on the System Information screen.
Often the result of no memory hole due to a discrete adapter. Apparently
that theory is wrong or doesn't apply on your motherboard.

Remember, I'm the one (quoted above) stating the difference between usable
and available.

Oops

OTOH, is not the memory used by the video adapter taken from available
memory, rather than from useable memory? For one thing, it *is* being
used - or so it seems to me.

Or is this possibly another case of Microsoft's ability to muddy the
waters by their semantic skills? E.g., Outlook vs Outlook Express,
Windows Explorer vs Internet Explorer, the Administrator vs an
administrator... Though these examples use the opposite scheme: two
similar terms with different meanings, rather than two different terms
with similar meanings.

It remains undeniable that the quantity is not reported here, for
whatever reason decreed by the high priests in Redmond.

 

[Paul]

Oops

OTOH, is not the memory used by the video adapter taken from available
memory, rather than from useable memory? For one thing, it *is* being
used - or so it seems to me.

Or is this possibly another case of Microsoft's ability to muddy the
waters by their semantic skills? E.g., Outlook vs Outlook Express,
Windows Explorer vs Internet Explorer, the Administrator vs an
administrator... Though these examples use the opposite scheme: two
similar terms with different meanings, rather than two different terms
with similar meanings.

It remains undeniable that the quantity is not reported here, for
whatever reason decreed by the high priests in Redmond.

Video adapters have several means of gaining memory.

1) Static allocation from UMA (system memory). Typically set up
in the BIOS setup screen. This is subtracted from usable memory,
and should be reflected in hardware reserved. Since the allocation
is usually pretty small, I don't know if there is an address space
penalty to be paid for this memory as well. Typically used on
things like laptops or older desktops.

2) Dynamic allocation. Comes from system memory, on demand, and the
memory is managed by the OS. Some GPUs will claim they can
"use 1536MB", but the memory is only used in games or the like,
and released later. This would come from available memory.
Typical Wikipedia terms "Turbocache" or "HyperMemory". This allocation
can be used with (1) or (3) as well, if the quantity of memory
offered by (1) or (3) is tiny. For example, a Turbocache card might
have 128MB of local memory, and the ability to use and access 512MB
of dynamic memory. (Some people have sought to disable the dynamic memory
allocation, in the interest of having their game use only local memory.)
Since the memory comes from system memory, the address space price has
already been paid.

3) Local memory. Some GPU chips in laptops, have memory soldered to
the GPU assembly. On some chipsets with integrated graphics, a
"sideport" memory is a similar local memory device for the GPU.
My laptop has sideport memory, and many AM2+/AM3 vintage machines
have the potential to have a sideport (32 bit) memory chip added as well.

On regular graphics cards, local memory consists of more chips, and
has a greater peak bandwidth available.

The price the system pays for this, is typically seen in 32 bit systems.
The bus the card sits on (PCI or PCI Express), needs to be mapped into
host space, and impacts the addresses available for other things. (The GPU
local memory is effectively dual ported, and can be accessed by the
GPU or the CPU.) And that helps limit the Usable memory, by denying
the memory controller the addresses it needs, to access all of system memory.
The larger address space available in a 64 bit OS, means address space
isn't as precious.

HTH,
Paul

 

[Seth]

Oops

No worries.

OTOH, is not the memory used by the video adapter taken from available
memory, rather than from useable memory? For one thing, it *is* being
used - or so it seems to me.

I think the issue here is your GPU isn't grabbing and reserving all the
memory up front (thus creating a usable of less than installed) but rather
increasing and decreasing as needed (like an application). Because your GPU
is using memory in an application sort of way Windows doesn't subtract the
total on the System Information screen like it would for a static GPU memory
hole.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

No worries.


I think the issue here is your GPU isn't grabbing and reserving all the
memory up front (thus creating a usable of less than installed) but rather
increasing and decreasing as needed (like an application). Because your GPU
is using memory in an application sort of way Windows doesn't subtract the
total on the System Information screen like it would for a static GPU memory
hole.

For you and Paul: I should add that the CPU is an Intel Core i5 2500 on
an ASUS P8H67-M EVO motherboard (a home-built computer).

The i5 series has built-in graphics, called Intel HD Graphics 1000
(GT1), and the MB chipset supports it.

The Intel Graphics control, the Resource Monitor, and CPU-Z aren't
helping me much, when it comes to seeing specifically what my graphics
system is using. My lack of knowledge comes into play as well

IIRC, Intel offers information on line, so maybe later I'll see what
they say (and what I forgot!). Or Google or Wikipedia...

But I just thought of System Information.

It says
Installed Physical Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB
Total Physical Memory 3.91 GB
Available Physical Memory 1.96 GB

That doesn't help me a lot.

On the memory panel it shows these addresses related to graphics:
0xFE000000-0xFE3FFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK
0xC0000000-0xCFFFFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK
0xA0000-0xBFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK

as well as 28 other blocks of memory, mostly above 0xFE000000, but I'm
too lazy to calculate all of the allocations to see how much it is.

The second video allocation seems to be about 268MB, if I didn't
miscount the F's. The other two are small(ish); to me the last one looks
like the old VGA allocation.

Under Display, I see this:
Adapter RAM 1.77 GB (1,897,897,984 bytes)

I hope this is more meaningful to you two than it seems to be to me

 

[Tim Slattery]

It says
Installed Physical Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB
Total Physical Memory 3.91 GB
Available Physical Memory 1.96 GB

Under Display, I see this:
Adapter RAM 1.77 GB (1,897,897,984 bytes)

So your display adapter is taking 1.77 GB. Add that to the "available
physical memory" and you come up with 3.73GB. That would leave .27GB
for your BIOS and whatever else needs to be mapped. Remember that your
video RAM, BIOS and other things must be mapped into your 4GB physical
space first, then whatever address space is left over is used for your
RAM. See http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html for a discussion of
how this works. This is the principle advantage of 64-bit computing:
you have a HUGE address space that will allow you to use all the RAM
in your machine.

But I don't know why "Total Physical Memory" reads out as 3.91GB
instead of 4.0.

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In message <[email protected]>, Paul <[email protected]>
writes:
[]

Video adapters have several means of gaining memory.

1) Static allocation from UMA (system memory). Typically set up []
2) Dynamic allocation. Comes from system memory, on demand, and the
memory is managed by the OS. Some GPUs will claim they can []
3) Local memory. Some GPU chips in laptops, have memory soldered to
the GPU assembly. On some chipsets with integrated graphics, a
"sideport" memory is a similar local memory device for the GPU.
My laptop has sideport memory, and many AM2+/AM3 vintage machines
have the potential to have a sideport (32 bit) memory chip added as well.

On regular graphics cards, local memory consists of more chips, and
has a greater peak bandwidth available.

The price the system pays for this, is typically seen in 32 bit systems.
The bus the card sits on (PCI or PCI Express), needs to be mapped into
host space, and impacts the addresses available for other things. (The GPU
local memory is effectively dual ported, and can be accessed by the
GPU or the CPU.) And that helps limit the Usable memory, by denying

[]
And on some systems - I'm not sure how common on PCs - the GPU memory is
_not_ accessible to the main CPU, which instead gives _only_ high level
commands (draw a line/circle/box, maybe even areas with textures) to the
GPU.

 

[Paul]

For you and Paul: I should add that the CPU is an Intel Core i5 2500 on
an ASUS P8H67-M EVO motherboard (a home-built computer).

The i5 series has built-in graphics, called Intel HD Graphics 1000
(GT1), and the MB chipset supports it.

The Intel Graphics control, the Resource Monitor, and CPU-Z aren't
helping me much, when it comes to seeing specifically what my graphics
system is using. My lack of knowledge comes into play as well

IIRC, Intel offers information on line, so maybe later I'll see what
they say (and what I forgot!). Or Google or Wikipedia...

But I just thought of System Information.

It says
Installed Physical Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB
Total Physical Memory 3.91 GB
Available Physical Memory 1.96 GB

That doesn't help me a lot.

On the memory panel it shows these addresses related to graphics:
0xFE000000-0xFE3FFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK
0xC0000000-0xCFFFFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK
0xA0000-0xBFFFF Intel(R) HD Graphics Family OK

as well as 28 other blocks of memory, mostly above 0xFE000000, but I'm
too lazy to calculate all of the allocations to see how much it is.

The second video allocation seems to be about 268MB, if I didn't
miscount the F's. The other two are small(ish); to me the last one looks
like the old VGA allocation.

Under Display, I see this:
Adapter RAM 1.77 GB (1,897,897,984 bytes)

I hope this is more meaningful to you two than it seems to be to me

Using the P8H67-M EVO manual:

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1155/P8H67-M_EVO/e5955_P8H67_M_EVO.zip

I can see (PDF page 78 or so)

iGPU Memory [32M, 64M, 96M, 128M]

"... allocate a fixed amount of system memory"

So that is UMA type, as far as I know. You might be able to
display that in GPUZ. Maybe it can list the static allocation
of your HD 2000 graphics ?

http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/SysInfo/GPU-Z/

TechPowerUp GPU-Z v0.5.4 Jun 29, 2011

Now your

"Total Physical Memory 3.91 GB"

could mean you're using the default of [64M], and if the 64M
wasn't in usage, your physical memory would be listed as 3.97GB or so.

*******

Intel offers this.

http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/CS-029090.htm

It has some ways of displaying graphics memory usage.

Their screenshot example here shows three parameters.

http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/img/graphicsdriversizeat75pct1.jpg

Minimum Graphics memory 32M
Maximum Graphics memory 729M
Graphics Memory in Use 103M

So if you use one of their tools, you may get a better
idea of the static BIOS allocation and the range of
dynamic allocations allowed.

*******

On my laptop, the sideport (local) memory seems to be 256MB.
Hardware reserved is about 262MB, which I can't make sense out of.
(Since there shouldn't be any other losses on this laptop. The
sideport should be doing the job. I don't see a good reason
for the sideport to be "backed" by UMA or anything.)

System Info reports
Installed 3.00GB
Total Physical 2.74GB (more or less consistent with the Hardware Reserved loss)
Available Physical 1.66GB (kinda useless info, how much is currently left)

Task Manager shows a graph indicating 1.02GB of memory is "in use",
which accounts roughly for the difference between 2.74 and 1.66GB

Resmon's colored blocks show

Hardware Reserved 262MB
In Use 1001MB
Modified 63MB
Standby 1257MB
Free 489MB
(Total 3072MB)

Available in the Resmon window is listed as 1746MB.
(The numbers will be changing, as I'm taking screen
snapshots and the like.)

For whatever reasons, my graphics have a 256MB sideport,
and *something* is stealing 262MB total, which is pretty
suspicious. You would think my laptop would have a
"static + dynamic" capability, and Wikipedia lists that
for HD 4250 as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units

Up to 512 system + optional 128 sideport

It could be that 128MB was the largest chip available when
the article was written.

The 262MB hardware reserved shouldn't really be there.
It can't be an address space penalty, because the laptop
runs the 64 bit version of Windows 7.

*******

Anyway, perhaps the Intel methods will shine a bit more
light on your static + dynamic graphics allocations.

Paul

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

So your display adapter is taking 1.77 GB. Add that to the "available
physical memory" and you come up with 3.73GB. That would leave .27GB
for your BIOS and whatever else needs to be mapped. Remember that your
video RAM, BIOS and other things must be mapped into your 4GB physical
space first, then whatever address space is left over is used for your
RAM. See http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html for a discussion of
how this works. This is the principle advantage of 64-bit computing:
you have a HUGE address space that will allow you to use all the RAM
in your machine.

But I don't know why "Total Physical Memory" reads out as 3.91GB
instead of 4.0.

I didn't quote all that I saw, sorry.

The report by the Resource Monitor lists 5 categories of RAM that add up
to 4096 MB...

Here's what that reads right now:
Hardware Reserved 93 MB
In Use 1576 MB
Modified 78 MB
Standby 1569 MB
Free 780 MB

That adds up to 4096 MB

Below that on the screen are these items:
Available 2349 MB
Cached 1647 MB
Total 4003 MB
Installed 4096 MB

Note that Installed minus Total is 93 MB, equaling the HW Reserved
above, but the first two numbers add up to the mysterious value 3996 MB.

OK, everybody, have fun!

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Using the P8H67-M EVO manual:

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1155/P8H67-M_EVO/e5955_P8H67_M_EVO.zip

I can see (PDF page 78 or so)

I had to download the manual (v.e.r.y slowly) to see this, since the
pages are numbered in the 1-1 to 5-4 style :-(

iGPU Memory [32M, 64M, 96M, 128M]

"... allocate a fixed amount of system memory"

On my own, I never would have found this or recognized it as relevant, I
suspect.

So that is UMA type, as far as I know. You might be able to
display that in GPUZ. Maybe it can list the static allocation
of your HD 2000 graphics ?

HD 1000 here.

http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads/SysInfo/GPU-Z/

TechPowerUp GPU-Z v0.5.4 Jun 29, 2011

GPU-Z shows me nothing about memory usage.

Now your

"Total Physical Memory 3.91 GB"

could mean you're using the default of [64M], and if the 64M
wasn't in usage, your physical memory would be listed as 3.97GB or so.

*******

Intel offers this.

http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/CS-029090.htm

I'll fetch that & take a look.

Also, if you want, see my reply to Tim Slattery's message,

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

I'm pretty much out of my depth here, not having bothered to learn
enough about graphics to even be sure if what I'm posting is relevant

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I'll fetch that & take a look.

Wow! The Intel panel looked nothing like what the website showed, but by
winging it, ignoring the description on that site, I eventually got the
information screen they show.

I see this:
Physical Memory: 4003 MB
Minimum Graphics Memory: 64 MB
Maximum Graphics Memory: 1696 MB
Graphics Memory in Use: 162 MB

The report also says, near the bottom:

Processor Graphics in Use: Intel(R) HD Graphics 2000

which contradicts the Intel(R) HD Graphics 1000 that I found
somewhere[1], earlier today, so I withdraw the correction I made.

[1] Maybe in Windows System Information, but I can't remember.