Heya ..... i got intel motherboard s975xbx2 ......and i got 4 ram of kingston ram each is 1 GB...when i check in bios it shows all ram are conected but when i check in window controll panal (Startup>control Panel>System) it shows i only hav 3.25 GB ram......
before this i got 3 ram each 1gb ...and in controll panel it shows i got 3 Gb ram(no sharing at all)
why after connecting 4 rams its sharing (and its sharing alot)

plzz help me how to solve this problem i need all 4gb ram to be shown ...like it did when i hav 3 gb ram

Recommended Answers

All 29 Replies

Are you running XP or another OS?
A Problem which i have descovered is that XP doesn't show all of the RAM you have. You will probably upgrade your BIOS to make full use of that extra Gb of RAM. I believe Vista can only use up to 3Gb effectivly so that extra Gb you have (If You run Vista) is slightly pointless. What programs are you intending on running to need 4Gb of RAM?

Firstly thanx 4 replying....second i am using XP and my pci x card is 8600GT...last i want ram to upgrade my rendering speed in max.....
it will be greatfull if u can slove my problem ... and plzz tell me wats a Bio upgrade and how can i do it

I believe the second post on this thread should help you out:
A BIOS upgrade is where you delete your old BIOS and install a new one, much like program updates, take away the old, and install the new.
It says on the 2nd post of the link what you should do. If you are unsure about what to do, post back here and i'll see if i can get someone how knows more than i do about this to help you out.

wow ... its hard i saw it ....... didnt get it tho....how would we know that its really bios falult plzz tell me that....cuz i am afraid to use flash or watever is it to upgrade Bios (may harm my data which is very important)

Keep One thing in Mind, if you don't know what you are about to do does, don't do it!

Its windows fault. Windows cant handle over 3gb ram properley

Hey i had seen the articel ...kinda Tough...ok to be honest i didnt understand a bit... TOOO technical 4 me.......does that new ram stick i brought helping me or not?....plzz answer this cuz from the artical i got this idea that the problem wont be solve (that will be my last question plzz answer this too)

Well in fact is hindering you more than it is helping. So take one of them out would be the best bet. Then your XP won't be struggling trying to make use of something which it can't. Your Motherboard can support it, it's just your Operating System can't.

Thanxx alot for helping me MY nightmare are over i thought someting was wrong within my Hardware...(i may change my opreating system may be I will buy Vista this time).......anyway thanx again SERUNSON

Vista has the same bug I think

Hi Tksdevil

I don't know if you still access this thread or not. I recently purchased S975XBX2 and had a difficult time to get it booting with correct DDR2 SDRAM. Can you provide the part number of the Kingston memory that you are using for S975XBX2 mobo?


hi all , ive read this thread and the link you attached and I am understanding this i think If windows XP cannot address 4 or more gigs then let me ask a few questions which I hope someone can answer. I have 4 gigs of ram for GTA4 on PC, windows XP SP3 with dual core, .
I have 2 2 gig sticks of ram so I cannot make it 3 , and my properties also show 3.25.

1)is there a way to get it to use all 4 gigs on windows xp? (i remember you saying you can upgrade the bios.
2) does windows vista or a newer windows OS support 4 gigs, all i want is it to use 4 gigs.
thanks in advance for your help.
stevelindner@hotmail.com is my email ,

1) XP-64 does. You need a 64 bit operating system to use the full 4GB, but personally I wouldn't go XP-64. Vista was designed with 64 in mind, XP wasn't.
2) Vista-64 does. There is a 32 bit and 64 bit version of Vista too.

I mean technically a 32bit o/s can handle 4GB, but that's in total. Some is taken up by all the bits and pieces in your computer leaving about 3GB of address space for your RAM.

But for GTA4, the limitation for most people will be the RAM on their video card. I'm guessing you have 256 or 512 MB on your graphics card, which would mean that this is the limiting factor for how high you can turn up the graphics.

The New Normal has put it spot on and I'll just put that another way and add a suggestion.

You are at least the 0.25GB better off by having added 1GB RAM.

Assuming the 8600 to have 512MB RAM, this is added to the 3.25MB (actually it's subtracted off the top of the 4GB).

Other devices claim another 256MB off the 4GB addressable space.

Voila - you have used the 4GB memory allocation allowed in 32 bit OS. And, you now have 0.75GB of unused motherboard RAM.

You can set up a RAM Disk to use that memory by means of some reasonably priced software and that's what I'm gonna do next week when my Qosmio arrives.

ok so here are my specs - dx diag summarized:

Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 3
BIOS: Phoenix - AwardBIOS v6.00PG
Processor: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4800+, MMX, 3DNow (2 CPUs), ~2.5GHz
Memory: 3326MB RAM OCZ Fatal1ty Edition 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 800mhz
Page File: 303MB used, 4907MB available
DirectX Version: DirectX 10.0 (4.10.0000.5515)
DxDiag Version: 5.03.2600.5512 32bit Unicode

Card name: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
Chip type: GeForce 8800 GT
Display Memory: 512.0 MB
Driver Name: nv4_disp.dll
Driver Version: 6.14.0011.8084 (English)
Realtek HD Audio output

im wondering , seeing as how I am running xp pro , a 32 bit os - if I upgraded to vista 64 bit, will I be able to use the full potential of my new fatality ram. its 2 sticks , each are 2 gigs. im trying to smoth out gta 4s porting issues with faster and better ram than I had before.
if vista 64 will allow me to play better , I will just go out and buy it -
I do realize that all of my computers devices memory also accounts for a portion the 32 bit OS 4 GB ram addressing cap., video card included,
So im wondering if i get vista 64 , will I not have a memory addressing cap/maximum. And will it be default in the OS,or will I have to download a program or enable something to support the more than 4 GB addresses.
thanks again for helping me understand this.

I have Vista64 with all the latest patches and I can use my full 4GB of RAM. If you decide to go that route, I'd suggest installing with only 2GB, getting all the Vista updates, then putting in the other 2GB.

But is it really worth it for that 700MB? Vista uses more RAM than XP just to function, so your games won't get an extra 700. I doubt GTA4 is maxing out your system RAM at the moment anyway, although it would be fairly close (that game eats memory for breakfast).

The New Normal makes a lot of sense.

Bearing in mind that one of my systems is 64 bit, I had the opportunity of going 64 bit OS in the Qosmio. Unless I put 8GB in, I can't see the advantage when for a few $$ I can buy a RAM Disk program that works above the 4GB address range to use up the spare 3/4GB. I've got plenty to load in there to give me considerable time saving onn saving documents. But then I doubt you do what I do on my PCs.

I had same problem with 98 and 1 Giga Ram as it were not able to use because of address space for Graphic card.
If I am not wrong, XP could handle up to 4 Giga address space, and perhaps Your Graphic card is 512 or even 750 MBy, so You have spent money for no results.
But nowadays memory is cheap, I have RAMBUS type RAM some 7 years ago, and 1 Giga costed 2000$+ so I was really unhappy when 98 limited use of RAM to 768 Mby without as much as >>By Your leave....<<, telling me use of memory is restricted.
Now, I would like to buy MB that could have 128 Giga RAM, but if I would not be able to use it, then I shall wait OS that could handle this. Good old ATARI has had no such problems as PC, as it has had MOTOROLA 68040 with linear addressing, and OS and device drivers were loaded from start of RAM, and then I could have used as much RAM that was installed, up to 64 Mby, where PCs were limited to 4 Mby........

nah 98 cant properley use over 256/512 either as its 16 bit in places
nt can support the max for 32 bit oses

for whoever said something about the videocard sharing this memory, or skimming it off the top or whatever, thats not how it works, that ram is on the videocard itself... now that we have that out of the way \/

i assume you have a 32 bit operating system. The codeing sequences in a 32 bit processor, which are then incorporated into the 32 bit os, only allow a user to use 3.25 gigs of ram, the os itself is supposedely able to use the full 4 gigs, but not the user.

the ONLY way to get this ram to show up would be to upgrade to a 64 bit os. period. But since the os can still use the 4 gigs it wouldnt make much differance to you.

I am running a vista x64 machine with 8 gigs of ram.

for whoever said something about the videocard sharing this memory, or skimming it off the top or whatever, thats not how it works, that ram is on the videocard itself... now that we have that out of the way \/

i assume you have a 32 bit operating system. The codeing sequences in a 32 bit processor, which are then incorporated into the 32 bit os, only allow a user to use 3.25 gigs of ram, the os itself is supposedely able to use the full 4 gigs, but not the user..../QUOTE]
I'm the "whoever" referred to above but that's not what I've said (I did not mention shared memory) and I'm not sure you have a proper handle on how Windows uses memory.

The RAM on the videocard has to be mapped into the Windows (32)addressable space which is 4GB. So it is skimmed off the top along with the demands of other devices.

I do not wish to argue, but the ram required for a videocard is mapped by the videocard on the videocard and is not skimmed off the top of the os, that would be pointless, for instance, my two cards combined (1 gig of memory), still leave me with 8 gigs of memory.

if for some reason his videocards do that...


which i also own, and it does not do that either.

if you mean onboard memory.... onboard memory does take memory from the computer itself, but usually only 64 megs or so.

Its not the actual memory it takes, its pointers to the memory. These are finite.

everything to a pc is memory on a low level. The registers on a cpu are memory, the bios is memory, the video ram is memory. If you have ever programmed in asm you will know what i mean.

For example, a 16-bit width address bus can address 2 to the power of 16 addresses (2 ^ 16 = 65,536) memory locations, meaning the maximum amount of memory it can address is 64kb.

... to add to jbennet's explanation ....

Merlin33069 is referring to his situation with a 64 bit OS.

As jbennet & I have applied effort to explain, on the 32 bit OS, the video card RAM is mapped into the 4GB addressable space leaving physical system RAM unused in a 4GB system. I shall be turning this extra into RAM Disk which is mapped by the BIOS not the OS.

So what are our options? vista 64? Is there perhaps a program for windows XP 32bit to allow our OS to address the extra memory without the risk of video driver issues?

Looks like im buyin' Vista 64 for this issue and DX10 support :)

For what my opinion is worth, using Vista 64 is worth doing if you can make sensible use of > 4GB RAM. There may be application issues (stuff you want to carry forward from W32) on Vista 64 so just to get to the extra 0.75GB may a poor trade off.

As I mentioned, I'll be using the spare 0.75GB as a RAM Disk which will speed up tenfold some of my heftier document saves that currently take a minute or so (with a bit of prior copying into RAM Disk).

As you'll see from my sig, I use both 64 and 32 bit systems which have their place in what I do - which won't be what you do!

Vista 64 is the solution

Dont buy "xp" 64 its bad.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.