erotisi gia ram

[SoTiRiS]

3erete posi ram ipostirizoun ta win me?exo 384mb kai 8elo na 3ero an ta windows me ti vlepoun olokliri i isxeiei oti kai sta win 98.

[mphxths]

egw pou ebala mia fasi 512 ta eide kanonikotata!

[SoTiRiS]

den ennoo file mphxth an tin vlepoun oli tin ram san posotita alla an tin xrisimopoioun oli tin ram otan xreiastei.

[Gary]

oxi file sotiri mono ta NT/2000 boroyn na <BR>xrisimopoioyn oli ti mnimi <BR>oxi win milenium

[SoTiRiS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gary:<BR><B>oxi file sotiri mono ta NT/2000 boroyn na <BR>xrisimopoioyn oli ti mnimi <BR>oxi win milenium </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>3ereis gary posi ram axiopoioun ta win me?

[georgeadams]

Αν βάλεις πάνω από 512MB στα Win95/98/Me τότε όταν boot-άρεις, βγάζουν μύνημα "There is not enough memory available to run this program. Quit one or more programs, and then try again."<P>Οπως φαίνεται πιό κάτω, έχουν κάποιο πρόβλημα με το virtual memory driver όταν ξεπεράσουμε τα 512MB μνήμης.<P>Γιώργος<P>-------------------------------------------- <A HREF="http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/14967.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/14967.html</A> <P>Win ME hits memory limit<BR>By: Andrew Thomas<BR>Posted: 24/11/2000 at 09:51 GMT<P><BR>Like world+dog, we were obviously looking for something to beat up on<BR>Intel with following the launch of the P4. Unlike most of the planet, we<BR>reckoned that an old BIOS shipped with a couple of old mobos wasn't much<BR>of a story.<P>We much preferred a glitch we'd discovered a couple of weeks ago that<BR>appeared to be a rerun of the Caminogate RDRAM cockup. And, unlike some<BR>folk, we actually did some research before loosing the hounds on<BR>Chipzilla.<P>Our sample P4 and D850GB mobo, supplied with Windows ME installed, ran<BR>perfectly happily with the 256MB of RDRAM shipped to us. It also ran<BR>perfectly happily with the 512MB of RDRAM that Kingston sent us. Only<BR>when we tried to run both together did we hit problems.<P>No matter which configurations we tried, the system would not run with<BR>768MB of memory, returning the error message: "There is not enough<BR>memory available to run this program. Quit one or more programs, and<BR>then try again."<P>768MB "not enough"? Blimey.<P>At first we considered the obvious options - unsupported RIMMs, mixing<BR>ECC and non-ECC memory, phases of the moon and so forth. This was<BR>tantalisingly familiar territory: an Intel RDRAM mobo that didn't work<BR>properly with fully-populated RIMM slots.<P>But the answer turned out to be far more mundane: Windows ME simply<BR>can't cope with more than 512MB of memory.<P>And neither can any other Win9x variant.<P>And it's a 'feature'. It transpires that Win ME, Win98 and Win95 cannot<BR>deal with main memory sizes in excess of 512MB. The Microsoft<BR>Knowledgebase entries on the subject (dating back a few short weeks)<BR>contain the following fascinating facts:<P>"The Windows 32-bit protected-mode cache driver (Vcache) determines the<BR>maximum cache size based on the amount of RAM that is present when<BR>Windows starts. Vcache then reserves enough memory addresses to permit<BR>it to access a cache of the maximum size so that it can increase the<BR>cache to that size if needed. These addresses are allocated in a range<BR>of virtual addresses from 0xC0000000 through 0xFFFFFFFF (3 to 4<BR>gigabytes) known as the system arena.<P>"On computers with large amounts of RAM, the maximum cache size can be<BR>large enough that Vcache consumes all of the addresses in the system<BR>arena, leaving no virtual memory addresses available for other functions<BR>such as opening an MS-DOS prompt (creating a new virtual machine).<P>"This problem may occur more readily with Advanced Graphics Port (AGP)<BR>video adapters because the AGP aperture is also mapped to addresses in<BR>the system arena. For example, if Vcache is using a maximum cache size<BR>of 800MB and an AGP video adapter has a 128MB aperture mapped, there is<BR>very little address space remaining for the other system code and data<BR>that must occupy this range of virtual addresses."<P>And here are the three suggested workarounds:<P>"1. Physically remove any memory in excess of 512MB [!]<P>"2. Use the System Configuration utility to limit the amount of memory<BR>that Windows uses to 512MB or less.<P>"3. Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the<BR>maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512MB (524,288 KB) or<BR>less."<P>And the unspoken fourth solution: upgrade to Windows 2000.<P>Knowledgebase also admits that the addressing restriction has been<BR>identified as a failing in Windows. Installing Win2K obviated the<BR>problem. All 768MB ran faultlessly.<P>So if you think that adding extra memory will make your Win 9x system<BR>run faster, the answer is: it will, provided you don't exceed 512MB.<BR>With today's systems more than capable of exceeding this size, and with<BR>wallets capacious enough to purchase more than 512MB of RDRAM, Win 9X/ME<BR>suddenly appears rather passe.<P>Scary thought: how much memory will Office 2001 require? Β?<P>