Back to the topic; the RAM limitation is a 'feature' of the nForce3 & 4 and it's due to the "South Bridge resource deployment". As said the Athlon64 CPU is capable of addressing 4GB (more with WinXP x64) but usually at a heavily reduced speed (eg PC2100). If you want more you could try a different mobo chipset but ATi Xpress200 lack o/c'ing and VIA are, well, VIA (the K8T890 don't even support dual-core). I'd have suggested going for a Xeon or preferably Opteron (with its registered DDR) but cost quickly becomes a significant factor when all you're gaining is 600MB RAM.
The Xpress 200 depends what mobo it's in. It will only lack ocing if put in a HTPC mobo or a shuttle or whatever. A64s can address 4 DIMMs at either 333 or 400/2T if venice core. Dunno about SiS chipsets, not used one for A64. Why not just bite the bullet and go intel?
First, you owe nVidia an apology. They don't have anything to do with the memory on that MoBo, its all handled by the CPU memory controller (AMD). Second, who makes these other Mobos (Via or Sis) and what BIOS are they using, they could just have a different reporting method for memory (see below). Third, is this all on the same OS? I mean, There is an issue with XP and 4g of memory. At leats on the first release the max was like 3.75G though maybe that has been fixed with SP2. So, if they are reporting the memory present, that is going to be different than the memory available. So, first there is PCI memory mapped I/O and that can be as many meg as it wants - depending on the devices present. So, the more devices, or if one device wants 600 meg of memory, then um, bamm there you go. Also, the ACPI tables will take up another 256k. Here is something to try, boot to DOS, run Debug and do an INT15 fn E820. That will give the exact memory map so that you can find out exactly what the BIOS is telling the OS is available in the way of memory. You might find the Via 4G to be the same as the MSI 3.xG.
i do NOT owe nv an apology - its a chipset fault - i`ve now tried this on 4 different NF3 and 4 boards - and EXACTLY the same thing is reported - 3.4 gigabytes of ram. via boards report 4 gigabytes - and right now im trying to get hold of an SiS board to try that OS? its winxp-64 - so the os is NOT the issue. 3 GB is reported as 3 GB - and yet 4 GB is reported by BIOS as 3.4GB so adding another gig of ram means the system is using 600MEG , whereas with 3 gig it is not thats a chipset problem as the same thing happens on 4 different boards (dfi , asus , msi and gigabyte)
Ok, after reading that, that's damned cool. 30 left in the world... If i were you Harlequin, i'd put that in a box/display case - it'll be worth a shitload someday.
Precisely. Additionally despite the memory controller being integrated into the CPU the mobo still has some say regarding capabilities and compatibilities, just check the difference of mobos of the same chipset and those of differing chipsets.
OK - my bad and my apologies. The first time I looked through the specs it looked as if the NForce product was merely a southbridge device. MSI and nVidia have conspired (apparently), though poorly organized documentation to obfuscate the fact that it does have two memory controllers on it (the Nforce device) - or maybe I just looked past the obvious. So, then finally in their documentation it mentions that in their effort to increase memory performance, the resulting limitation is that the system will only support 3G of memory. MSI and other MoBo manufacture’s should have this clearly put in their documentation as it is an irregular limitation. EDIT: OK, so looking at MSI's website, they are advertising it as a 4G system which is contrary to what nVidia specifically says in its documentation (as I said 3G only). So, it sounds like your beef is with MSI for basically not testing/reading their own product and thus falsely advertising its capabilities.
FWIW MSI also declare "SDram up to 4GB" on their packaging yet in their manual it clearly states due to Southbridge blahdy blah only 3+GB is supported (assumedly when 4x1GB is used). I'd imagine 3rd party manufacturers like MSI were not aware of the nVidia chipset limitation themselves OR decided to either quote that you could plug in 4x1GB or simply described what the integrated memory controller is capable of perhaps. I wouldn't really blame MSI myself.
I think Intel CPUs are better for video work anyways. A new BIOS may help too. I know mine has an option for remapping the really high amounts of ram so all 4 gigs are seen.
Yes, OK, I get it, but I only went to the MSI wen site and looked at the specs they have published. They say it will support 4G - which it will not. If you look on the nVidia web site, its rather clear that the hardware ONLY supports 3G of memory. So, its not that there is a defect or even an issue, its that the specs are wrong (at least on the MSI website). Nope, go to the nVidia website and look at the NForce specification. It clearly says it only supports 3G of memory. Its a hardware limitation.
I have to disagree. From their own literature: Thus, it is safe to assume MSI designed this MoBo and MSI wrote the specifications. Furthermore if THEY want to claim to be a leading MoBo manufacturer (even if they didn't design this MoBo inquestion), THEY still need to put it through testing AND ensure the published product specifications are accurate. It is wholly on their shoulders. Just like when Ford bought firestone tires, lowered the pressure outside of firestones specifications and help to cause Broncos to flip. Should Firestone go back and make sure that Ford followed the Firestone guidelines or should the engineers at Ford understand that the guidelines have a purpose and therefore they should follow them. Oh - and the American Airlines crappy service methods which cause the crash of DC-10s. If AA had followed Macdonald Douglas procedures and guidelines for DC-10 maintenance, hundreds of people would not have died, and MD would not have gone out of business. But in reality, it should have been AA that went out of business. They are the one who bought a product and didn't follow specifications. Same thing here. MSI - and maybe the other companies, have the responsibility. When they buy a chipset, they need to know what they are buying and how to use it. whew - ok - sorry I get carried away. But at any rate, if "world-class engineering" doesn't include a specification review, then I wouldn't buy anything that had "world-class engineering".
Well as the memory controller is on the processor with A64s, it's not chipset-related. I just know for a fact there's an option in my BIOS to allow mapping of 4 gigs of ram. Whether or not it works, I have no idea; if you want to send me 4 gigs of ram to test, I promise I'll send them back when I'm done.
Pagefile is virtual memory based off the hard drive... and with that amount of ram, it would default from 6GB-8GB (150%-200%)
Yes, thats the same trap I fell into earlier in the thread. However, they (MSI)have chosen not to use that memory controller. Rather, all of the memory cycles are going to the NForce chipset, where there are two memory controllers present but together they can only address 3G of memory. So, it does indeed come down to the nVidia hardware and not the AMD hardware. And a pagefile is a completely different creature, the memory controller knows whats up so it can't be fooled into thinking virtual memory is actual memory (unless you design aa HT to IDE interface). .
