Windows 7 32-bit with full 4 GB or 8 GB RAM support??

[Mr Bean]

The statement a 32-bit operating system can technically only managed a maximum of 4 GB of RAM.

Bet you beleave it! well I always Did.

 

This is DEAD wrong, and Microsoft is even evidence itself, that with the special version of "Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition" it worked:

 

technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc758523(WS.10).aspx

 

4-GB RAM Maximum

... the 32-bit version of Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition supports up to 64 GB of RAM on x86-based computers. ...

 

The kernel of the 32-bit version of Windows 7 has only a lock, which prevents access to more memory. More dramatically is this lock in the 32-bit version of Windows 7 Starter Edition: There the prohibition is much more rigorous and it only allows access to 2 GB of RAM:

 

In the 32-bit version of Windows 7 from 4 GB usually only 3.25 -3.5 GB of RAM are usable: IN my Case it was 3.00

 

In general many people believe this "not usable" RAM

is occupied by the graphic card RAM:

 

The German computer magazine c't has made a test

with different graphic cards (c't 23/2009, page 165):

 

Graphic card RAM Usable RAM from 4 GB

0 MB 3.5 GB

128 MB 3.5 GB

256 MB 3.25 GB

512 MB 3.25 GB

1024 MB 3.25 GB

 

These results are completely incomprehensible. Why is with no video card (0 MB, connection via Remote Desktop) 512 MB RAM blocked? Why blocked a graphic card with 128 MB also 512 MB RAM – and not 128 MB? And why blocked a graphic card with 1024 MB "only" 750 MB?

 

The Russian Programmers Group "staforce" has written a small program witch removes the lock in the kernel of the 32-bit version of Windows 7. "ICE Technologies" has translate this program into English. The program automatically makes a copy of the kernel file "ntkrnlpa.exe" and saves the copy as separate file "ntkrlICE.exe". Then the program removes the lock in the copied file "ntkrlICE.exe" and integrates the new kernel file as an extra boot menu entry in the Windows 7 boot menu. So then you have the option to start Windows 7 either as usual with the original kernel file "ntkrnlpa.exe" or with the modified kernel file "ntkrlICE.exe".

 

And even 8 GB of RAM are now no longer a problem.

The original kernel still reports that 4898 MB are "Hardware Reserved" - what hardware?

 

Windows-7/Tipps/32-Bit-RAM-Sperre/8Gb-Resource-Monitor-unpatche

The patched kernel then reports correct that only 34 MB is "Hardware Reserved":

 

de/medien/Windows-7/Tipps/32-Bit-RAM-Sperre/8Gb-Resource-Monitor-patched

 

 

ok the name of the small app is

32-Bit-RAM-Sperre/Info-to-4-GB-Kernel-Patch

 

The RAM limit of the 32-bit version of Windows 7 is therefore 64 GB - like Microsoft describes for the "Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition"

 

The patch

 

The small program "4GB-RAMPatch.exe" patches the kernel and removes the kernel lock:(and it released it on my Win7 System!)

 

"Windows-7/Tipps/32-Bit-RAM-Sperre/4-GB-Ram-Kernel-Patch"(look for this)

 

 

Ok I found This and installed it Let me tell you Its works 100%

Mr Bean

[Mr Bean]

Ok so what happens?

 

 

1 you need to Delete the ntkrlice.exe (if it on the system.

2 Start MSconfiguration-> Boot tab and delete the entry if show As Windows (Without DDR-RAM LOCK )

 

Be aware not to rid any outer entry!!

3 this can be run by Running the pacth..EASY..if you do not know how to run it manuly...

 

Ok warning Do not Do this If you have 1 tiny Bad feeling ...or Just a little frightened.

 

ok on with the post NOW:IF

if its not there just close every thing and run the patch. NOW you removed the windows transparent water mark on the Menu as well by ticking that

then close the patch.

 

after that reboot you will see a new Menu entry. hit and boot up.

ok you should now have 4 or 8 Gig at full use ,check your properties

 

you see you detailed Description of your PC

 

ok Now as always YOU take the Risk If you want To walk into the door I showed You the way in Its up to you If You Do.

 

Ok I posted this as IT DID no harm To My system and I think it would Be fine to run But be aware of This Its for 32BIT 7 windows & only !!!!

I do not know if this is safe on 64 BIT.....as I do not use it...

Mr Bean

[Mr Bean]

Just to show You I have taken 2 captured shots So you can see the difference on this system 4 gig of memory installed and a brand new windows

 

 

I not fibbing or just posting for the sake of posting something.

 

I do try every thing out myself first and if successful I like to pass this on here to the Members.

I believe this is the real thing..!

 

Mr bean

[Toppack]

We have two systems that have same quad-processor, motherboard and W-7 64bit.

The main difference is that one has 8.G RAM and the other has 4.G.

I've found that 4.G is more than enough, to do anything we require, and any more than that is Overkill. :roll:

I just waisted my money on the extra 4.G, that is in the 8.G computer.:cry:

 

Oh well, I have some extra RAM-modules, if I ever need to replace any failures :lol:

[Mr Bean]

ok you should now have 4 or 8 Gig at full use

 

yes 3 gig is plenty to use a OS or even 1 gig would do it fine

we run from 1 gig to 32 gig on our different pcs (hobby)

 

I suppose if one thinks about it running say win 7 on 1 gig is plenty as well

for normal day to day surfing.

but to ease the pc work load I would thing if one can give it more why not if I installed 4 gig like on this one why only 3 is available? why not the 4 gig ,if it the Os does not need it It has spare that it can access if it may need it.

I think that is what thy are saying..we just did a test on 32 gig installed and wallah, its there if the system needs it, and as you pointed out you have * 8 gig sitting there 4 is blocked from use!, thats doing zip all that makes no sense to me. in my case 1 gig not used ,sitting there for nothing.on this system.

but we going to fix that and whack in a other 4 now.and get the full use of the ram.

 

So why not have it working or available? I can tell you that the system runs faster smother ,and the memory is now there when pushing the system

 

like heavy games or processing.what ever. without stumbling over for memory.

 

but ,installed you the patch ,one cant undo this

 

Though there is the option , to pick at booting time what you want half (chocked) or full use.depending on the ram installed.

 

now most people use boosters and the like , well this may take the strain of the pc using more ram instead of cramming the 3 gig available ,by boosting it by force, just think how nice it would be to be able if wanted to use the full 8 gig, or more, it has to be easier on the system not having to drive with the brakes on, whether one needs it or not ITS there ! and there is plenty to run the normal stuff not having to shut them down so one can play a heavy game?

 

 

I think myself its a clever bit of technology ,but a lot will tell you or I this is not necessary ,and yes Thy be right one can run any os On 1 GIG.

 

(and any more than that is Overkill.) what would one over kill?

I ask that in a nice way (smiling..)

I think that locking Or throttling a system Is killing it faster.but then that just my humble opinion.

Mr Bean

[Toppack]

Evidently there is No physical-memory blocked on the 4.G computer.

Since I have gotten it to over 3.2G usage, by running about a dozen active programs, at same time, in a test to see if I could 'Max it Out'.

I've not tested the 8.G systems in that way, since it was difficult to get it to 3.2G usage.

[Mr Bean]

http://www.unawave.de/windows-7-tipps/32-bit-ram-barrier.html?lang=EN

 

Ok take a look here This will ex plane this and if interested download the program..

 

now I still think you are not getting full usage of the max ram installed..

like I posted we now have on the different PC all ram available running win7 versions 32 bit.

 

Mr Bean

[Toppack]

Okay, The RAM Lock is Only with W-7 32bit.

I'm not seeing it because I've only used the 64bit version.

 

Edit - (Sorry, I overlooked the fact that you were Only referring to 32bit version, when I first read your posts)

 

Thank you for this great Info.

I doubt that very many 32bit users realize that.