LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Latest LQ Deals
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 12-19-2008, 04:13 AM   #1
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
RAM allocation


Yesterday I upgrade my RAM from 2 GB to 4GB and my BIOS
Looking into my BIOS hardware spec it says total RAM 4096 MB
Appropriate 640 MB
Available 3456 MB
According to the shop where I buy my computer it is because graphic card
being a Nvidia Gforce 6200 turbo cash allocated in advance that amount of RAM.
My question is this true or not ?
Looking in My computer in opensuse it is says Total RAM 3.3 GB caches 253,9 MB available 2.9 GB
So he seems to wright about the preallocation , but still is this true ?
And if so why ?
My MOBO ASUS P5LD-X/I333
Thanks in advance
 
Old 12-19-2008, 11:48 AM   #2
baDibere
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
Hi,

My English is not well but If I understand true, you have 4GB RAM but computer says that it is ~3.2GB.

I have heard that 32-bit computer systems can work up to 3.2(maybe 3.5) GB RAM. Your problem can be because of this.
 
Old 12-19-2008, 12:24 PM   #3
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by baDibere View Post
Hi,

My English is not well but If I understand true, you have 4GB RAM but computer says that it is ~3.2GB.

I have heard that 32-bit computer systems can work up to 3.2(maybe 3.5) GB RAM. Your problem can be because of this.
No my CPU is a 64 Bits Intel dual Core
The question come down to the fact do Graphic card with a turbo cash
preallocated RAM Yes or No
 
Old 12-19-2008, 01:17 PM   #4
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Linux 11 (Bullseye)
Posts: 3,407

Rep: Reputation: 141Reputation: 141
This is a common problem: only being able to access 3.3GB of 4.0GB of RAM when using a 32 bit kernel. What you need to do to get access to the rest is to install a PAE enabled kernel. I don't know what it's called on your distros, but it might be called bigmem or something like that. If you have a 64 bit CPU, you could always load the 64 bit version of your OS.
 
Old 12-19-2008, 01:40 PM   #5
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quakeboy02 View Post
This is a common problem: only being able to access 3.3GB of 4.0GB of RAM when using a 32 bit kernel. What you need to do to get access to the rest is to install a PAE enabled kernel. I don't know what it's called on your distros, but it might be called bigmem or something like that. If you have a 64 bit CPU, you could always load the 64 bit version of your OS.
I refer in my original post to opensuse 64 bits version
 
Old 12-19-2008, 02:32 PM   #6
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Linux 11 (Bullseye)
Posts: 3,407

Rep: Reputation: 141Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronlau9 View Post
I refer in my original post to opensuse 64 bits version
I guess I missed that, as I don't know anything about Suse numbering. You might also go into the BIOS and reduce the video memory size to the lowest possible value. Linux will normally take it back and use it for the video card, but include it in memory totals.
 
Old 12-19-2008, 06:35 PM   #7
lazlow
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,363

Rep: Reputation: 172Reputation: 172
Ok, I actually do not see where you said you were using the 64bit version of suse, you did say 64bit cpu. You can run the 32bit version of suse on a 64bit cpu, which is why we are making a point of this. If you post the results of "uname -a " it will clear up any doubts.

Last edited by lazlow; 12-19-2008 at 06:38 PM.
 
Old 12-20-2008, 03:17 AM   #8
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazlow View Post
Ok, I actually do not see where you said you were using the 64bit version of suse, you did say 64bit cpu. You can run the 32bit version of suse on a 64bit cpu, which is why we are making a point of this. If you post the results of "uname -a " it will clear up any doubts.
The answer is Linux-XR4p 2.6.27.7.9-default # 1SMP V2008-12-04 +100
I686 I686 I386GNULinux
 
Old 12-20-2008, 05:41 AM   #9
elliott678
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2005
Location: North Carolina
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 977

Rep: Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronlau9 View Post
The answer is Linux-XR4p 2.6.27.7.9-default # 1SMP V2008-12-04 +100
I686 I686 I386GNULinux
That would be the 32 bit version that you have installed.
 
Old 12-20-2008, 05:51 AM   #10
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by elliott678 View Post
That would be the 32 bit version that you have installed.
But why if I read the Live CD it says opensuse I686
 
Old 12-20-2008, 05:57 AM   #11
elliott678
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2005
Location: North Carolina
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 977

Rep: Reputation: 74
i686 is a 32 bit architecture that has been around since the Pentium Pro in 1995. The 64 bit version should be labeled x86_64 or something similar.
 
Old 12-20-2008, 08:25 AM   #12
lazlow
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,363

Rep: Reputation: 172Reputation: 172
Which takes us right back to what Quake said in Post #4. Here is what a 64bit reports back:
Quote:
[fred@localhost ~]$ uname -a
Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.23.15-137.fc8 #1 SMP Sun Feb 10 17:03:13 EST 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Personally I consider using the PAE/Bigmen solution to be a hack. It converts the register from 32bit to 36bit(?,never can remember) in software, which is by its very nature slower. Not all applications will behave well using PAE either. On the other hand switching to 64bit (on most distros) requires a complete fresh install. I guess I would consider just living without the .8gig until you are ready to update, it will not cause any issues.
 
Old 12-20-2008, 01:04 PM   #13
ronlau9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2007
Location: In front of my LINUX OR MAC BOX
Distribution: Mandriva 2009 X86_64 suse 11.3 X86_64 Centos X86_64 Debian X86_64 Linux MInt 86_64 OS X
Posts: 2,369

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Well I did a total fresh install with X686 , but the total amount of RAM is still 3.3 GB and the free RAM memory even drops down a bit because X686 use more as a cashes.
So it seems to me that my retailer was correct when he said that difference in the BIOS between the 4 GB and the available of 3.3 GB is caused by the fact that it is preallocated by my Graphic card who used a turbo cashes .
 
Old 12-20-2008, 01:41 PM   #14
Quakeboy02
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Distribution: Debian Linux 11 (Bullseye)
Posts: 3,407

Rep: Reputation: 141Reputation: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronlau9 View Post
Well I did a total fresh install with X686 , but the total amount of RAM is still 3.3 GB and the free RAM memory even drops down a bit because X686 use more as a cashes.
So it seems to me that my retailer was correct when he said that difference in the BIOS between the 4 GB and the available of 3.3 GB is caused by the fact that it is preallocated by my Graphic card who used a turbo cashes .

Um, why did you install 686 still again and expect a different result? As has already been said, you need to either go with a 64-bit install or a bigmem 686 install.
 
Old 12-20-2008, 08:44 PM   #15
jay73
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2006
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Ubuntu 11.04, Debian testing
Posts: 5,019

Rep: Reputation: 133Reputation: 133
Yeah, you need to download a new iso and select the AMD64 (or x86_64) version this time. Just reinstalling your 32 bit system is not going to make any difference at all.

Last edited by jay73; 12-20-2008 at 08:46 PM.
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All RAM not being recognized on Linux RHEL after adding RAM manouche Linux - Enterprise 4 04-18-2008 10:31 AM
FC 6 - missing RAM - Intel S5000PSL Board - 16GB RAM meofcourse Linux - Hardware 11 12-20-2007 03:21 AM
Question about RAM allocation and what 'seems' like very odd swap use NoeticRapture Slackware 8 06-25-2005 03:08 PM
Win98SE Pentium166MMX/64MB RAM vs Linux AthlonXP+ 3000/512MB RAM : Lucent LT WinModem t3gah Linux - Software 2 04-22-2005 01:01 PM
allocation jhon Programming 3 08-31-2004 08:52 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration