Qosmio only uses 1.75GB of RAM (1789MB) from a total of 4GB

I have a Qosmio X305-Q706 and I recently fixed it because it had a bootup failure caused by the keyboard and now I've discovered another problem with it. I don't know why but the computer detects 4GB of RAM installed in the system properties but any other RAM monitoring tool will show me that there's only 1.75GB (1789MB) available!
I'd expect at least a maximum of 3GB knowing the 32-bit limitations when it comes to using RAM. I thought that probably the computer administered the RAM modules automatically by activating them if the RAM exceeded the available amount... but it didn't! It started using the page file and kept the RAM at 1.75GB.
I added a few screen shots for somebody to see. Please help.
Message Edited by Zhelkus on 03-11-2009 06:26 PM

More reviewing...your model Graphics8• Dual NVIDIA® GeForce® 9800M GTS graphics with NVIDIA® SLI®Technology 512MBx2, GDDR3 discrete graphics memory, plus up to
1663MB dynamically allocated shared graphics memory using
NVIDIA® TurboCache™ technology.o Total Available Graphics memory 2175MB
Go to www.nividia.com their tech area explains how SLI works embedding memory usage configurations.

Similar Messages

Photoshop only using 20% of 8Gb ram

i am usually dealing with huge files in photoshop and i have 8Gb of ram yet my G5 dual processor with 80Gb of hard drive space and 8Gb of ram only lets photoshop use about 20% of available ram. it says it is using 100% of available ram.
is there a way i can allocate more ram to photoshop?
thanks
eric

RAM is limited by the program not the system. Currently, Photoshop 7 and Photoshop CS are "officially" limited to addressing no more than 2 GB of RAM. In actual practice, a "100% Allocation" of RAM to Photoshop 7.01 is around 1800 MB on systems with 2.5 or more GB of RAM installed.

Cs 5.5 only uses 22% of my ram, but 100% of CPU

Hi,
I'm just wondering why the ram usage is so low compared to the CPU in AE cs 5.5? I'm checking the bottom stats when the render is happening and it says only 22% of my ram is being used. Even until the very end, only 22%.
That being said, people on here are recommending tons of ram, such as 32gb+, but why? If this is the case? Maybe my comp needs more complex effects such as grain generation?
Thanks!

Maybe my comp needs more complex effects such as grain generation?
Yes, which is the whole point. Otherwise simply refer to the many performance and "best settings" threads that have amassed over the years to get a feeler for how AE uses resources.
Mylenium

Why can I only use 2.48 GB RAM in Boot Camp (Win 8.1 Pro, 64-bit)?

Hello, I am fairly new to the iMac and I have to use some programs in Windows that are not available for Mac so I set up Boot Camp and installed Windows 8.1.
My iMac is a I7-2600 CPU @ 3.4GHz with 16 GB RAM, system type-bit. Under system in Windows it shows Installed memory (RAM) 16 GB (2.48 GB usable).
I read about this problem and most answers are related to people using 32-bit. So what is wrong in my case, where is the problem?
Thank you in advance for help and suggestions.

Can you check msconfig in Windows as shown in the linked discussion?
You may also want to look at https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366796%28v=vs.85%29.a spx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396.
What is the year/model of your iMac (my guess is a 2011 iMac)? Can you post the output of the highlighted command from OS X Terminal?
sysctl hw.cpu64bit_capable
hw.cpu64bit_capable: 1

After Effects Hangs on Initializing Media Core and Only Uses .40 GB or RAM

I actually have either 2 separate issues or one that effects both. The fist one is that once After Effects loads, I generally can't RAM preview for 1080p quality, and about 6-20 frames for 720p, depending on if I get lucky or not. I went into Memory and Multiprocessing in the preference and no matter what I set the RAM per CPU to, the Actual CPUs that will be used is always 0, so then I go to details and it says "Installed RAM: 11.99 GB." "Current RAM Usage: .28 GB" "Allowed RAM Usage: .40GB." Whenever I render a video it always uses up to 3% or 4% of my RAM but never any higher.
And the second problem...
Whenever I start After Effects CS6 (and it happened in CS5.5) Trials it hangs on Initializing Media Core, for about 5 minutes, then it says Quicktime isn't installed. To fix that problem I have tried everything I could find in the 30+ hours I have spent on that problem. Turning off all firewalls, anti-virus, etc, updating, reinstalling, and everything in between. (Also I see dynamiclinkmanager.exe and AfterFX.exe but not QT32.exe or PProHeadless.exe which need to be allowed through firewalls and such)
I'm using After Effects CS6
Windows 7 64-bit
12 GB of RAM
Quicktime 7.7.2 and Itunes 10.6.3.25 Any ideas would be very much appreciated, thanks! ^.^

Ok, well I installed updates to my graphics driver, After Effects, and Windows, and unfortunately nothing worked, but from reading other forums, when I am using After Effects I should see QT32server.exe right? That doesn't show up in processes, but also I installed Premiere Pro to test dynamic link, and I always get an error "Failed to connect to Dynamic Link Manager." and when I hit Ctrl + Enter it says the same thing. ( I actually don't know what that hotkey does ) any ideas at all would be very much appreciated
Edit: I started thinking about it, my driver is an Nvidia GeForce GTS 450, which I didn't see on Adobe's supported list, is this the culprit behind the render problems?
Message was edited by: Jeremiah1119

After effects only using 6% ram

Installed RAM: 23.99 GB
Current RAM Usage: 2.37 GB
Allowed RAM Usage: 19.99 GB
Process ID
Application Name
Min Needed Memory
Max Usable Memory
Max Allowed Memory
Current Memory
Current Priority
3524
aeselflink
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.23
3752
After Effects
0.40
23.99
19.99
1.23
1 - High
3868
aeselflink
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.22
6504
aeselflink
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.23
7372
aeselflink
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.23
7880
aeselflink
3.00
3.00
3.00
0.23
5 hard drives:
1- operating system and softwear
2- Raid 0 - footage and projects.
3- Raid 0- used to render projects out to.
(Simply Raid 0, I dont have a controller or anything like that, can't afford)
Ever since the first time I used after effects, when I try to pre-render anything it only uses 6% of ram, so it takes forever to render out anything. One day it did say 46% used and that time it finished real fast. How can I fix this? to use more when I render out?
Thanks for the help

Nothing to fix because nothing is broken. AE will only use what it needs. If it renders slow or even reverts to single core rendering, it means there are effects or settings that trigger this behavior because they are incompatible with MP rendering. Likewise, some effects are simply more CPU intense, but never use a lot of RAM while the otehr day the situation may be reversed...
Mylenium

AE CS3 only uses 4gb ram

Hi there,
I am actually using the AE CS3 version on a Windows 7 64 bit PC with 12 Gig of ram. But everytime I use AE, it says that it uses 4 gigabyte of ram only. That's kind of strange, as the OS uses the whole amount of ram.
Is there any solution to it or do I have to upgrade to CS4? Hope not...
Thank you!

The information in that FAQ entry is still mostly valid for After Effects CS3, especially the important point: After Effects CS3 is a 32-bit application, so each process can only see and use a theoretical maximum of 4GB of RAM. However, with Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously multiprocesing, After Effects spawns additional processes that can each use its own few GB of RAM.
Here's the page in After Effects CS3 Help about the Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously multiprocessing feature:
http://livedocs.adobe.com/en_US/AfterEffects/8.0/WS2FD05F13-66CB-47c1-9FD2-7CEE7EDF588F.ht ml
Don't be so quick to dismiss information about CS4 as being irrelevant to CS3 (and vice versa). Most things don't change from one version to the next, so information written for one version is usually still good for the next. (If you're ever unsure, you can use this decoder ring page to see what's changed from CS3 to CS4.)

Upgraded 16gb ram. Only using 4gb

Hi,
I have an iMac 27" Mac OS X 10.6.8. I upgraded the memory from 4gb to 16gb. After working on it I have noticed that the memory that is using within the activity monitor, it only uses 4gb. I'm usually using Pro Tools 8 LE for it, I have a lot of troubles with memory.
Any Ideas to start using the 16gb ram?
Thanks in advance

Install Sophos: https://discussions.apple.com/message/18316360#18316360
That is pure sarcasm by the way. Don't install Sophos.
What you are seeing is completely normal. Your iMac uses what it needs, and your usage indicates that it needs less than 25% of its available memory. If it needs more it will take more. 16 GB is enormous.
Enjoy your Mac.
Message was edited by: John Galt

Why won't my macbook pro accept both 4gb Ram, It will only use a 4gb and a 2gb?

I have a mid 2009 2.6 Ghz 15" macbook pro, and recently purchased two samsund ddr3 4gb 1600hz 204 pin RAM. I removed my two 2gb standard Ram from my macbook pro, and inserted the two 4gb Ram. When I turned the computer one it began using its 3 beep sequence as if the Ram fail, so I removed one 4gb Ram and reinserted a 2gb Ram and the computer started. It said I had total 6 gb ram. I am wonderind why It won't accept both of the 4gb Ram.

Exactly what Kappy and Stedman1 states.
The RAM you purchased is way out of specs for what you need.
Go and return or exchange them for either a set of Crucial, Corsair, Mushkin or Kingston (non value) RAM.

Oracle can only use 2GB on Windwos XP Server

Hi all,
Is the following statement true or false:
"If the Oracle database runs on the Windows XP server (without access to the Datacenter version of Windows), the single-process architecture limits the Oracle database server to about 1.75GB of RAM in total. So, if we have 8GB of RAM on the server, users connected to Oracle can use only about 2GB of it."
Thanks in advance.

This was why I posted in the first place... Like I said, it is not just copied (not verbatim, at least not from the edition I read), and it is taken out of context.
In this case, the chapter talks about how to develop oracle applications, the mentioned section (p 10) has an example of how not to by ignoring how oracle works and hence using more connections than really needed - it is not a chapter about Windows memory architecture.
According to the link I mentioned above, even XP has ability to use larger-memory techniques e.g. a larger user address space (3GB). But who or which note, doc, etc. is correct? Like Tom always pushes towards, you should not just swallow the bait, instead try to find out what it means yourself, build your own understanding.
Message was edited by:
orafad

Bridge is slow because it's only using two threads

I'm finding that Bridge (CS6) exhibits very poor performance when building 100% previews, I think the software is limited to only two threads.
If you load bridge and go into a folder with some images and then Tools->Cache->Purge you'll see that Bridge takes a long time to rebuild the previews even on a high end machine, especially if you have both "Always High Quality" and "100% Previews" selected. I think the problem is that it appears to build the previews using only two threads on the CPU, so while a 2005 dual core machine might get maxed out, a Quad Core, or 8 Thread, or even 12 Thread machine sits there mostly idle while Bridge grinds away for an hour or more.
It's easy to check this, just load up Windows Task Manager, and view the "Processes" tab and Bridge will only ever use 2 threads worth of CPU cycles, i.e. 50% on a Quad Core, and 17% on a 12 Thread high end desktop. I've seen the problem with JPG files, PSD files, and NEF files (Nikon RAW). The processing time of large Nikon D800E NEF files is very slow. After shooting 900 images I can expect the preview build time to take over an hour on a super high end machine with loads of memory, storage IO, and CPU cores and threads, all because it appears bottlenecked on software design. Meanwhile the machine is only running at roughly 20% utilization, the memory barely used, and the IO system close to idle.
I'm using Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, 64GB RAM, 12 Thread Core i7 3960X at 4Ghz, two Nvidia GTX470 graphics (in SLI), a 2-way RAID-0 SSD storage array for the OS, and an 8-way RAID-0 SSD array for the photoshop work files. The hardware is clearly not the issue. Although, just to check, I confirmed the same problem exists on a simple Win8 Core i7 system, and a Core i5 laptop.
Even worse, after waiting an hour to build previews for 900 images (3 seconds each), after adding GPS data, or after making edits in Camera Raw it then needs to rebuild all the previews again, this is understandable, but super fustrating when you know it's not working as fast as it really should be.
To be clear, I'm not upset it takes 6 seconds per image per thread - there's a lot of work to do, especially with D800 files. But I'm upset that Bridge's software design only uses 2 threads, and thus limits performance to building a preview every 3 seconds, when in fact it could be working 6 times faster on a PC with 12 thread, and I find it shocking that Adobe's latest software wouldn't be optimized for anything more than a dual core CPU, wasn't quad core launched in 2006?
Roland.
P.S. for any Adobe Tech's reading - I submitted this under case number 184020852 and there's an attached PDF in the ticket including several screenshots.

There have been many discussions in Photoshop forum about processor speed and multicores. I know Bridge is not Photoshop but it may give you some insight as what is going on. Photoshop has supported multithreading since CS3. Here is a quote from Adobe Tech Note:
Photoshop generally runs faster with more processor cores, although some features take greater advantage of the additional cores than others. There is a law of diminishing returns with multiple processor cores: The more cores you use, the less you get from each additional core. Therefore, Photoshop doesn’t run four times as fast on a computer with 16 processor cores as on a computer with four cores. For most users, the increase in performance that more than six cores provides doesn't justify the increased cost.
I run embedded thumbnails (therefore 100% previews are off) as they take up less space and are the fastest to load. I ran a simple test with Bridge CS5 (32 bit) and CS6 (64 bit) on one folder of 200 video images totaling 16 gigs, or 80 meg per file. With folder loaded I clicked Tools/Cache/purge cache for xxx folder. I then timed the rebuild until the arrow stopped spinning in lower left hand corner. For CS5 the time was 35 seconds. For CS6 the time was 72 seconds.
I then took a folder of 1147 jpg images of 660 meg (427k/image). In CS5 it took 12 seconds to build the cache, and the same for CS6. However, the interesting part of this is when I loaded this folder in CS6 I had never been there before so it had to build it. THis took 80 seconds. When I purged it an it rebuilt it took 12 seconds. I have noticed this phenomemum before where the initial build takes 5-7 times longer than a rebuild of the cache.
I then ran the same test with the still images with 100% preview and Always High Quality. With CS5 it took 3 min 30 seconds and with CS6 it took 5 min. 20 seconds.
So with these very SIMPLE tests I conclude that CS6 has quite a bit slower cache process than CS5. As we have all learned with buying new products, new and improved does not always mean it is better.

I AM STUCK WITH MOZILLA FIREFOX / NOT SHOWN ON MY LAPTOP SCREEN / USING HUGE AMOUNT OF RAM IN GENERAL - CAN YOU HELP????

Hi,
I have copied these problem on you site, as I could explain better then what they did, wich my problem remain the same as they have. And part me explaining what is really happen to my Laptop.
''Mozilla/Firefox 4 will not SHOW on my computer SCREEN.
Firefox won't load onto my computer. I have Windows 7, and each time I try to run the program to install it, it tells me I have another version still waiting to be installed that requires my computer to reboot. When I check "yes" to reboot, my computer reboots but still no Firefox. When I try to uninstall the the old Mozilla program from my Control Panels, there is no Mozilla files or programs listed not in my list of programs but when I go directly to the Windows File on the C: Drive, there's a Mozilla program file there. WHen I go into that file check, I attempt to open the uninstall program. I get an error message that says something to the effect of: "the version Mozilla on this computer is not compatable with my OS." Something about it being and 86bit program. My Firefox 3.6 worked fine 2 days ago. What's wrong??? ''
'''Firefox 4 using huge amounts of RAM on sites with Java scripts
I have been observing Firefox using huge amount of RAM when I am on sites that use Java Scripts to rotate images. I have tried a couple of different sites and have monitored the RAM usage. With Java script enabled Firefox 4 continues to grow its RAM usage by about 10MB a minute. I have had the usage hit as high as 1.5GB. As a comparison I have monitored the same sites in Internet explorer and have not seen the same issue. - Just to eliminate a site issue.
Turning off Java Script solves the issue and eventually frees the RAM.
I am using XP Pro, 3 GB RAM. '''''
My experince with Mozilla Firefox:
Here what really happen when I install the Mozilla Firebox on my La[top you can see the file is there but when I click the program to open its does not shown on the screen but when I check with WTM (Windows Task Manager) its shows that is ON and you can only witness the laptop going very slow and I have to reboot it, and I can not install any other Mozilla :( because of the same problem and all the above.
I really need Mozilla to work as soon as possible due to important deadlines I have pendent, and i can only use Chrome but is not my ideal program. Can you help me , please ?????
Thank you
Vitor Mendes

If it opens in safe mode, you may have a problematic add-on. Try the procedure in the [[Troubleshooting extensions and themes]] article.

Adobe Media Encoder only using single core of CPU (core parking has already been disabled and did not solve the problem)

I only edit videos every few months and the last time I edited a video was around 6-9 months ago. At that time, I noticed AME was only using a single core of the CPU and contacted Adobe who instructed me to disable core parking, which worked. After disabling core parking AME used 100% of all 12 logical cores to process the video and all was good. Then last week, I decided to edit another video and noticed AME was very slow and checked and it was again only using a single core to process the video, but core parking is still turned off. By slow I mean that a 10 minute video with the lens distortion correction preset and one video transition effect is estimated to take nearly 3 hours to complete. For comparison, the GoPro software processed the same clip with the same effects in 20 minutes. Also, through troubleshooting with Adobe over the last few days, I have also tried downloading previous versions of the software but the prior versions have the same issue.
The video I'm trying to edit was shot on a GoPro Hero 4 Black with 1080p Wide at 60 frames per second. The default video format for GoPro is .mp4. The output settings I'm using when I export from Premiere Pro to AME are H.264 with the YouTube 1080p HD.
My system:
ASUSSabertooth X79
Intel core i7 4930k (6 physical cores, 12 logical cores)
16GB DDR3 Quad channel RAM
Samsung 830 SSD 128GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 (not CUDA compatible, I know)
Please ask if you need any additional information to help solve this problem.

This has been driving me CRAZY... so going over the message boards from 2 to 5 am this morning I found the best explanation I have seen. The problem is that Adobe Creative Cloud is NOT "Processor Group Aware". Windows parses any more than 36 cores into "Processor Groups" and while the Pro version of Windows 7 & 8 can handle 256 threads they have to spread them across multiple processor groups.
Simple Version: AREA | How many cores does 3ds Max support?
Microsoft's Explanation: Processor Groups (Windows)
Clearly, this is an Adobe Problem... If any engineers are reading this PLEASE review the below and incorporate it into your next build of Creative Cloud!!!
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn653313%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
Again, I bought a VERY expensive machine based on your white paper that recommended Dual Xeon Workstations. Please, Please Give us the product you PROMISED!!!
Michael

HELP: Premiere Pro CC not using all CPU and RAM during rendering and export

Hello,
I am using Premiere Pro CC on a Windows 7. My timeline is quite simple with two videos, one with the movie (mpeg) and the other with the subtitles (avi).
When I render the sequence in PP or export, the rendering time is way too slow and it only uses around 15-20% of the CPU and 3 GB of RAM.
My hardware config is :
- CPU : i7-4770k 3.50Ghz
- RAM : 8 GB
- Disk : 2 x 3 TB SATA (no raid)
RAM is not the bottleneck, neither the disk access.
I have tried rendering and exporting the same project on an iMac (with an i5 2.7 Ghz and 4 GB RAM and only 1 disk) and the result is 4x faster !!!
The CPU usage is close to 100% as well as RAM usage.
So how come PP uses all resources availble on an iMac and not on a Windows 7 ?
Is there any known bug or software bottleneck on Windows 7 ?
My machine is brand new and nothing much installed besides Adobe products.
Any help is very much appreciated.
Thanks,

I just rendered out a a 2 minute sequence with about 100 clips in it and Colorista effects on everything to the Vimeo 1080 H264 preset. It took about 5 minutes to render straight from Premiere, it used all the recourses it could, my CPU was running at near %100, same with my ram and GPU, I was happy.
Then I did another render with Red Giant Denoiser and it now wants to take 30 mins and it is only using about %20 of the recourses available. My problem isn't that its taking longer with Denoiser but that its not using all of my computers CPU and GPU.
Im rendering at maximum render quality and bit dept to H264 (Im happy to wait the extra time), if I try to use VRB 2 it encodes 1 pass at a time and wants to take up to 40 minutes.
I would appreciate some advice on this.
Premiere Pro CC 2013
2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB (CUDA GPU enabled in Premiere)
16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
OS X 10.9.4 (13E28)

MAC MINi Use More CPU - More RAM ?

My Mac Mini 2012 Server i7 2.6 2tb has just had its RAM upgraded from 4gb to 16gb . When doing a simple task like downloading and installing all my Apps
it uses , according to Activity Monitor , only 4 - 7 % of CPU and 4gb or less of RAM . Consequently it is taking hours and hours to complete this simple task .
Internet is not brilliant but not too slow either .
Is there something ' holding back ' the Mini ? Is there a setting that I can tweak ? I assumed it would fly through simple tasks like this.
Also , when put to sleep , the white display light powers on and off for a few minutes but then goes solid white again giving the impression of being on and when I return to screen sharing the login page is visible . Does this mean that it is not staying in ' Sleep Mode ' ??
Apologies for Noob Questions
~M~

First the downloads, open Safari and go to the following
website:
http://www.speedtest.net
and run an internet speed test. Then do the math to figure
how long a download should "ideally" take. Remember that
there is more to download speeds than just the raw data
rate. Server loading, the type of network you are on and
its activity can contribute greatly to large file down loads.
RAM and CPU have little to no impact when it comes to
downloading data over the internet, unless of course there
is a background task hogging CPU, which it does not seem
in your case.

Qosmio only uses 1.75GB of RAM (1789MB) from a total of 4GB

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for