Why not 4 GB RAM

Is there a maximum amount of RAM the machine will register? If you are simply stuffing a 2GB chip in one slot and leaving a 1 GB in the other, what prevents you from putting a 2GB in each RAM slot?

You might find this article enlightening....
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=321 and a MacFixit article
http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20061027080510835
The MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo presumably uses Intel's 945PM chipset, which can physically handle 4 GB of DDR2 RAM. However, a number of items that must be stored in physical RAM space, and when RAM reaches 4 GB, there is some overlap. In other words, in a 3 GB RAM configuration, there is no overlap with the memory ranges required for certain system functions. Between 3 GB and 4 GB, however, system memory attempts to occupy space that is already assigned to these functions. For instance, the PCI Express RAM allocation occurs at somewhere around 3.5 GB of RAM and requires 256 MB of RAM. Thus, the virtual space between 3.5 GB of RAM and 3.75 GB of RAM is occupied by PCI Express data. So in a system with 3 GB of RAM, nothing is being wasted because the memory space required by PCI Express is still between 3.5 and 3.75 GB, and the installed system RAM does not violate this space.

Similar Messages

Why do I get "Not enough RAM to launch" pop up when I try to open PhotoDeluxe 4 on my new PC?

Why do I get "Not enough RAM to launch" pop up when I try to open PhotoDeluxe 4 on my new PC?

Which version of windows are you using?
Is your windows system 32 or 64 bit?
It may be that PhotoDeluxe 4 just won't work on newer windows operating systems.
Have you tried right clicking on the PhotoDeluxe 4 shortcut selecting Properties and trying a Compatibility mode such as windows xp or windows 2000 under the Compatibility tab?

Why doesn't my program open? Error message states "not enough RAM" but I have 5 GB avail

I have Elements 2.0. Have been using it on 3 computers. Suddenly this laptop won't even open the program. Error message states "not enough RAM" but I have 5 GB available. How can I fix this. No problem on other computers with same Windows 7, Elements 2.0. This laptop is an HP. Others are Toshiba & Dell.

globejr wrote:
I have Elements 2.0. Have been using it on 3 computers. Suddenly this laptop won't even open the program. Error message states "not enough RAM" but I have 5 GB available. How can I fix this. No problem on other computers with same Windows 7, Elements 2.0. This laptop is an HP. Others are Toshiba & Dell.
Even if you have 5GB of RAM, PSE can't make use of all of it because it is likely to be a 32 bit program (if not 16 bit). PSE2 is very old made for Windows 2000 or Windows 98 but this was all before my time so my facts must be wrong here.
I am amazed that you managed to install it on Windows 7 in the first place.
You might want to try this link:
<http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/install-and-use-windows-xp-mode-in-windows-7>

AE CS4 - why such poor RAM preview on my FAST machine?

Hi all, I just installed After Effects CS4 - I have a smokin fast mchine: quadcore Zeon 3.20 GHz, hyperthreading turned on, nvidia quadrofx 3800 with current driver, 12 GB DDR3 RAM, windows 7 64bit ... can you PLEASE help me troubleshoot a problem: even on the simplest compositions, a moving picture or a moving piece of type, the RAM preview stutters along, the current time indicator hops along at a choppy pace, images in the frame dont look like they're moving smoothly, and all i get is about 6 seconds of RAM preview ... seems to me that I used to get better performance on a MUCH MUCH slower machine under windows XP ... i have looked around the forums and seem the advice on multiprocessor options and the like, but nothing I do seems to help ... do any of you have any advice for me to improve my performance??? if you have any questions about my setup or preferences, let me know, I will be on this until I get what I expect out of my (otherwise incredibly fast) machine

Hi Todd, thanks again for your reply ... FYI, I bought the FX3800 for Avid editing, for which it is the qualified video card, and supports distributed processing in the Avid along with my DX HD hardware BOB - I had hoped it would work well with After Effects, too, but I do understand the Adobe is very transparent about the fact that, as long as your card has OpenGL support, probably best to sink your $$$ into more RAM or faster CPU .. but to stay on topic, I am just very stunned that I am not getting better playback with my system ... I have the most recent Nvidia drivers ... I have 2 NEC 2490WUXi2 each connected through DVI-D to my video card, each runnign at its native 1920x1200 res, 59 hertz ... the programs I have installed are Adobe CS4 Production Premium, Win7 64bit, MS Office 2007 Enterprise, latest version of Quick Time, Media Player version 11, and NERO 9 ... you dont think that one of these video player apps (like media player or QT) are messing with my screen performance do you? what about Nero 9, have you heard any compatibility or display problems associated with this app? would unistalling any of these programs be a troubleshooting technique that you'd attempt?
Finally, when you say "an issue with a bottleneck of drawing to the screen" what do you mean exactly? 'cause this kinds sounds like a goood description of what I am seeing ... what might be the cause of such a bottleneck, I am willing to try anything ...
Thanks, sir, for your reply!
Derek Reid
Trader Multimedia Inc.
www.tradermm.com
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:46:43 -0600
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: AE CS4 - why such poor RAM preview on my FAST machine?
Just one thing to cut down a frequent misconception:
Your nice graphics card doesn't do much for After Effects performance.In fact, trying to use OpenGL for rendering (including rendering of previews) can cause problems.
I recommend turning OpenGL rendering off for all but interactions. I.e., choose the http://help.adobe.com/en_US/AfterEffects/9.0/WSAF696587-2D81-42e2-B248-4C5C2B7D3614a.html and turn off http://help.adobe.com/en_US/AfterEffects/9.0/WS3878526689cb91655866c1103a4f2dff7-79e8a.htm l. OpenGL is not compatible with Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously multiprocessing.
I'm not saying that OpenGL is your problem. Rather, because you mentioned your nice graphics card, I just had to stress that you need to forget about that with regard to After Effects. It's not really relevant.
It may be that the jerkiness is an issue with a bottleneck of drawing to the screen. (I don't know, but it's possible.)
Your hard disk being too slow wouldn't be an issue with RAM previews, since the frames are all cached in RAM.
>

Error: Not Enough RAM to Open Small Files

MacBook5,2
Macintosh OSX 10.6.3
4GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M - 256MB
Adobe Photoshop CS4 Extended (11.0.1)
I am rendering TIFF files out of Maya that are 11880 x 3400 pixels. The file size ranges between 100 - 160 MB. Whenever I attempt to open one of these images in Photoshop, I receive this error: "Could not complete the Open command because there is not enough RAM."
I just ran Adobe Update and I have all the latest updates.
I deleted my Photoshop preferences and restarted Photoshop.
I have my Scratch disk set to an internal solid state disk with 30 GB of free space.
I have Photoshop's RAM set to 3000MB.
Despite all of this, I still receive the "Could not complete the Open command because there is not enough RAM" error every time I attempt to open the images rendered out of Maya.
The images from Maya are completely normal 8bit TIFF files with neither an alpha channel nor a depth channel. I can successfully open them in After Effects, but this is useless to me. I need to edit them individually in Photoshop.
Photoshop's error is clearly not due to file size. I have HDR panoramas with dimensions greater than 11880 x 3400 that go up to 1GB in file size that I can open and work on in Photoshop without any problem.
Why is Photoshop not playing nicely with these TIFF images?

I still want to a solution to the above problem, but I have found a temporary work-around using After Effects.
Import the image into After Effects and then save the image as another file using Composition --> Save Frame as --> File.
As I said earlier, After Effects is capable of reading the files that are coming out of Maya even though Photoshop is not.
When I use After Effects to save the image as a TIFF, Photoshop is now able to open the new TIFF file.
This, however, is only a temporary work-around. It is not optimal to resave the image before I start working on it. I am probably loosing some precious data in the After Effects conversion. As a matter of fact, the images tend to be 40MB smaller in size when I export them through After Effects, even though I am using the same file type, no compression, and still 8 bits.
Now, back to the problem: What is wrong with Photoshop?

2.0 GHz Intel Quad core i7 vs. 3.7 GHz Intel Duo Core i7 Processor: Why not make the Quad Core 3.7GHz?

I don't really understand processors, but is the 2.0GHz Quad Core i7 really a better processor in terms of performance? If it has 4 cores why not give it greater processing speed like 2.7 or 3.0 GHz?
I am asking because I am thinking about getting the high end Mac Mini, but I see that it's processor runs at 2.0GHz and the others in the line run at 2.5 and 2.7 respectively. Why is this?

I'm really oversimplifying here, but...
Let's just assume that each core runs at full speed all the time, the total performance of that processor would be the sum of the running totals of each core:
Duo Core i7 = 2 (cores) * 2.7 GHZ = 5.4 Ghz total processor power
Quad Core i5 = 4 (cores) * 2.0 GHZ = 8.0 Ghz
Like I said, oversimplified. But, you get the point. Not to mention, most apps still aren't optimized, so at a given time they only use a single core anyway. In this case, it'd be more beneficial to have more cores, since they would (hypothetically) be able to run more simultaneous processes (four vs. two in your case).
I gues the greater question is: what were you planning on using the mini for? Most CPUs go underutilized anyway, so you may be better off getting a 2.0, and maxing out your RAM and maybe adding a SSD. Those upgrades (the SSD especially) will result in a very noticeable increase in performance.

PS CS3 not recognizing Raw Files and converters Ive downloaded not working..Why not?

PS CS3 not recognizing Raw Files and converters Ive downloaded not working..Why not?

Do you seriously think we can answer that with zero information from you?
Please give us:
Operating System/version
Photoshop version number
Amount of RAM installed
Hard drive(s) free capacity
Video card make and model
Camera make and model
Then describe what you have done so far and the symptoms you are seeing.

Photoshop CS4 does NOT use RAM as scratch disk

Photoshop CS4 does NOT use RAM as scratch disk
as far as I can tell.
I have 20 GB RAM and still Photoshop uses the hard disk as scratch disk.
(OS = Win 7 64).
Can I force the use of RAM as scratch disk?
/Larry

Hi PECourtejoie,
I really try to understand this, please.
I don't know if 'Hitting the hard disk brings unacceptable slowdowns in my workflow'.
Because I don't know what unacceptable slowdowns are.
Any operation in Phshp takes time, and you always want it to go as fast as possible..
I know that if Phshp only worked against RAM instead of constantly saving to (and reading from) the hard drive it ought to go faster.
But I still don't know if this is the case, because there is a constant use of a tempfile on the hard drive's Scratch disk!
So far I understand that Phshp may BOTH work in RAM AND save data to the hard drive Scratch disk.
It could be possible that the writing to the hard disk happens when Phshp is idle from other tasks and that the reading only happens when data has disappeared from the Cache in RAM.
That could be a scenario where a Scratch disk on Hard drive doesn't interfere with Phshps performance, and an explanation why we should not bother about the Scratch disk on the hard drive.
But I would very much like to have some confirmation on this, IF this is the explanation of how the Scratch disk on a hard drive works without influencing Phshp's performance??
Everybody just seem to assume that Photoshop uses (some) parts of RAM as work space - I just need a better understanding of this. And some correct descriptions.
/Larry

Why or why not single-host installation?

Hi friends,
I'm collecting your opinions and experiences here... :)
Why or why not to install complete, i.e. both Infra and Mid-tier, AS release 2 on a single host? -does it not basically come down to hardware configuration? (if the cpu and RAM is "good" enough, then no problems)
And multi-host installations is mostly for expansion and segmentation reasons?
Thanks,
Fredrik

In my experience the reason NOT to do a single host installation is performance.
I tried doing a single-host installation on an NT box running dual Pentium 500mhz processors and 1GB of ram. Everything seemed to work just fine. The infrastructure went in one Oracle home, the app server went in another. All of the admin functions took forever. The EM website was a complete pain to use. The machine clearly was short on memory and short on CPU.
Keep in mind the infrastructure installation includes a complete application server, it's own instance of the Oracle database, plus a bunch of additional adminstration specific bits. It's a lot of stuff. The application server installation duplicates a lot. You end up running two instances of Apache, a bunch (5-10) instances of the J2EE container, etc.
The good news (for us anyway) is that the infrastructure installation can also be used to manager Oracle databases. It's instance of the Oracle database is the repository for the admin data. We were going to set up an dedicated box for Oracle Enterprise Manager anyway for our new 9i databases. So putting the infrastructure on it's own box ends up causing us no grief at all. Also we plan on running 4 instances of the app server (for various sites we have around the world). So again having the infrastructure on it's own box really makes sense for us.
To sum up, in my limited experience the single-host solution worked just fine (though it was not used in a production setting) but if you go that way you'll want a beefy box.

Firefoox will not see my default network printer. it see's all other printers except that one. why not?

firefox will not see my artisan 810 network printer and allow me to select it from the available printers. why not?
== This happened ==
Every time Firefox opened
== un known

Thank you. That's what I thought will need to happen.
One more question. I tried using the Apple install disk that came with the computer. It's an OS 10.5.6 disk. It does not see my 10.6.8 system internal hard drive to repair. All it see's is itself 10.5.6 disk. Do you think I can use a 10.8+ disk utillity since that is a higher system it will see the 10.6.8. Where the 10.5.6 does not?
I don't want to turn the computer off for fear I'll get the question mark again. P-Ram got me going last time but for how long I don't know? It would be nice to be able to turn the computer off for the night and startup as usual to give it a rest and try to reset itself.
Thanks for your help, I know I will eventually need to re-install. But I am in the middle of a project with tight deadlines and all I can do right now is back-up. Trying to migrate to another computer temporarily to finish the job. That's a lot of extra work in the short time also.
Just trying to put a band-aid on it for another couple weeks.

T400 4GB Vista or Windows 7 32 bits with PAE. Why not possible?

Hello,
I have read some articles about enabling 4GB of RAM in Windows Vista 32 bit version enabling PAE as discussed here: http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=989
I have tried this method and others and I have disabled DEP in Windows and in the BIOS.
Is this possible to reach 4 GB of RAM in 32 bit OS with PAE in T400? I have read that in windows 2008 is possible (also linux) but why not in Vista32 or windows7 32?
Cheers!
Jorge
Message Edited by hardaway on 02-13-2009 03:53 PM
Message Edited by hardaway on 02-13-2009 03:54 PM
T400 (2767-AK3)

I mean why is not possible to use a 4GB ram in a 32 bit OS with PAE in the Lenovo T400.
I know in other machines is possible.
T400 (2767-AK3)

Adobe can support pentax why not apple?

I just downloaded a beta of lightable from adobe which supports my pentax raw format. If Adobe can support pentax, why not apple? It seems as though aperture is playing poor catchup, maybe apple to put more resources on it.
Image if only 1/3 of the cameras were supported when Iphoto launched, they would have looked like idiots. Well?

I just downloaded a beta of lightable from adobe
which supports my pentax raw format. If Adobe can
support pentax, why not apple? It seems as though
aperture is playing poor catchup, maybe apple to put
more resources on it.
Image if only 1/3 of the cameras were supported when
Iphoto launched, they would have looked like idiots.
Well?
In very simple terms...
In order to add support for various camera RAW files, Apple has to ask the camera manufactures to supply proprietary information about how to process and read the RAW files. Each and every single camera has a different "proprietary process" it must use to handle the RAW file that the camera produces.
So that means that Apple is at the mercy of the manufacturers in order to get that information. Now most manufactures would prefer that you purchase or use their own software to work on the RAW files that their camera produces... it's an extra revenue stream for them. Because of this, it's not hard to imagine that they are a bit reluctant to divulge what is proprietary information that they spent time and money on creating. It's well documented that Nikon in particular is very reluctant about releasing such information.
If Adobe has support for a particular camera that Apple does not, then that means that Adobe has already gone through the trouble of asking the manufacturer for the information that is needed, reached an agreement and signed the appropriate licensing contracts, exchanged whatever compensation was agreed upon, and then went to work making the software for ACR so it can read that particular cameras RAW files. As you can imagine, it's a process that takes some time to hammer out... more than likely because it involves more lawyers than engineers!
So... be sure you let Apple know that you would like them to add support for a particular camera, but just as important, make sure that your cameras manufacturer knows that you would like them to allow Apple to support their cameras with Apple's software.
PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5Ghz Mac OS X (10.4.4) 4.5GB RAM, Nvidia 7800 GT, 600GB RAID

If 3 is great, why not 4?

Why does the MacBook Pro only support a max of 3Gb with 1-2Gb and 1-1Gb RAM module? Why not 2-2Gb RAM for a total of 4Gb? Seems if 3 is great, why not go for 4?
Jim

No idea and it's actually against the Terms of Use for these forums to discuss it. However, given the last update was in Nov 2006 I doubt they'll be any time in the very near future.
You might want to consult some Mac rumour sites to see if they say anything. Here's a link to start you off…
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

LR5 I can´t installing in Vista....why not?

Hello, my name is Kai and my problem is with the installing LR5 in Vista.
I can´t installing in Vista....why not?

System requirements for LR5
Windows
Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® 64 processor*
DirectX 10–capable or later graphics card
Windows 7 with Service Pack 1, Windows 8, or Windows 8.1
2GB of RAM (4GB recommended)
2GB of available hard-disk space
1024x768 display
DVD-ROM drive required if purchasing Adobe® Photoshop® Lightroom® retail boxed version
Internet connection required for Internet-based services†

My operating system windows XP not working with photoshop cloud, why not?

I need to add 2 more licences for photoshop cloud and I'm being told my operating system windows XP does not work with Photoshop cloud. We already have 2 pcs using it in our office so why not?
Please help
Roy

Do you have the latest version of iTunes? If not, get it at:
http://www.apple.com/itunes

790FX-GD70 not setting RAM to correct timing nor voltage from SPED

My 790FX-GD70 not setting RAM to correct timing nor voltage from SPED when set to auto. The RAM I have should be 6 6 6 20 @ 1.8V but the motherboard is setting it to 9 9 9 24 @ 1.5 V
The RAM is Crucial 2GB, Ballistix 240-pin DIMM, DDR3 PC3-10600 memory BL25664BA1336 • DDR3 PC3-10600 • 6-6-6-20 • Unbuffered • NON-ECC • DDR3-1333 • 1.8V • 256Meg x 64 of which i have two of then in the two black slots.
Just to rule out the RAM I also tried a different model of RAM whose timing is 7 7 7 24 @ 1.65 which will not allow to boot to windows unless I adjust the voltage manually to 1.70 (1.65 V will still not boot properly) it sets it also at 9 9 9 24 yet this same sticks of RAM will set correctly in a MSI 770 C45 without any adjustments.
Now i will say in the case of the 790FX-GD70 I require no changes in voltage for it to boot with the 1.8 V RAM just the timings are not as they should be. The 790FX-GD70 is stable as is and I will probably leave it at the auto settings but wondered if anyone else encountered similar issues with this board

Looks like this is a bit of an issue for some other users of your RAM and not necessarily a MSI thing! This user has a ASUS board! Good luck and hope you get it sorted out.
Backround:
I bought some DDR3-1333 ram that was advertised as 6-6-6-20 @ 1.8v and, as expected, running on my board's default 1.5v it was only getting like 9-9-9-24. In fact, @ stock voltage the best I could boot up with (unknown stability) was 9-7-7. In an attempt to get the best (advertised?) performance I went ahead and manually set the timings to 6-6-6-20, left all other timings on auto, and upped the voltage to 1.8v
Boots up fine and appears to be stable. However, I do notice the RAM is fairly warm to the touch whereas @ 1.5v it was pretty benign heat-wise. I tried running 1.785v but 3 out of 4 times it would hang on the windows desktop display. So I bumped it back up to 1.8v and I'll run Memtest 86 or something else later tonight.
My question, being a noob and all...
Is running at 1.8v going to hurt something? (See my setup MB, and CPU stats)
Just to repeat, the box and manufacturer do list it as 1.8v spec. (FYI: BL25664BA1336)

Why not 4 GB RAM

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for