Article View: comp.os.os2.misc
Article #17526Re: RAM > 64Mb.. is this normal ?
From: Stanley Chow
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:00
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:00
59 lines
2840 bytes
2840 bytes
In article <844098206snz129.os2.7@artin.glassnet.com>, Clive Humble <chumble@glassnet.com> wrote: > >Hi chaps, > > >I've just added a few more chips to my PC. > [ output from 4OS2 memory, and GammaTech Sysinfo] I think I would ignore these two and just rely on ... >*********** System Information Tool - *********** >*********** Installed Memory Amounts *********** >Memory Amounts by Operating System >Total amount memory detected by OS/2 : 97,900 Kilobytes >Total bytes of memory locked by OS/2 : 8,772 Kilobytes >Total amount of virtual memory free : 651,456 Kilobytes >Page size of memory : 4,096 Bytes >Memory Amounts by Type >Base Memory : 640 Kilobytes >Total Usable : 65,152 Kilobytes >Extended Memory : 64,512 Kilobytes >System Board Memory : 65,152 Kilobytes >Cacheable Memory : 65,152 Kilobytes >*********** System Information Tool - *********** > >What's with the 'Total amount detected' and the last three >stats..? I am pretty sure "Total detected" is what OS/2 thinks as the total amount of physically installed RAM, and it looks like the entire 96 meg was found. The last four lines certainly look like only 64 meg is used. On my machine with 64 Meg, the breakdown by type is exactly the same. >What's with the 'Memory address about 16 Mb' There are a number of "magic" addresses in the PC games; the best known is of course the 640K low-ram, but 1 meg and 16 meg are also special, which is probably why OS/2 reports them separatly. > >Is something amiss ? Do I bring my box down to 64Mb and buy another >kite with the 'lost' 32Mb..? Strange, my 64 Meg machine has exactly the same ranges; sure looks like OS/2 is using only 64 meg. There may be BIOS or other h/w switches that you need to flip; I recalled there being some patch for some brand of motherboards to go above some size (sorry about being so vague, but it wasn't something that worried me, so I didn't look at the details). -- Stanley Chow; schow@bnr.ca, stanley.chow-ott@nt.com; (613) 763-2831 Bell Northern Research Ltd., PO Box 3511 Station C, Ottawa, Ontario Me? Represent other people? Don't make them laugh so hard.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<52p9hq$b9j@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<844098206snz129.os2.7@artin.glassnet.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1044c2,66705ab72eae6e87 X-Google-Attributes: gid1044c2,public X-Google-Thread: 104dc3,66705ab72eae6e87 X-Google-Attributes: gid104dc3,public From: schow@bnr.ca (Stanley Chow) Subject: Re: RAM > 64Mb.. is this normal ? Date: 1996/09/30 Message-ID: <52p9hq$b9j@bcarh8ab.bnr.ca> X-Deja-AN: 186297563 references: <844098206snz129.os2.7@artin.glassnet.com> organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd. newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,demon.ip.support.os2