Athlon 64 & 4x RAM

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Are there known problems using 4 sticks of RAM in Athlon 64 boards? I have a system (Gigabyte PCI-E board, VIA chipset) that only sees 3.1GB on boot instead of 4GB. All the sticks of RAM work fine individually. Any pair works fine for 2GB. System runs stable with 4GB, just counts the wrong amount of RAM. Any ideas?
 

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra
You could try the 3G switch in boot.ini as well, this might free up a bit more, but the absolute maximum you will see (out of 4GB) is 3.5GB.

You could also try a real 64-bit OS :)
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Thanks Bill. Fast answer, very helpful.

I don't have the system here anymore, but as I recall, this is on the POST count, not in the control panel. He is running Windows 2000, no plans to change so far as I know, though if there are benefits for him, he might go for it. The main application in Photoshop, but he has a number of others, don't know if they would be OK with Win XP 64 bit or not.

OK, I see from the links you kindly provided that it could equally well be a BIOS thing. Still shouldn't map to 3.1GB though, should be 3.5, I'd have thought. (I probably have the exact numbers at the office, or I can call him.)

Strikes me that, assuming he doesn't want to jump to XP-64, that it might make sense to swap out two of the 1GB sticks for a pair of 512MB ones. Seeing as Photoshop is only going to get a max of 2GB anyway, and we reclaim a "wasted" 512MB, he could put some change in his pocket and equally well run 3GB of RAM. What do you think?
 

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra
Found this in my travels

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=4050

3rd post down by Spotty

I found there were two magic settings in the BIOS which allowed all 4GB to display on post. The first setting was the Fullscreen Logo=>Disable setting. Can't see the ram count if the DFI super-logo is in the way.

The second and much more important setting is in the third menu down in the BIOS "Advanced Chipset Features". There you will find a switch called "Memory Hole for PCI MMIO". That has to be enabled in order for 4GB to post. Otherwise, you will see only 3.25GB on the post screen.

As for using it under Windows XP SP2 (32 bit) I've had many problems. Windows XP always seems to cut 1GB and show 3GB of ram. I haven't found a solution for it so far. Windows XP64 is much more cooperative, showing 4GB with no problems. Unfortunately, many apps (like ZBrush) have major problems with 4GB under Windows XP64. 2GB under Windows XP64 seems fine, but 4GB destroys ZBrush. 4GB under Windows XP32 is fine with ZBrush also.

There is one other thing about Windows XP 32 memory management you should know. There is a secret and invisible system file in your C:\ directory called boot.ini. To make better use of your ram you should flip the 3G switch inside boot.ini.

The key line in my boot.ini looks like the following:

multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional /3G" /3G /noexecute=optin /fastdetect

The /3G switch allows each application to use as much as 3GB of ram. It will reserve 1GB for the OS and for other apps, which isn't a bad thing.

Instead of a 2GB/2Gb split, with 512MB or more of the OS stuff disappearing

I'd try the 3G switch first, as it's basically a freebie, and then go back to 3GB total if that doesn't work out. Mind you, if your customer isn't using more than 3GB, then it's not worth it either.

Clarifications
The 3G switch makes 3 GB available to apps instead of 2GB. The switch should work on XP Pro.

Go here and read this thread—search for #G and you should find a post by MS, Dr. Michael Schuette, the guy behind LostCircuits. He is an EE by trade--works for Mushkin last I knew. Also, pay attention to the reply by Trinity—works (coder) for Microsoft. Knows his stuff as well. Just trying to give some background on the reliability of the information posted in the board.

HTH

http://www.lostcircuits.com/discus/messages/6/2641.html?1129902880
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
If you are a Photoshop user who can take advantage of large amounts of RAM, you need Windows XP 64-bit (and Photoshop CS2).

[url=http://www.adobe.com/support/techdocs/332271.html said:
Adobe[/url]]Allocating memory above 2 GB with 64-bit processors

Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000 and Windows XP Professional, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer.The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM.

Important: The 3 GB switch is a Microsoft switch and may not work with all computers. Contact Microsoft for instructions before you set the 3 GB switch, and for troubleshooting the switch. You can search on the Microsoft support page for 3gb for information on this switch.

When you run Photoshop CS2 on a computer with a 64-bit processor (such as a, Intel Xeon processor with EM64T, AMD Athlon 64, or Opteron processor), and running a 64-bit version of the operating system (Windows XP Professional x64 Edition), that has 4 GB or more of RAM, Photoshop will use 3 GB for it's image data. You can see the actual amount of RAM Photoshop can use in the Maximum Used By Photoshop number when you set the Maximum Used by Photoshop slider in the Memory & Image Cache preference to 100%. The RAM above the 100% used by Photoshop, which is from approximately 3 GB to 3.7 GB, can be used directly by Photoshop plug-ins (some plug-ins need large chunks of contiguous RAM), filters, actions, etc.
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
On a tangential note: The more recent A64 chips run all 4 sticks at DDR-400; the memory controllers in older generation chips throttled down to DDR-333 if 4 sticks were used. Some motherboard manufacturers are very upfront on the product page about both the speed and the max-RAM issue (notably, MSI); most keep silent and one needs the jaws of life to extract it out of pre-sales support.
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
LiamC said:
find a post by MS, Dr. Michael Schuette, the guy behind LostCircuits. He is an EE by trade--works for Mushkin last I knew.
IIRC he worked for Ramtron, or at least a "division" of it, and thereby indirectly worked with Mushkin (which had been bought by Ramtron, and organized as an internal division). IIRC, he lost his job with them several years ago when Ramtron drastically downsized. He later found employment, and appears to still be, with OCZ .... which is frigging hilliarious considering how he used to (quite rightfully) carve into the unethical business practices of OCZ. Not surprisingly, he hasn't said anything negative about them since :). (Some more useless information, but included for point of posterity:) Ramtron has since sold off Mushkin.

Additionally, I'm not certain if he is actually an EE by trade, or for that matter where the "Dr." designation came from -- as I have only started to see that attribute appear around the web within the last year. Perhaps he completed a Phd on the side, although I have a hard time imagining someone working full time and concurrently doing a doctoriate. Nevertheless (i.e. irregardless of his actual academic obtainments/qualifications.....which, as some people may realize, aren't terribly indicative benchmarks of intelligence anyways), he is a bright guy and a great source for many things. :)
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
mubs said:
Some motherboard manufacturers are very upfront on the product page about both the speed and the max-RAM issue (notably, MSI); most keep silent and one needs the jaws of life to extract it out of pre-sales support.
So true.
 

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra
CityK said:
Additionally, I'm not certain if he is actually an EE by trade, or for that matter where the "Dr." designation came from -- as I have only started to see that attribute appear around the web within the last year. Perhaps he completed a Phd on the side, although I have a hard time imagining someone working full time and concurrently doing a doctoriate. Nevertheless (i.e. irregardless of his actual academic obtainments/qualifications.....which, as some people may realize, aren't terribly indicative benchmarks of intelligence anyways), he is a bright guy and a great source for many things. :)

I have corresponded with MS since at least 2000. He doesn't like to advertise the Dr. bit.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
time said:
If you are a Photoshop user who can take advantage of large amounts of RAM, you need Windows XP 64-bit (and Photoshop CS2).

No.

Earlier versions of Photoshop can use the additional virtual address space.

You don't need Windows x64 to take advantage of the additional RAM. Just turn on physical address extension with the /PAE switch in the boot.ini. This will allow Windows to use the higher address space, and, also, turns on the 3GB virtual machines (so no /3G should be necessary).

Keep in mind that the additional virtual address space is useless unless the application is programmed to take advantage of it.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
I should add, if you install Windows with the RAM in and the BIOS memory hole option on, it should automatically take advantage of it.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
sechs said:
Earlier versions of Photoshop can use the additional virtual address space.
No. They don't have the relevant flag set in the header.

You don't need Windows x64 to take advantage of the additional RAM. Just turn on physical address extension with the /PAE switch in the boot.ini. This will allow Windows to use the higher address space, and, also, turns on the 3GB virtual machines (so no /3G should be necessary).
No. AFAIK, /PAE is independent of /3G. The former tells the OS to use Intel's extensions to access more than 4GB of actual RAM, whereas the latter refers to the virtual address space available to an individual process.

It's also worth pointing out that:

a) /3GB takes memory from the OS kernel, which may be bad.
b) With this switch, 3GB is the absolute limit available to Photoshop for everything. Under XP64, it can use 3.7GB just for an image, plus a couple of GB for plugins etc.
c) Win2k Pro doesn't support any of this (AFAIK).
 

Explorer

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Jun 26, 2002
Messages
236
Location
Hinterlands
Tannin said:
...He is running Windows 2000, no plans to change so far as I know,...

Windows 2000 (Workstation) can't use more than 2 GB of RAM. Windows 2000 Advanced Server and Windows 2000 Enterprise Server are the only members of the Win2K operating system family that can use more than 2 GB of RAM.



...though if there are benefits for him, he might go for it.

Windows XP Pro SP-1 and SP-2 can use 4 GB of RAM.

There's the benefit.


 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Haven't talked to the customer yet, but I found my notes. The BIOS counts 3,145,200 where I would have expected 4,192,000. Sounds to me as if, for reasons best known to itself, it's only seeing 3GB. Given the info above (thankyou gentlemen) it looks as though our best plan is either:

* Drop back to 2GB in total
* Upgrade to XP64 and retain the 4GB

I'll see what he wants to do.
 

Platform

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
May 10, 2002
Messages
234
Location
Rack 294, Pos. 10
Tannin said:
Haven't talked to the customer yet, but I found my notes. The BIOS counts 3,145,200 where I would have expected 4,192,000. Sounds to me as if, for reasons best known to itself, it's only seeing 3GB...

4 GB is 4096 MB, or 4194304 bytes.

3 GB is 3072 MB, or 3145728 bytes.


 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
If it's a memory hole issue, the BIOS may not count past the addresses reserved for devices. Not always the case, but possibly.
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,554
Location
USA
Several months ago, I read somewhere that using 4 sticks with A64 causes them to drop to 2T timing rather than 1T. Something to do with a limitation of the A64 on-die memory controller. Not sure if that is still a problem but that's the reason I'm using 2 1GB sticks now. Reports in various forums say that the A64 with 2T timing takes a measurable performance hit compared to 1T timing.

C
 

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra
According to this source:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-e3-mem.html

The E Stepping A64 (Venice 512KB, San Diego 1MB) can use 4 channels with double-sided DIMM's @ DDR400 (though I think it defaults to 2T). Single sided can be run in a 4 x 1T config.

The D Stepping can support DDR 400 x 4 but only at 2T

The C steppings (C0, CG), can only run 4 DIMMs @ DDR333.


If you go here:
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=65000305
you can see the difference 2T and 1T command rate (bus turnaround) makes

TR investigate here:
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2005q4/mem-latency/index.x?pg=1
Basically, in synthetic benchmarks you can see a respectable difference. In real world apps, the difference is about 1% to 2% TR do some testing in games that show up to 7% difference, but this is at 640 x 480. At 1024 x 768 or higher, i.e real world play settings, other system latencies make the memory settings disappear.

If you spend your time running 3DMark or SuperPi, worry. Otherwise, don't—you'll never see the difference. In fact, you'd more likely see the difference from DDR333 v DDR400 if you have a C stepping than command rate.

<aside>I wrote an article for my site that I never posted going into the why's of Athlon/A 64 cache/memory hierarchy. The design is (deliberately) cache size agnostic and relatively insensitive to memory accesses because of

Large L1,
L2 set associativity (16-way)
L1/L2 exclusive cache
Large TLB (translation lookaside buffers)
Low latency memory controller

You have to find artificially created benchmarks to show up the difference between 512KB cache and 1MB cache A64's, and in a lot of benchmarks, there is no measurable difference. The vast majority of people don't work the way benchmarks do, so whether a 3% difference is measurable or noticeable is moot. And as cache hit rates are in the 90's (%) for most common code, a 3% speed up in 5% of cases is, in Australian vernacular, a poofteenth of fuck all.

I hoped you paid attention. There will be a test at 11:30.

:lol:
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,554
Location
USA
Good info, Liam. Thanks. I thought the difference would not be noticeable (hench my choice of the word measurable) but I didn't know it is only about 1-2%. Maybe I'll bump up to 4GB after all. These QMD work units have given me something to blow my newegg GC on I guess...

C
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,554
Location
USA
I wonder if the 1T vs 2T comparison matters for other apps like PS?
 

LiamC

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Feb 7, 2002
Messages
2,016
Location
Canberra
You know, I really have to get a life. I shouldn't know where these articles are at the drop of a hat.

:eekers:
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,931
Location
USA
No...no...no.

I would not normally say this, but please don't get a life. :D

"Resources are strong in this one."
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
Sir Bill: thank you very much. Your explanations and those links were most useful. You are a scholar and a gentleman.
 
Top