Dilemma - Need Advice - CPU VS RAM

I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything wa
running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual cor
CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of m
4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to tak
advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it onl
supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back t
XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB o
RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dua
core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows X
Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multipl
CPU's)... please help :eek

--
amboyangle
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.co

You could install Windows XP Pro, 64 bit. 4GB of ram is just the starting
point for the software of tomorrow. By tomorrow, I mean 9 am sharp.

Or you could write to:

Mr. Bill Gates
Microsoft Corporation,
1 Microsoft Way,
Redmond, Washington, 98052-7329

I realize Bill Gates is off now managing the expenditure of his money but,
nonetheless, the letter will get someone's attention. In your letter, ask
why you shouldn't be given, free of charge, an OS that supports your
hardware. I had an issue with Microsoft support, or lack thereof, about 4
years ago. I wrote a snail mail letter of complaint to Mr. Gates. Four days
later, my phone rang. It was a vice-president of Microsoft who requested to
know what my issue was. I told him. Within an hour or so, I had top-level
Microsoft support helping me free of charge. The issue was quickly resolved.

On the other hand, Microsoft may argue "Caveat emptor - let the buyer
beware" - You should have read the fine print on the package before buying
Vista.

Tyro

"amboyangler" <> wrote in
message news:...
>
> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything was
> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual core
> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of my
> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to take
> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back to
> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB of
> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dual
> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows XP
> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
> CPU's)... please help
>
>
> --
> amboyangler
> Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com
>

Yes, with Xeons, he could afford the best. Agreed. But some try to squeak
by.

Tyro

"Alpha" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:49:29 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:
>
>>You could install Windows XP Pro, 64 bit. 4GB of ram is just the starting
>>point for the software of tomorrow. By tomorrow, I mean 9 am sharp.
>>
>>Or you could write to:
>>
>>Mr. Bill Gates
>>Microsoft Corporation,
>>1 Microsoft Way,
>>Redmond, Washington, 98052-7329
>>
>>I realize Bill Gates is off now managing the expenditure of his money but,
>>nonetheless, the letter will get someone's attention. In your letter, ask
>>why you shouldn't be given, free of charge, an OS that supports your
>>hardware. I had an issue with Microsoft support, or lack thereof, about 4
>>years ago. I wrote a snail mail letter of complaint to Mr. Gates. Four
>>days
>>later, my phone rang. It was a vice-president of Microsoft who requested
>>to
>>know what my issue was. I told him. Within an hour or so, I had top-level
>>Microsoft support helping me free of charge. The issue was quickly
>>resolved.
>>
>>On the other hand, Microsoft may argue "Caveat emptor - let the buyer
>>beware" - You should have read the fine print on the package before buying
>>Vista.
>
> It's the difference between "Pro" and "Home".
> He's downgraded when he upgraded IYSWIM.
>
> MInd you, if he's running XEONs I'm not sure why he chose a "Home" OS...
>
>>Tyro
>>
>>"amboyangler" <> wrote in
>>message news:...
>>>
>>> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything was
>>> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual core
>>> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of my
>>> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to take
>>> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
>>> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back to
>>> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB of
>>> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dual
>>> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows XP
>>> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
>>> CPU's)... please help
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> amboyangler
>>> Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com
>>>

Tyro;1129695 Wrote:
> Yes, with Xeons, he could afford the best. Agreed. But some try t
> squeak
> by.
>
> Tyro
>
> "Alpha" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:49:29 -0800, "Tyro" <> wrote:
> >
> >>You could install Windows XP Pro, 64 bit. 4GB of ram is just th
> starting
> >>point for the software of tomorrow. By tomorrow, I mean 9 am sharp.
> >>
> >>Or you could write to:
> >>
> >>Mr. Bill Gates
> >>Microsoft Corporation,
> >>1 Microsoft Way,
> >>Redmond, Washington, 98052-7329
> >>
> >>I realize Bill Gates is off now managing the expenditure of his mone
> but,
> >>nonetheless, the letter will get someone's attention. In your letter
> ask
> >>why you shouldn't be given, free of charge, an OS that supports your
> >>hardware. I had an issue with Microsoft support, or lack thereof
> about 4
> >>years ago. I wrote a snail mail letter of complaint to Mr. Gates
> Four
> >>days
> >>later, my phone rang. It was a vice-president of Microsoft wh
> requested
> >>to
> >>know what my issue was. I told him. Within an hour or so, I ha
> top-level
> >>Microsoft support helping me free of charge. The issue was quickly
> >>resolved.
> >>
> >>On the other hand, Microsoft may argue "Caveat emptor - let th
> buyer
> >>beware" - You should have read the fine print on the package befor
> buying
> >>Vista.
> >
> > It's the difference between "Pro" and "Home".
> > He's downgraded when he upgraded IYSWIM.
> >
> > MInd you, if he's running XEONs I'm not sure why he chose a "Home
> OS...
> >
> >>Tyro
> >>
> >>"amboyangler" <> wrot
> in
> >>message news:...
> >>>
> >>> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everythin
> was
> >>> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dua
> core
> >>> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB ou
> of my
> >>> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit t
> take
> >>> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
> >>> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I g
> back to
> >>> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 G
> of
> >>> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using
> dual
> >>> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Window
> XP
> >>> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
> >>> CPU's)... please help
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> amboyangler
> >>> Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com
> >>>

Someone was selling this computer for $300 and I had to buy it.... It'
not necessarily a server but a business workstation.... is there
negative aspect of using Xeons as a home based processor

--
amboyangle
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.co

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:35:58 +0000, amboyangler
<> wrote:

>
> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything was
> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual core
> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of my
> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to take
> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back to
> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB of
> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dual
> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows XP
> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
> CPU's)... please help


Two points:

1. All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a
4GB address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you
can not go.

But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you
have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.
That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not
available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can
use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can
range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around
3.1GB.

Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual
RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no
address space to map it too.

2. Why do you want more than 3.25GB of RAM? The thought that more RAM
always means better performance is wrong. Having more RAM means better
performance only if you had substantial swap file usage with the lower
RAM quantity and adding more eliminates or reduces that swap file
usage.

How much RAM you need to eliminate or reduce swap file usage depends
very greatly on what apps you run, but for the great majority of users
and what they do, 3.25GB is more than enough, and more than that
doesn't improve performance.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

Tyro <> wrote:
>
> You could install Windows XP Pro, 64 bit.

There are not many device/peripheral drivers around for WinXPx64.

ss.

amboyangler <> wrote:
>
> Someone was selling this computer for $300 and I had to buy it.... It's
> not necessarily a server but a business workstation.... is there a
> negative aspect of using Xeons as a home based processor?
>


No - just electricity use on older ones. For that price, it sounds like
your Xeons are old Pentium4 type, and so are not very powerful compared to
newer ones, and use a lot of electricity x2. Switch it off when you are not
using it.

If you look in Device Manager, System Information, use Belarc Advisor, or
SiSoft Sandra, etc, I could tell you for sure if you supply the processors'
model number.

ss.

Ken Blake, MVP <> wrote:
>
> 2. Why do you want more than 3.25GB of RAM? The thought that more RAM
> always means better performance is wrong. Having more RAM means better
> performance only if you had substantial swap file usage with the lower
> RAM quantity and adding more eliminates or reduces that swap file
> usage.


No, you are completely forgetting about SuperFetch.

ss.

Garbage!!! You should be ashamed of yourself for promoting such ignorance.
You should know full well that the more memory, the better. Disk swap files
running at millisecond speed do not match ram speed. Do you have any basic
knowledge of electronics and disk mechanical speeds? The more ram on any
system running Vista, the better. I have 4GB ram and typically, 2.5GB is in
use. The swap file is having a ball. I really need much more ram than 4GB.
How did you ever get to be an MVP?

Tyro

"Ken Blake, MVP" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 23:35:58 +0000, amboyangler
> <> wrote:
>
>>
>> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything was
>> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual core
>> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of my
>> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to take
>> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
>> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back to
>> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB of
>> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dual
>> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows XP
>> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
>> CPU's)... please help
>
>
> Two points:
>
> 1. All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just Vista/XP) have a
> 4GB address space. That's the theoretical upper limit beyond which you
> can not go.
>
> But you can't use the entire 4GB of address space. Even though you
> have a 4GB address space, you can only use *around* 3.1GB of RAM.
> That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not
> available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can
> use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can
> range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around
> 3.1GB.
>
> Note that the hardware is using the address *space*, not the actual
> RAM itself. The rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no
> address space to map it too.
>
> 2. Why do you want more than 3.25GB of RAM? The thought that more RAM
> always means better performance is wrong. Having more RAM means better
> performance only if you had substantial swap file usage with the lower
> RAM quantity and adding more eliminates or reduces that swap file
> usage.
>
> How much RAM you need to eliminate or reduce swap file usage depends
> very greatly on what apps you run, but for the great majority of users
> and what they do, 3.25GB is more than enough, and more than that
> doesn't improve performance.
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup

When you use a 64 bit O/S, your are now using 64 bit pointers instead of 32
bit and as a consequence they use more ram. So you are not getting the extra
memory usage that you might think by going 64 bit.
It would make a greater difference if you had much more than 4GB of ram.
My system has only 2GB of ram, and if works great, so I wouldn't complain
about only having 3.x ram usage and not the full 4GBs.


"amboyangler" <> wrote in
message news:...
>
> I previously had Windows XP professional on my PC and everything was
> running very smoothly. It also detected that I had 2 different dual core
> CPUS (2 Dual Core Xeons).... However it only detected 3.25 GB out of my
> 4 GB of RAM. I recently installed Vista Home Premium 64 Bit to take
> advantage of the whole 4 GB of RAM but later learned that it only
> supports a single CPU. Here is my question, do you suggest I go back to
> XP and have use of both processors but only have access to 3.25 GB of
> RAM, or stay with Vista Premium using 4 GB of RAM but only using 1 dual
> core CPU? I'm stumped.... 2 other options would be to get Windows XP
> Professonial X64 or Vista Ultimate 64 Bit (which supports multiple
> CPU's)... please help
>
>
> --
> amboyangler
> Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com
>