New 512Mb memory is missing 32Mb



T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my Abit VA-20
motherboard.
RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective stick, I
booted with each stick separately, trying each in both slots. All four tests
showed
224Mb.
Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256 before)!
So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which still read as 480.
Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz, when the product I bought is
sold as 333MHz.
I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter whether old
or new memory is present, and regardless of the number of memory sticks.
Previously, the memory always (for three years and two OS) always read as
256Mb.
That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the motherboard
slots are new and look fine.
1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed difference?
2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz, what
effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy tasks)?
3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
Details on the RAM I bought:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621

Doug Knox MS-MVP
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?

--
Doug Knox, MS-MVP Windows Media Center\Windows Powered Smart Display\Security
Win 95/98/Me/XP Tweaks and Fixes
http://www.dougknox.com
--------------------------------
Per user Group Policy Restrictions for XP Home and XP Pro
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_securityconsole.htm
--------------------------------
Please reply only to the newsgroup so all may benefit.
Unsolicited e-mail is not answered.

"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my Abit VA-20
> motherboard.
> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective stick, I
> booted with each stick separately, trying each in both slots. All four tests
> showed
> 224Mb.
> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256 before)!
> So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which still read as 480.
> Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz, when the product I bought is
> sold as 333MHz.
> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter whether old
> or new memory is present, and regardless of the number of memory sticks.
> Previously, the memory always (for three years and two OS) always read as
> 256Mb.
> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the motherboard
> slots are new and look fine.
> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed difference?
> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz, what
> effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy tasks)?
> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
> Details on the RAM I bought:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
>
>
>
>
>

T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Hi, Doug,
If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video is
integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of seizing a
portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my RAM?

Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>
>
> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>> slots. All four tests showed
>> 224Mb.
>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz,
>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the number
>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for three years and
>> two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>> difference?
>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz, what
>> effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy
>> tasks)?
>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621

Alpha
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
yes

Doug Knox MS-MVP
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
If you have onboard video, then yes, it shares the system RAM (takes a chunk). As to how much is taken, this is usually a BIOS setting. But depending on the BIOS and mother board, I guess it could conceivably take a percentage of what's installed, but I find that highly unlikely. Usually, this is a fixed value, and once set won't change unless you change it.

--
Doug Knox, MS-MVP Windows Media Center\Windows Powered Smart Display\Security
Win 95/98/Me/XP Tweaks and Fixes
http://www.dougknox.com
--------------------------------
Per user Group Policy Restrictions for XP Home and XP Pro
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_securityconsole.htm
--------------------------------
Please reply only to the newsgroup so all may benefit.
Unsolicited e-mail is not answered.

"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi, Doug,
> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video is
> integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of seizing a
> portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my RAM?
>
> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>>
>>
>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>>> slots. All four tests showed
>>> 224Mb.
>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz,
>>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the number
>>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for three years and
>>> two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>>> difference?
>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz, what
>>> effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy
>>> tasks)?
>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
>
>
>

Jim Macklin
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Yes, it is normal for on-board graphics/video to use some of
the system RAM. Often if you check the BIOS you will see
settings for controlling this use and the amount. Also,
adding more RAM often increases the amount that video can
use. You should download the motherboard manual from ABIT,
you can also download EVEREST, a system scanner from
www.lavalys.com to see a full report on how your system is
working.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| Hi, Doug,
| If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to
Video (Video is
| integrated into the motherboard), would my video be
capable of seizing a
| portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my
RAM?
|
| Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
| > Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
| >
| >
| > "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| > news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb
sticks on my
| >> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
| >> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
| >> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a
defective
| >> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each
in both
| >> slots. All four tests showed
| >> 224Mb.
| >> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it
was 256
| >> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new
memory, which
| >> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z
as 166MHz,
| >> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
| >> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb
no matter
| >> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of
the number
| >> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for
three years and
| >> two OS) always read as 256Mb.
| >> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems
unlikely.
| >> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation;
also, the
| >> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
| >> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the
speed
| >> difference?
| >> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed
to 333MHz, what
| >> effects should I notice (I do not play games or do
other heavy
| >> tasks)?
| >> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
| >> Details on the RAM I bought:
| >>
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
|
|
|

T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Alpha wrote:
> yes

Thanks for the info. The scenario is beyond my imagining, but my imagination
is limited!

T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Doug, this is very interesting. Because the amount of stolen RAM was not a
percentage, but always 32Mb, regardless of how much RAM I had installed
(this after putting in the 512Mb for the first time). As long as the RAM is
being used, I don't mind. My computer is paging much less now, and used RAM
is always good RAM, from what I understand. Thanks for your insight. It
makes me want to find out more about my hardware.

Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
> If you have onboard video, then yes, it shares the system RAM (takes
> a chunk). As to how much is taken, this is usually a BIOS setting.
> But depending on the BIOS and mother board, I guess it could
> conceivably take a percentage of what's installed, but I find that
> highly unlikely. Usually, this is a fixed value, and once set won't
> change unless you change it.
>
>
> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Hi, Doug,
>> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video is
>> integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of
>> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my
>> RAM?
>>
>> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>>>
>>>
>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>>>> slots. All four tests showed
>>>> 224Mb.
>>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz,
>>>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the number
>>>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for three years
>>>> and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>>>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>>>> difference?
>>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz,
>>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy
>>>> tasks)?
>>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621

T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Ha! I ran Everest after the memory upgrade, and they *still* say:
"Suggestion Install more system memory to improve applications performance."
I wonder how high I will have to go before Everest is satisfied?
Seriously, I like the notion of the Video having taken some RAM. It'
brilliant (not to mention true). In Everest, it says that the memory size in
my video adapter is 32Mb. The BIOS refers to VGA Share Memory size, which is
also 32Mb. I therefore believe I have located the "stolen goods."
Thanks very much for your help.


Jim Macklin wrote:
> Yes, it is normal for on-board graphics/video to use some of
> the system RAM. Often if you check the BIOS you will see
> settings for controlling this use and the amount. Also,
> adding more RAM often increases the amount that video can
> use. You should download the motherboard manual from ABIT,
> you can also download EVEREST, a system scanner from
> www.lavalys.com to see a full report on how your system is
> working.
>
>
>
> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Hi, Doug,
>> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video is
>> integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of
>> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my
>> RAM?
>>
>> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>>>
>>>
>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>>>> slots. All four tests showed
>>>> 224Mb.
>>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz,
>>>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the number
>>>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for three years
>>>> and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>>>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>>>> difference?
>>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz,
>>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy
>>>> tasks)?
>>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>>>>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621

Alias
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Your onboard video card is taking the 32 MB. Nothing to worry about.

Alias
"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote

> Doug, this is very interesting. Because the amount of stolen RAM was not a
> percentage, but always 32Mb, regardless of how much RAM I had installed
> (this after putting in the 512Mb for the first time). As long as the RAM
> is
> being used, I don't mind. My computer is paging much less now, and used
> RAM
> is always good RAM, from what I understand. Thanks for your insight. It
> makes me want to find out more about my hardware.
>
> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>> If you have onboard video, then yes, it shares the system RAM (takes
>> a chunk). As to how much is taken, this is usually a BIOS setting.
>> But depending on the BIOS and mother board, I guess it could
>> conceivably take a percentage of what's installed, but I find that
>> highly unlikely. Usually, this is a fixed value, and once set won't
>> change unless you change it.
>>
>>
>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>> Hi, Doug,
>>> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video is
>>> integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of
>>> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my
>>> RAM?
>>>
>>> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>>>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>>>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>>>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>>>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>>>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>>>>> slots. All four tests showed
>>>>> 224Mb.
>>>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>>>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>>>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz,
>>>>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>>>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>>>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the number
>>>>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for three years
>>>>> and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>>>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>>>>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>>>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>>>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>>>>> difference?
>>>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz,
>>>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy
>>>>> tasks)?
>>>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>>>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
>
>
>

Richard Urban
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
32 meg is used for shared video memory! It is a bios adjustment.

--
Regards,

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-)

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my Abit
> VA-20
> motherboard.
> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective stick, I
> booted with each stick separately, trying each in both slots. All four
> tests
> showed
> 224Mb.
> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256 before)!
> So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which still read as 480.
> Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as 166MHz, when the product I bought
> is
> sold as 333MHz.
> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter whether
> old
> or new memory is present, and regardless of the number of memory sticks.
> Previously, the memory always (for three years and two OS) always read as
> 256Mb.
> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
> motherboard
> slots are new and look fine.
> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed difference?
> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz, what
> effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other heavy tasks)?
> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
> Details on the RAM I bought:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
>
>
>
>
>

Jim Macklin
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
No problem. If you want to learn more about computer
hardware and software, there are several sites that offer
reliable info. www.pcpitstop.com has some on-line tests and
their reports are useful and written for the average person
to understand.
There are books on computers that are readable, such as the
"Dummies" series. If you want to learn a lot of detail, the
books written for the study of the A+ technician exam are
quite good, look for MICHAEL MEYERS as the author. Most
libraries have the books ( ISBN 0-07-222274-3 )

If you have an AGP slot on your motherboard (mobo) and add a
video card, you will gain that shared RAM back and the video
will use the dedicated VRAM on the card. Cards now may have
anywhere up to 512 MB of VRAM are intended for gamers who
want to have the screen redrawn a hundred times a second at
very high resolution (photo realistic). You can pay $400+
for a high end card. But if you just surf the web and do
office text work, 32 MB of on-board shared video is just
fine.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
news:eHv%23o%231XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| Ha! I ran Everest after the memory upgrade, and they
*still* say:
| "Suggestion Install more system memory to improve
applications performance."
| I wonder how high I will have to go before Everest is
satisfied?
| Seriously, I like the notion of the Video having taken
some RAM. It'
| brilliant (not to mention true). In Everest, it says that
the memory size in
| my video adapter is 32Mb. The BIOS refers to VGA Share
Memory size, which is
| also 32Mb. I therefore believe I have located the "stolen
goods."
| Thanks very much for your help.
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > Yes, it is normal for on-board graphics/video to use
some of
| > the system RAM. Often if you check the BIOS you will
see
| > settings for controlling this use and the amount. Also,
| > adding more RAM often increases the amount that video
can
| > use. You should download the motherboard manual from
ABIT,
| > you can also download EVEREST, a system scanner from
| > www.lavalys.com to see a full report on how your system
is
| > working.
| >
| >
| >
| > "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| > news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| >> Hi, Doug,
| >> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to
Video (Video is
| >> integrated into the motherboard), would my video be
capable of
| >> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of having
changed my
| >> RAM?
| >>
| >> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
| >>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
| >>>
| >>>
| >>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| >>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb
sticks on my
| >>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
| >>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
| >>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting
a defective
| >>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying
each in both
| >>>> slots. All four tests showed
| >>>> 224Mb.
| >>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also
(it was 256
| >>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new
memory, which
| >>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by
CPU-Z as 166MHz,
| >>>> when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
| >>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short
32Mb no matter
| >>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless
of the number
| >>>> of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for
three years
| >>>> and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
| >>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems
unlikely.
| >>>> I find it hard to come up with a software
explanation; also, the
| >>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
| >>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and
the speed
| >>>> difference?
| >>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed
to 333MHz,
| >>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games or
do other heavy
| >>>> tasks)?
| >>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
| >>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
| >>>>
| >
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
|
|
|

Plato
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
T. Waters wrote:
>
> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my Abit VA-20
> motherboard.
> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective stick, I

You have onboard video which grabs 32 megs of your ram for it's use.
That ram is NOT available to windows.





--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

T. Waters
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Many thanks, Jim. These resources are just what I need. I find hardware
*much* less confusing than software, but at this point, it is still quite
mysterious.

Jim Macklin wrote:
> No problem. If you want to learn more about computer
> hardware and software, there are several sites that offer
> reliable info. www.pcpitstop.com has some on-line tests and
> their reports are useful and written for the average person
> to understand.
> There are books on computers that are readable, such as the
> "Dummies" series. If you want to learn a lot of detail, the
> books written for the study of the A+ technician exam are
> quite good, look for MICHAEL MEYERS as the author. Most
> libraries have the books ( ISBN 0-07-222274-3 )
>
> If you have an AGP slot on your motherboard (mobo) and add a
> video card, you will gain that shared RAM back and the video
> will use the dedicated VRAM on the card. Cards now may have
> anywhere up to 512 MB of VRAM are intended for gamers who
> want to have the screen redrawn a hundred times a second at
> very high resolution (photo realistic). You can pay $400+
> for a high end card. But if you just surf the web and do
> office text work, 32 MB of on-board shared video is just
> fine.
>
>
>
> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
> news:eHv%23o%231XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> Ha! I ran Everest after the memory upgrade, and they *still* say:
>> "Suggestion Install more system memory to improve applications
>> performance." I wonder how high I will have to go before Everest is
>> satisfied? Seriously, I like the notion of the Video having taken
>> some RAM. It' brilliant (not to mention true). In Everest, it says
>> that the memory size in my video adapter is 32Mb. The BIOS refers to
>> VGA Share Memory size, which is also 32Mb. I therefore believe I
>> have located the "stolen goods." Thanks very much for your help.
>>
>>
>> Jim Macklin wrote:
>>> Yes, it is normal for on-board graphics/video to use some of
>>> the system RAM. Often if you check the BIOS you will see
>>> settings for controlling this use and the amount. Also,
>>> adding more RAM often increases the amount that video can
>>> use. You should download the motherboard manual from ABIT,
>>> you can also download EVEREST, a system scanner from
>>> www.lavalys.com to see a full report on how your system is
>>> working.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>>>> Hi, Doug,
>>>> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to Video (Video
>>>> is integrated into the motherboard), would my video be capable of
>>>> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of having changed my
>>>> RAM?
>>>>
>>>> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
>>>>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new 256Mb sticks on my
>>>>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
>>>>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
>>>>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen. Suspecting a defective
>>>>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying each in both
>>>>>> slots. All four tests showed
>>>>>> 224Mb.
>>>>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also (it was 256
>>>>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new memory, which
>>>>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by CPU-Z as
>>>>>> 166MHz, when the product I bought is sold as 333MHz.
>>>>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short 32Mb no matter
>>>>>> whether old or new memory is present, and regardless of the
>>>>>> number of memory sticks. Previously, the memory always (for
>>>>>> three years and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
>>>>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect seems unlikely.
>>>>>> I find it hard to come up with a software explanation; also, the
>>>>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
>>>>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and the speed
>>>>>> difference?
>>>>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as opposed to 333MHz,
>>>>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games or do other
>>>>>> heavy tasks)?
>>>>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
>>>>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
>>>>>>
>>>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621

Jim Macklin
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
A few weeks of study and you to can be a guru.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
news:u90VwX$XFHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
| Many thanks, Jim. These resources are just what I need. I
find hardware
| *much* less confusing than software, but at this point, it
is still quite
| mysterious.
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > No problem. If you want to learn more about computer
| > hardware and software, there are several sites that
offer
| > reliable info. www.pcpitstop.com has some on-line tests
and
| > their reports are useful and written for the average
person
| > to understand.
| > There are books on computers that are readable, such as
the
| > "Dummies" series. If you want to learn a lot of detail,
the
| > books written for the study of the A+ technician exam
are
| > quite good, look for MICHAEL MEYERS as the author. Most
| > libraries have the books ( ISBN 0-07-222274-3 )
| >
| > If you have an AGP slot on your motherboard (mobo) and
add a
| > video card, you will gain that shared RAM back and the
video
| > will use the dedicated VRAM on the card. Cards now may
have
| > anywhere up to 512 MB of VRAM are intended for gamers
who
| > want to have the screen redrawn a hundred times a second
at
| > very high resolution (photo realistic). You can pay
$400+
| > for a high end card. But if you just surf the web and
do
| > office text work, 32 MB of on-board shared video is just
| > fine.
| >
| >
| >
| > "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| > news:eHv%23o%231XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >> Ha! I ran Everest after the memory upgrade, and they
*still* say:
| >> "Suggestion Install more system memory to improve
applications
| >> performance." I wonder how high I will have to go
before Everest is
| >> satisfied? Seriously, I like the notion of the Video
having taken
| >> some RAM. It' brilliant (not to mention true). In
Everest, it says
| >> that the memory size in my video adapter is 32Mb. The
BIOS refers to
| >> VGA Share Memory size, which is also 32Mb. I therefore
believe I
| >> have located the "stolen goods." Thanks very much for
your help.
| >>
| >>
| >> Jim Macklin wrote:
| >>> Yes, it is normal for on-board graphics/video to use
some of
| >>> the system RAM. Often if you check the BIOS you will
see
| >>> settings for controlling this use and the amount.
Also,
| >>> adding more RAM often increases the amount that video
can
| >>> use. You should download the motherboard manual from
ABIT,
| >>> you can also download EVEREST, a system scanner from
| >>> www.lavalys.com to see a full report on how your
system is
| >>> working.
| >>>
| >>>
| >>>
| >>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| >>> news:%23Ujj2K1XFHA.3864@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| >>>> Hi, Doug,
| >>>> If nothing on my computer has changed with respect to
Video (Video
| >>>> is integrated into the motherboard), would my video
be capable of
| >>>> seizing a portion of memory just on the basis of
having changed my
| >>>> RAM?
| >>>>
| >>>> Doug Knox MS-MVP wrote:
| >>>>> Shared video memory for an onboard video controller?
| >>>>>
| >>>>>
| >>>>> "T. Waters" <@$%$%#^@jdjgkl.com> wrote in message
| >>>>> news:e%23V6W90XFHA.2128@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
| >>>>>> Today I replaced 256Mb of old RAM with two new
256Mb sticks on my
| >>>>>> Abit VA-20 motherboard.
| >>>>>> RAM is 184-pin DDR DIMM, speed is 333.
| >>>>>> On System Properties, only 480Mb are seen.
Suspecting a defective
| >>>>>> stick, I booted with each stick separately, trying
each in both
| >>>>>> slots. All four tests showed
| >>>>>> 224Mb.
| >>>>>> Then, I tested the old memory. It reads as 224 also
(it was 256
| >>>>>> before)! So, I reinstalled both sticks of this new
memory, which
| >>>>>> still read as 480. Also, the RAM speed is seen by
CPU-Z as
| >>>>>> 166MHz, when the product I bought is sold as
333MHz.
| >>>>>> I am baffled that the memory reads as being short
32Mb no matter
| >>>>>> whether old or new memory is present, and
regardless of the
| >>>>>> number of memory sticks. Previously, the memory
always (for
| >>>>>> three years and two OS) always read as 256Mb.
| >>>>>> That the memory sticks all have the same defect
seems unlikely.
| >>>>>> I find it hard to come up with a software
explanation; also, the
| >>>>>> motherboard slots are new and look fine.
| >>>>>> 1. Does anyone have an explanation for the 32Mb and
the speed
| >>>>>> difference?
| >>>>>> 2. If the RAM is in fact running at 166MHz as
opposed to 333MHz,
| >>>>>> what effects should I notice (I do not play games
or do other
| >>>>>> heavy tasks)?
| >>>>>> 3. Is getting replacement RAM likely to help?
| >>>>>> Details on the RAM I bought:
| >>>>>>
| >>>
| >
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820161621
|
|
|


New 512Mb memory is missing 32Mb