PAE ( Physical Address Extension ) setting in VISTA ULTIMATE 32-bit

I have just got Dell XPS M1530 with below configurations :

Intel Core 2 Duo T9300
4GB RAM
GeForce 8600 GT 256 MB
200 GB 7200 rpm drive
Intel Next-Gen Wireless
Windows Vista Ultimate
15.4 TFT TrueLife WSXGA+

I have understood that not all of the 4GB will be used by the OS.

My questions are:
1. My friend said that Vista will use approximately of 3.25 GB only and THE REST of it will be used by the graphic card. So what I get from what he said is my graphic card memory will expanded to 512MB or more. Does what I think correct? If not, what is the correct condition for my system above?

2. I also have read that to fully use all of the 4GB, I must use the Vista 64-bit and in other article, I read that there is a utility/technology named PAE ( Physical Address Extension ) which is only available for 32-bit Windows.

I was confused when I come to part that mention if I use PAE, the 32-bit Windows will use totally of 4GB and on the next part of the SAME article, it said that I must use the Vista Service Pack 1 for PAE to INDICATE/RECOGNIZE ( INDICATE ONLY, NOT USING ) the system physical memory available is 4GB.
Which one is correct?

What does PAE for if it ONLY RECOGNIZING the amount of memory available?

3. Is there any other way to fully use the 4GB RAM beside Vista 64-bit? Because it must be very difficult to get the application software for the 64-bit, and expensive of course.

4. What are the advantages using 64-bit instead of the 32-bit Windows?


Thank you very much.

 

1) The RAM cannot be used period. It isn't being used by the GPU.
2) PAE will never allow 4GB use for consumers. High end servers use it, but that's it and it requires PAE aware hardware, software, and drivers to have a chance to work!
3) Nope, must have a 64bit OS.
4) Well, you can use more than 4GB. Also, in 32bit OSes each program can only ask for up to 2GB...and that limit is eliminated in 64bit OSes (only for 64bit apps though).

 

The OS will not recognize more than 3.5gb but it doesn't mean it's not being used. Some programs can access the rest of the RAM. /PAE does not apply for Vista because it's already managing memory well.

 

Which programs can access the rest of the RAM??????????

 

This is from MaximumPC's Q&A:

More Memory?

I’m a computer guy and have gotten a lot of questions, and have some of my own, about how much memory Windows 32-bit operating systems can see. I’ve heard that the videocard can eat into memory over the 2GB mark. Is it worth buying more than two or three gigs of memory if your videocard prevents Windows from seeing the RAM? The more I read and find out, the more confused I get.
—Joe Lentine

The Doctor waffles on this all the time, and you probably will too. First, here’s the poop: Windows XP and Windows Vista can address a maximum of 4GB of RAM. Of that, 2GB can be used by applications and 2GB can be used by the OS. It’s more complicated than that, but to cut to the chase, the Doctor thinks that, generally, 2GB of RAM is optimal, but a little more, especially at today’s prices, can’t hurt. Your system will probably show only 2.5GB or 3GB of RAM (depending on your configuration), but don’t be alarmed, the rest is there. And although the applications may not be able to access it, the OS and drivers supposedly can.

 

The Doctor is a frigging Idiot! I respect MaxPC, learned a lot from it but on this one he lost his mind. And let us use terms correctly. Don't say 32bit can use a maximum of 4GB of RAM but video card eats into that. Let us be clear and correct. 32bit OS has a maximum of 4GB of addressable memory. "Memory addresses" don't throw the word RAM in there. Also more than just the video card might eat away at the 4GB maximum memory addresses. The Doctor also from his response seems to ignore that there are 64bit versions of both OS out there. And should clarify this is a limitation of 32bit OS's (all) not some kind of Windows problem.

If this question keeps coming up someone is going to have to buy Greg some Excedrin!

Warning! The Surgeon General has determined this question can cause migraines.

 

I concur, the doc is an idiot

 

what do you think about this article?

http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=989

i just don't see much point sacrificing performance just for the sake of using all of 4gigs

 

Not much I can add. Greg already gave a pretty accurate answer.

What about it?
As Greg said, PAE only works if your hardware supports it (which shouldn't be a problem), and if your drivers support it (this is risky. most likely you'll just see a lot of crashes because the drivers don't expect PAE), and even then, only in software that supports it.
That is, Windows will be able to use more than 2GB RAM for itself, but it won't give you more than 2GB RAM for, say, Crysis, because Crysis doesn't support PAE.

So basically, PAE a big waste of time for "normal" usage.

 

I have seen that article and it does seem correct. It seems to give the information. It does not stress or draw conclusions as I would but does have the info there. Will run slower 2 cycles to 3? That is a 50% reduction in speed. If the goal of having 4GB's is to increase performance then that hit is likely insurmountable? So why do? Also applications must be written to make use of this feature. No current consumer applications are written to do such. Therefor you will not gain any advantage on any standard application eg; office, games and really any. But you will suffer the full hit/penalty going from 2 cycles to 3 (50%). So why anyone would consider is beyond me.

NJoy, I agree with you 100%