OK, need to check if this will run on my laptop. I checked on the "can I run it" website and it said I could but just want to check... config is (from dxdiag):
Processor: Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2080 @ 1.73GHz (2 CPUs)
Operating System: Windows XP Professional (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2
that video card you have there ... to call it a "3d accelerator" would be to give it a lightyear of rope
the "Go" edition Geforces are little more than 2d accelerators that can do minimal 3d acceleration (alpha blending, etc) - the mobile graphics chipsets of "the current generation" are generally about as fast as the fast cards 4 generations ago.. you can get laptops with proper accelerators but then tend to cost $3k-$5k
the card you have... it's performance is comparable to a Geforce4 series gaming card... or a bottom-of-the-line business edition generation 2 radeon (ie Radeon 9000)
[edit]
i stand corrected.. it's not that it's a Go Edition 7300
it's that it's a 7300 at all.. a Go 7800 would be fine
your card has all the minimum supported features (Which is why the "can i run the game?" tool says yes) it is just slow as molassis in january
video ram does not share an address space with main memory so it does not count in the equation for total available ram on a system that the windows memory manager can use don't talk out of your ass - leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about there are some regions mapped that the system can treat as both simultaneously and some that are mapped to be used by the video card to fetch stuff from main memory - these regions don't have to be used that way but they're mapped to be "i can use it this way" that makes their address spaces overlap, not become one
I am not that shure what you mean whit what you are saying.
Are you saying that the 32b addressable memory space, 4GB, don't include other memory availble on other hardware?
"Various devices in a typical computer require memory-mapped access. This is known as memory-mapped I/O (MMIO). For the MMIO space to be available to 32-bit operating systems, the MMIO space must reside within the first 4 GB of address space.
For example, if you have a video card that has 256 MB of onboard memory, that memory must be mapped within the first 4 GB of address space. If 4 GB of system memory is already installed, part of that address space must be reserved by the graphics memory mapping. Graphics memory mapping overwrites a part of the system memory. These conditions reduce the total amount of system memory that is available to the operating system."
it's a poor wording
the video card memory is only directly addressable by the video card drivers and the API they expose to the OS and is it's seperate 0-whatever address space
there are "mapped" regions - VRAM[A,B] <==> MainRAM[C,D] regions that can be used for large DMA transfers
think of their address spaces as two separate sets and the mapping is a reversable 1 to 1 region mapping that is not onto in either direction and individual mappings can be flagged off and that memory on both sides used by each set of memory for it's own regions
so address 0x00010000 to 0x0001FFFFF in video ram may map to 0x00D00000 to 0x00D0FFFFF in main memory so, when active, the system could load a texture into that which needs to be moved to the video card and then initiate a DMA transfer from that main memory segment to into the video memory segment
So even if it is a poor wording you are saying the opposit on what is mentioned in the article?
I'm sorry i don't mean this to be insulting: you don't understand the material we're discussing.
I am most clearly not saying the opposite of what that is saying, because it doesn't say what you think it says. It just says the main-ram side of the mapped address spaces must be in address ranges below the 4GB boundry in main memory.
nowhere does it say that VRAM and main memory share address space.
basically address segments of you CPU's address space, at certain times, do not point to main memory but point to a region of the video card (or any other devices) memory. These mappings can be turned on an off. This ability has nothing to do with the amount of main system memory you have - except that 32-bit windows cannot use any mapped region above the the 4GB boundry because it lacks ability to use larger address spaces even if the hardware supports them
video ram does not share an address space with main memory so it does not count in the equation for total available ram on a system that the windows memory manager can use don't talk out of your ass - leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about there are some regions mapped that the system can treat as both simultaneously and some that are mapped to be used by the video card to fetch stuff from main memory - these regions don't have to be used that way but they're mapped to be "i can use it this way" that makes their address spaces overlap, not become one
I am not that shure what you mean whit what you are saying.
Are you saying that the 32b addressable memory space, 4GB, don't include other memory availble on other hardware?
"Various devices in a typical computer require memory-mapped access. This is known as memory-mapped I/O (MMIO). For the MMIO space to be available to 32-bit operating systems, the MMIO space must reside within the first 4 GB of address space.
For example, if you have a video card that has 256 MB of onboard memory, that memory must be mapped within the first 4 GB of address space. If 4 GB of system memory is already installed, part of that address space must be reserved by the graphics memory mapping. Graphics memory mapping overwrites a part of the system memory. These conditions reduce the total amount of system memory that is available to the operating system."
it's a poor wording
the video card memory is only directly addressable by the video card drivers and the API they expose to the OS and is it's seperate 0-whatever address space
there are "mapped" regions - VRAM[A,B] <==> MainRAM[C,D] regions that can be used for large DMA transfers
think of their address spaces as two separate sets and the mapping is a reversable 1 to 1 region mapping that is not onto in either direction and individual mappings can be flagged off and that memory on both sides used by each set of memory for it's own regions
so address 0x00010000 to 0x0001FFFFF in video ram may map to 0x00D00000 to 0x00D0FFFFF in main memory so, when active, the system could load a texture into that which needs to be moved to the video card and then initiate a DMA transfer from that main memory segment to into the video memory segment
So even if it is a poor wording you are saying the opposit on what is mentioned in the article?
The answer is very technical and it isn't even consistent. What you need to understand is that computer memory and video memory are two different things and are not interchangeable. So if you have a 512mb video card the computer operating system can't use that memory to run software. That memory is only used by the video hardware card.
The confusion comes into play due to the fact that intel hardware uses something called memory mapping for hardware adapters and general hardware data transfers. Memory maping is where you take a range or memory space and you say we will replace the memory with memory from an I/O card that will basically be acting like memory for that range. So this isn't real memory but rather hardware that is acting like memory. So for example there might be a chunk of memory that is being mapped to a hard disk controller. Maybe this is 1024 bytes. The computer writes a block of data there then tells the disk controler there is date there for the block addressed in another chunk of memory. Then the I/O controller loads that data and sends it to the hard disk.
This is ALL dynamic in that there are many ways hardware can do things and sometimes it uses memory mapping sometimes something else. With video cards it is even more complex. Most video cards have many regions of memory mapped. They always have a block of memory for character graphics. They can have a region for texture loading, or other uses. Again it can vary from one hardware to another.
If you want to see it you can go into device manager and look at your video card, properties, resources tab. You will see chunks of memory being set aside for that hardware. This is setup in the first are of memory and the problem with 4gb is that is the full range of memory addressable by a 32 CPU. So in the 32 bit OS you can only use 4gb and some of that is taking for these blocks of I/O.
ah better in device manager do view, resources by type, then look at memory. This shows for your address range what is using memory locations.
i'm fairly sure that x86 supports MMIO banking as well - so those regions are only removed from the main memory pool "as needed" and then restored when done.
video ram does not share an address space with main memory so it does not count in the equation for total available ram on a system that the windows memory manager can use don't talk out of your ass - leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about there are some regions mapped that the system can treat as both simultaneously and some that are mapped to be used by the video card to fetch stuff from main memory - these regions don't have to be used that way but they're mapped to be "i can use it this way" that makes their address spaces overlap, not become one
Video RAM is included in Windows’s address space. So, if you have 1024 MB of video RAM, Windows will have only 3GB (if you have a total of 4 gigs of system RAM) of address space left for system RAM. An additional 500MB of address space is usually needed for other hardware, leaving you with 2.5GB of available RAM.
So don't talk out of your ass and leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about.
Video ram is not part of the processor address space (except for small regions addressable via memory mapped I/O - and then it's not truly part of the address space)
If you want to continue arguing this then get accepted into the computer science program at a major university, take the computer architecture and machine languages and operating systems courses, get and A in both. Otherwise shut the fuck up noob.
Pentium era and later processors support MMIO banking, so regions of vram are from time to time temporarily part of the core address space, and for windows to use them they must be part of the core address space below 4GB that means that part of main memory is temporarily unusuable for windows
that is NOT the same as being part of the address space - that is part of the address space maps to part of the vram address space temporarily.
Hint: i'm a computer scientist
[edit]
found where you plagiarized your post from, word for word, that person doesn't cite a source either. SOURCE YOUR CLAIM WITH MICROSOFT DOCUMENTAITON or defer to those of us who have an educating in how computers fucking works and how to write memory managers and know what "address space" is
Denidil you are completely correct but you know you could make your point a bit less abraisively. You are a smart guy but don't fall into the pattern of building a barrier around you by rubbing your superior knowledge in other peoples faces. Help to understand and point people on the right path don't make them feel stupid because they lack knowledge. We all had to learn at one time and you have your chance to help someone else learn something new.
Anyway as I say you are very knowledgable and a smart guy. Think about what I've said but dont' take offense, please.
oh i try to be nice and polite and informative, until someone with way less knowledge comes along and tells me i'm talking out of my ass and is all insulting
then i cannot help but beat them back into their place
Pentium era and later processors support MMIO banking, so regions of vram are from time to time temporarily part of the core address space, and for windows to use them they must be part of the core address space below 4GB that means that part of main memory is temporarily unusuable for windows
Is it not this what people are saying that if you have 4GB of memory installed only 3.5GB is availble for windows if it have a graphic card with 512MB?
I mean use of incorrect words, does that change this. That is why I have asked the earlier questions. But let me rephrase it. It should be a simple yes/no question.
If I have 4GB of memory installed, and have a graphic card with 512MB. Will I have 4GB of the ram, the DDR2 sticks, availbe for complete use in Windows (not 64b, and not a motherboard supporting 8GB)? With the earlier things still in mind.
though on 32-bit OSes with 4GB of memory there will be temporary periods of time (when an MMIO bank is active) that the operating system won't be able to use all that memory .. but it's not entire 512MB lost during an active bank.. it's just a few megs and it's only temporary
Sorry, I'm just a confused watcher, interested because I need to update my PC sooner or later.
From your last post (forgive me if I'm wrong, it is an honest mistake if I am) do you mean that if you have windows 32 with 4gb, you won't lose 512 mb of ram, you will lose more like 5-10mb of ram?
is windows 64 more system demanding, or is there no drawbacks to using it?
sorry if these questions can be easily googled, but if we have someone so intellegent on these forums I love personal answers.
ps. please may you dumb down + simplify your answers so that people like me can follow you
this entire discussion is highly technical and of no practical concern for typical users
32-bit windows cannot use more than 4GB of memory. period. only main memory counts toward this (ie do not add your 512MB video card to that number)
even then after some recent hands on research and discussions over in the vnaguard performance forum anyone with a multicore system and a 64bit processor should be running vista64 as it's process scheduler is vastly superior and will actually load balance your cores.
Please mr morpin that is exactly what I am asking denidil if it is wrong or not.
I was up until now beliving this, found a better quote then I would make a question for.
"The issue with Vista 32Bit not showing all the available memory is caused by the fact that the memory address space available to a 32Bit system is not large enough to allow for more than about of (3.5Gb - Video RAM). As an example, I have 4GB of RAM and two 8800GTX in SLI. The total amount of Video RAM therefore is 1.5B, and in Vista 32Bit only 2Gb was useable. The reason the amount of video RAM is important is that when the OS was designed, the upper address space was reserved for use by the Video RAM."
But that is not true?
If I have 4GB and install a graphic card with 1.5GB the memory availbe to windows will not be 2.5GB. Which I believed it would be, 4GB - 1.5 GB = 2.5GB even if the memory modules says 2x2GB.
the problem with that link is they're massively over simplifying, and AFAIK the entire video card address space is not MMIOed to a segment of the CPU address space (That would be wasteful and retarded)
but yes some of the lost address space has to do with MMIO regions, but they shouldn't be that big - on a 64-bit OS it can place those MMIO regions completely outside the address range for the physical memory making it easier to deal with (don't have to deal with banking, which it appears windows may not know how to use at all)
the problem with that link is they're massively over simplifying, and AFAIK the entire video card address space is not MMIOed to a segment of the CPU address space (That would be wasteful and retarded) but yes some of the lost address space has to do with MMIO regions, but they shouldn't be that big - on a 64-bit OS it can place those MMIO regions completely outside the address range for the physical memory making it easier to deal with (don't have to deal with banking, which it appears windows may not know how to use at all)
Thank you! Now I more sure what you are saying.
It wont be 2.5 GB left as the 1.5 GB to it's fully content is not within th 0-4GB. Parts of it are but the full 1.5GB does not need to be there. The part of memory that is there will be replaced with the part that is out of the range.
This is what you have been saying all along I guess, but the pieces have not really been falling into places now.
Unless I am completely wrong with my description here I content with my "understanding" of this
Comments
OK, need to check if this will run on my laptop. I checked on the "can I run it" website and it said I could but just want to check... config is (from dxdiag):
it will run
like shit
but it will run
that video card you have there ... to call it a "3d accelerator" would be to give it a lightyear of rope
the "Go" edition Geforces are little more than 2d accelerators that can do minimal 3d acceleration (alpha blending, etc) - the mobile graphics chipsets of "the current generation" are generally about as fast as the fast cards 4 generations ago.. you can get laptops with proper accelerators but then tend to cost $3k-$5k
the card you have... it's performance is comparable to a Geforce4 series gaming card... or a bottom-of-the-line business edition generation 2 radeon (ie Radeon 9000)
[edit]
i stand corrected.. it's not that it's a Go Edition 7300
it's that it's a 7300 at all.. a Go 7800 would be fine
your card has all the minimum supported features (Which is why the "can i run the game?" tool says yes) it is just slow as molassis in january
I am not that shure what you mean whit what you are saying.
Are you saying that the 32b addressable memory space, 4GB, don't include other memory availble on other hardware?
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B929605&x=12&y=11
"Various devices in a typical computer require memory-mapped access. This is known as memory-mapped I/O (MMIO). For the MMIO space to be available to 32-bit operating systems, the MMIO space must reside within the first 4 GB of address space.
For example, if you have a video card that has 256 MB of onboard memory, that memory must be mapped within the first 4 GB of address space. If 4 GB of system memory is already installed, part of that address space must be reserved by the graphics memory mapping. Graphics memory mapping overwrites a part of the system memory. These conditions reduce the total amount of system memory that is available to the operating system."
it's a poor wording
the video card memory is only directly addressable by the video card drivers and the API they expose to the OS and is it's seperate 0-whatever address space
there are "mapped" regions - VRAM[A,B] <==> MainRAM[C,D] regions that can be used for large DMA transfers
think of their address spaces as two separate sets and the mapping is a reversable 1 to 1 region mapping that is not onto in either direction and individual mappings can be flagged off and that memory on both sides used by each set of memory for it's own regions
so address 0x00010000 to 0x0001FFFFF in video ram may map to 0x00D00000 to 0x00D0FFFFF in main memory so, when active, the system could load a texture into that which needs to be moved to the video card and then initiate a DMA transfer from that main memory segment to into the video memory segment
So even if it is a poor wording you are saying the opposit on what is mentioned in the article?
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
I'm sorry i don't mean this to be insulting: you don't understand the material we're discussing.
I am most clearly not saying the opposite of what that is saying, because it doesn't say what you think it says. It just says the main-ram side of the mapped address spaces must be in address ranges below the 4GB boundry in main memory.
nowhere does it say that VRAM and main memory share address space.
[edit]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMIO
basically address segments of you CPU's address space, at certain times, do not point to main memory but point to a region of the video card (or any other devices) memory. These mappings can be turned on an off. This ability has nothing to do with the amount of main system memory you have - except that 32-bit windows cannot use any mapped region above the the 4GB boundry because it lacks ability to use larger address spaces even if the hardware supports them
I am not that shure what you mean whit what you are saying.
Are you saying that the 32b addressable memory space, 4GB, don't include other memory availble on other hardware?
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B929605&x=12&y=11
"Various devices in a typical computer require memory-mapped access. This is known as memory-mapped I/O (MMIO). For the MMIO space to be available to 32-bit operating systems, the MMIO space must reside within the first 4 GB of address space.
For example, if you have a video card that has 256 MB of onboard memory, that memory must be mapped within the first 4 GB of address space. If 4 GB of system memory is already installed, part of that address space must be reserved by the graphics memory mapping. Graphics memory mapping overwrites a part of the system memory. These conditions reduce the total amount of system memory that is available to the operating system."
it's a poor wording
the video card memory is only directly addressable by the video card drivers and the API they expose to the OS and is it's seperate 0-whatever address space
there are "mapped" regions - VRAM[A,B] <==> MainRAM[C,D] regions that can be used for large DMA transfers
think of their address spaces as two separate sets and the mapping is a reversable 1 to 1 region mapping that is not onto in either direction and individual mappings can be flagged off and that memory on both sides used by each set of memory for it's own regions
so address 0x00010000 to 0x0001FFFFF in video ram may map to 0x00D00000 to 0x00D0FFFFF in main memory so, when active, the system could load a texture into that which needs to be moved to the video card and then initiate a DMA transfer from that main memory segment to into the video memory segment
So even if it is a poor wording you are saying the opposit on what is mentioned in the article?
The answer is very technical and it isn't even consistent. What you need to understand is that computer memory and video memory are two different things and are not interchangeable. So if you have a 512mb video card the computer operating system can't use that memory to run software. That memory is only used by the video hardware card.
The confusion comes into play due to the fact that intel hardware uses something called memory mapping for hardware adapters and general hardware data transfers. Memory maping is where you take a range or memory space and you say we will replace the memory with memory from an I/O card that will basically be acting like memory for that range. So this isn't real memory but rather hardware that is acting like memory. So for example there might be a chunk of memory that is being mapped to a hard disk controller. Maybe this is 1024 bytes. The computer writes a block of data there then tells the disk controler there is date there for the block addressed in another chunk of memory. Then the I/O controller loads that data and sends it to the hard disk.
This is ALL dynamic in that there are many ways hardware can do things and sometimes it uses memory mapping sometimes something else. With video cards it is even more complex. Most video cards have many regions of memory mapped. They always have a block of memory for character graphics. They can have a region for texture loading, or other uses. Again it can vary from one hardware to another.
If you want to see it you can go into device manager and look at your video card, properties, resources tab. You will see chunks of memory being set aside for that hardware. This is setup in the first are of memory and the problem with 4gb is that is the full range of memory addressable by a 32 CPU. So in the 32 bit OS you can only use 4gb and some of that is taking for these blocks of I/O.
ah better in device manager do view, resources by type, then look at memory. This shows for your address range what is using memory locations.
---
Ethion
i'm fairly sure that x86 supports MMIO banking as well - so those regions are only removed from the main memory pool "as needed" and then restored when done.
Video RAM is included in Windows’s address space. So, if you have 1024 MB of video RAM, Windows will have only 3GB (if you have a total of 4 gigs of system RAM) of address space left for system RAM. An additional 500MB of address space is usually needed for other hardware, leaving you with 2.5GB of available RAM.
So don't talk out of your ass and leave technical details to people who know what the fuck they're talking about.
Do some research, try google.
Thanks,
no it's not for a very simple reason
Video ram is not part of the processor address space (except for small regions addressable via memory mapped I/O - and then it's not truly part of the address space)
If you want to continue arguing this then get accepted into the computer science program at a major university, take the computer architecture and machine languages and operating systems courses, get and A in both. Otherwise shut the fuck up noob.
Pentium era and later processors support MMIO banking, so regions of vram are from time to time temporarily part of the core address space, and for windows to use them they must be part of the core address space below 4GB that means that part of main memory is temporarily unusuable for windows
that is NOT the same as being part of the address space - that is part of the address space maps to part of the vram address space temporarily.
Hint: i'm a computer scientist
[edit]
found where you plagiarized your post from, word for word, that person doesn't cite a source either. SOURCE YOUR CLAIM WITH MICROSOFT DOCUMENTAITON or defer to those of us who have an educating in how computers fucking works and how to write memory managers and know what "address space" is
just to show that he did indeed plagiarize it: http://projectdream.org/wordpress/2007/04/25/windows-xp-supports-4gb-of-ram-period/
Denidil you are completely correct but you know you could make your point a bit less abraisively. You are a smart guy but don't fall into the pattern of building a barrier around you by rubbing your superior knowledge in other peoples faces. Help to understand and point people on the right path don't make them feel stupid because they lack knowledge. We all had to learn at one time and you have your chance to help someone else learn something new.
Anyway as I say you are very knowledgable and a smart guy. Think about what I've said but dont' take offense, please.
---
Ethion
oh i try to be nice and polite and informative, until someone with way less knowledge comes along and tells me i'm talking out of my ass and is all insulting
then i cannot help but beat them back into their place
Is it not this what people are saying that if you have 4GB of memory installed only 3.5GB is availble for windows if it have a graphic card with 512MB?
I mean use of incorrect words, does that change this. That is why I have asked the earlier questions. But let me rephrase it. It should be a simple yes/no question.
If I have 4GB of memory installed, and have a graphic card with 512MB. Will I have 4GB of the ram, the DDR2 sticks, availbe for complete use in Windows (not 64b, and not a motherboard supporting 8GB)? With the earlier things still in mind.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
video ram and main memory are not related..
though on 32-bit OSes with 4GB of memory there will be temporary periods of time (when an MMIO bank is active) that the operating system won't be able to use all that memory .. but it's not entire 512MB lost during an active bank.. it's just a few megs and it's only temporary
Sorry, I'm just a confused watcher, interested because I need to update my PC sooner or later.
From your last post (forgive me if I'm wrong, it is an honest mistake if I am) do you mean that if you have windows 32 with 4gb, you won't lose 512 mb of ram, you will lose more like 5-10mb of ram?
is windows 64 more system demanding, or is there no drawbacks to using it?
sorry if these questions can be easily googled, but if we have someone so intellegent on these forums I love personal answers.
ps. please may you dumb down + simplify your answers so that people like me can follow you
----------------
Hello!
this entire discussion is highly technical and of no practical concern for typical users
32-bit windows cannot use more than 4GB of memory. period. only main memory counts toward this (ie do not add your 512MB video card to that number)
even then after some recent hands on research and discussions over in the vnaguard performance forum anyone with a multicore system and a 64bit processor should be running vista64 as it's process scheduler is vastly superior and will actually load balance your cores.
Basically what I'm asking is
I've heard if using windows 32, if you have 4gb RAM installed, only 3.5 is actually utilised.
is this true? Honestly I would have thought that would be relevant to anyone running windows 32 and needing to buy more ram.
----------------
Hello!
yes.. only 3.5GB is available for putting user mode programs into (i think it's actually 3.23)
ahh ok,
would that effect the dual channels? If I had 2 x 2gb in, would there be any form of performance hit (other than only running on 3.2 rather than 4) ?
is windows 64 more demanding than 32 or can I make a clean swap?
----------------
Hello!
takes a bit more harddrive space is all afaik
dual v single channel doesn't matter
Ahh very nice, thanks.
Might invest when I buy a new HD.
thanks.
----------------
Hello!
Why?
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
Why?
http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/
Why?
http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/
Please mr morpin that is exactly what I am asking denidil if it is wrong or not.
I was up until now beliving this, found a better quote then I would make a question for.
"The issue with Vista 32Bit not showing all the available memory is caused by the fact that the memory address space available to a 32Bit system is not large enough to allow for more than about of (3.5Gb - Video RAM). As an example, I have 4GB of RAM and two 8800GTX in SLI. The total amount of Video RAM therefore is 1.5B, and in Vista 32Bit only 2Gb was useable. The reason the amount of video RAM is important is that when the OS was designed, the upper address space was reserved for use by the Video RAM."
But that is not true?
If I have 4GB and install a graphic card with 1.5GB the memory availbe to windows will not be 2.5GB. Which I believed it would be, 4GB - 1.5 GB = 2.5GB even if the memory modules says 2x2GB.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
the problem with that link is they're massively over simplifying, and AFAIK the entire video card address space is not MMIOed to a segment of the CPU address space (That would be wasteful and retarded)
but yes some of the lost address space has to do with MMIO regions, but they shouldn't be that big - on a 64-bit OS it can place those MMIO regions completely outside the address range for the physical memory making it easier to deal with (don't have to deal with banking, which it appears windows may not know how to use at all)
Thank you! Now I more sure what you are saying.
It wont be 2.5 GB left as the 1.5 GB to it's fully content is not within th 0-4GB. Parts of it are but the full 1.5GB does not need to be there. The part of memory that is there will be replaced with the part that is out of the range.
This is what you have been saying all along I guess, but the pieces have not really been falling into places now.
Unless I am completely wrong with my description here I content with my "understanding" of this
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
yeah sounds like you're starting to get it