Ranter
Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Comments
-
Root797677y@Condor is right.
~4.3gb ram (before OS/overhead/TZ) without Physical Address Extension. I don't remember the limit thereafter. -
-vim-31257y@linuxxx yeah, ISOs are so 🤬 big,but at least, you don’t download them eveyday. And good thing with OS that installs from the Internet, you can keep the same ISO
-
trogus131637yYou just reminded me of some ridiculous Windows fuckery when I built a new machine with 32gb of DDR4 ram but after much confusion I found out my Windows 7 Standard Edition had an artificial cap of 16gb memory it would actually use. They extorted $99 out of me to "upgrade" to Windows 7 Pro to unlock utilization of all 32gb. Obscene.
-
@trogus
Yeah, Microsoft shafts you pretty bad. They can afford to, seeing as they're 90% of the market, but it does suck.
#LinuxForTheRestOfUs -
@linuxxx With a 32bit OS you have a theoretical maximum of 4BG of usable RAM. But in reality it will be less, about 3.6 GB, because these 32 bit are used for the whole memory address space (includes GPU RAM, CPU caches, IO bus adresses and other stuff).
Nowadays we always use 64 bit OS when possible. Only IoT and lower ARM platforms are still mostly 32 bit because it's limited by the CPU to 32 bit.
To any fellow Linux sysadmin out there, is it true that 32 bits systems can handle a max of 16gb ram?
Running a 32 bits CentOS live disc in my dedi which shows 16gb ram available while the BIOS shows 32gb installed...
😅
rant