Programs report more RAM than there is installed

Topic

New Reply

Normally, I’d guess, it’s more annoying if it reports less memory.

The computer has 256 MB installed, but some programs report 768 MB.
Windows XP Control PanelSystem shows 256 MB and so does Task manager (261616 kB). System Information, Total Physical Memory shows 768 MB. The Mainboard module in SiSoftware Sandra shows 256 MB in Bank0/1, Bank2/3 Empty, Bank4/5 512 MB, together 768 MB.

As I understand it, information about installed memory is reported by BIOS. Is there anything in the BIOS or on the mainboard that is not correct configured?

Award BIOS v6.00
K7S6A SiS-745

Reply | Quote

Replies

What is physically there?

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Joe,

there is 256 MB installed. That is, one memory module of 256 MB DDR PC2100 in one memory slot. The two remaining memory slots are empty.

Mainboard:
ECS K7S6A, SiS-745
BIOS:
Award v6.00, rev. 1.0f
Memory:
Hyundai, 256 MB DDR PC2100

Reply | Quote

You’ve verified that by opening the box?

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

I suspect one set of programs is reporting:

the amount of Real memory (i.e. those physical chip things, the figure in Task Manager => Performance =>Physical Memory, Total or Control Panel => System)

and the other set is reporting:

the Virtual memory (i.e. the size of your PAGEFILE.SYS — Control Panel => Advanced => Performance => Advanced => Virtual Memory).

Task Manager reports the sum of the Real and Virtual Memory as the Commit Charge, Limit.

(I’m assuming you’re talking XP, for the paths.)

Reply | Quote

John,

yes, Task managerPhysical Mem. Total report the correct amount of memory (so does Control PanelSystem).

But, as far as I know virtual memory should be the sum of physical memory and the swap file (pagefile.sys). The typical answer to my question is that I forgot about the swap file and that some programs report virtual memory. As I see it, this does not have anything to do with the swap file. For the moment the swap file has a fixed size of 640 MB on one of the partitions. (Another question could be why the programs report 874 MB swap space …).

As I mentioned, Windows XP “System Information” shows on the first page Total Physical Memory 768.00 MB. StartHelp has a tool that shows info. about My computer. Memory capacity (RAM) shows 768 MB.

Programs, such as Sandra and Aida, report 256 MB physical memory, BUT when they show information about the individual memory slots there is:
256 MB
Empty
512 MB
(see attachment).
It could be the capacity, not installed, but why then “empty”. On this board there is a max memory module size of 512 MB.

Reply | Quote

Tis a weird one, indeed. What does the bios setup report? In other words when you first boot up, you should get some kind of memory check. You should be able to set the bios from “quick boot” to a full check, which may give you some clues. My guesses/suggestions are to inspect the board and verify that there isn’t a 512mb stick in there you didn’t know about (!), and if there isn’t, pull the 256 stick and place it in say slot 2 and boot and see what happens then. The only other thought I had would be some kind of third party ramdrive software, but it seems like you would know about that too.

stumped,

kip

Reply | Quote

As has previously been suggested, the only answer is to take the lid off and look!

If you REALLY have two memory chips, the probable answer is that they are in the “wrong” slots. Personally I would put the 512 MB in slot 0, with the 256 MB in slot 1, leaving slot 2 empty. My guess would be that the BIOS can’t cope with the empty middle slot — the diagnostics programs actually find the second memory chip, but it hasn’t been recognised by the BIOS.

I’d be fascinated to hear what’s actually in the box!

Reply | Quote

Thanks for your answers so far.

Well, wouldn’t it be great to find that your new PC had been equipped with more memory or a faster CPU than you actually bought. But no, sadly isn’t that the case, it’s so empty in there

kip,

The BIOS setup reports:
Base mem. 640K
Ext. mem. 261120K
Tot. mem. 262144K

The BIOS has been set to “Quick Power On Self Test” since the day I bought the machine. I had almost forgot about the full memory check (on my old machine with 20 MB it doesn’t take so long time to perform…). Well, disabling the quick test doesn’t change anything; BIOS report 262144K OK.

Joe, kip and John,

Yep, I’ve opened the box. (Isn’t that almost the first thing you do when you get your new machine, maybe it’s just me…)

There is, as I said before, one memory module in slot DDR1 (User’s Guide refer to it as DDR1). I don’t know so much about different kinds of memory modules, but it has 8 small chips on each side, and it’s supposed to be a 256 MB DDR SDRAM. As far as I know, now it doesn’t matter in which memory slot you put the memory module.

This is a fairly new machine, 11 months, and I haven’t moved around or installed any new hardware. Even though I’m quite used to working inside a computer, I’d prefer not moving anything in this machine during guarantee period. Of course it might change the result if I move the memory module to slot 2, but why? I mean, if you are going to build a machine and you have only one memory module the obvious place to put it would be the first slot.

Now days I do not think there are any jumpers on the mainbord related to memory, my board has only jumpers for clearing CMOS, KB wake up, BIOS protection and CPU ratio. The only thing left, as I mentioned in first question, is if there are anything in BIOS setup not correct configured.

Regards,

Reply | Quote

How disappointing! (You wouldn’t be prepared to BUY a 512 MB memory module, just to make it come true?!)

My suggestion for moving the 256 MB module to slot 1 presumed that you were also moving the (now known to be non-existent) 512 MB module to slot 0. “Start with the biggest module in the lowest slot number, and work up in slot number and down in memory module size” is the method. Isn’t always required, but has been on some motherboards in the past. Apparently your slot numbers are 1, 2 and 3 – some firms start the count at 0, some at 1.

So we’re left with the problem of why perfectly good diagnostics programs see a phantom module in slot 2 (err, 3!). Have you tried ringing their technical support chaps / ms-chaps? They may well have met the problem before.

Reply | Quote

John,

Well, buying another 512 MB seems to be a little too much for the moment, even though XP certainly would run even greater (maybe 256 MB, and spend some money on some program). I agree with the suggestion of biggest module in lowest slot number, that’s the way I would have done it, required or not.

I don’t know if this could be a result of putting “wrong” memory in the machine, i.e. memory that’s not supported? But the machine has been running great. I haven’t had any major problem with programs, patches etc. The only thing was that I had to replace the CPU cooler fan after 2 months because it started to sound very loud.

I will take a look at Aida and Sandra support sites and try to contact them.

Reply | Quote

Argus

No, I was joking! But more seriously, I personally would have bought another 256 MB to bring the total real memory up to 512 MB. That would take of almost anything, and not cost too much. Unless you’re running some ludicrously large program, “512 MB should be enough for anyone”,

Reply | Quote

Well, it might seem logical that one would open the box. But many, many people would not. They would just accept what the software says. So, unless you explicitly say you ‘ll most likely get asked. If this is an OEM machine and only 11 months old it should still be under warranty. Then you could contact the vendor. Otherwise if it is home brew it would seem to be a MOBO problem and you’d need to contact the MOBO vendor support.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Joe,

That

Reply | Quote

Give us a screen shot(s) that shows the different amounts of memory. This may help us see what is happening.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Dave,

OK, any special program that I should take the screen shots from; System information, Task manager etc?

Reply | Quote

In regards to my suggestion above to move the mem to another slot, no it shouldn’t matter which slot it’s in, but I’m thinking that maybe there’s some “ghost information” somewhere that’s reporting wrong that would be cleared by moving (and then moving back) the memory stick. It shouldn’t have to be done, but then you shouldn’t be getting this misreported info in the first place!!

kip

Reply | Quote