Motherboard RAM limits...

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#1
I recently discovered that my motherboard (Asus M2N32 SLI Deluxe Wireless edition) will handle much faster processors than I previously thought it would. As a result, I may be receiving a Phenom II X4 965 from a friend in NC as an upgrade, and I am considering a RAM upgrade as well. The specs on the ASUS website state it has a limit of 8GB of RAM. However, I have not been able to find out if that 8gb is inclusive of the RAM on my video card (896mb) or not. Since I currently have 4GB of RAM, this would make a difference between upgrading to 6GB or 8GB of RAM.

I have run into issues with prior motherboards of the amount of video ram being included in the maximum motherboard memory cap, but I do not know if this is still the case, and the ASUS website has been of little help.


Edit: God damn it, wrong forum. Can someone move this over to the tech forum?
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#2
32 views and not a single reply? Fuckers.

Got two different people telling me that VRAM isn't part of the addressing limit on a motherboard. Any dissenting opinions? My 965 proc is on the way, and I'm considering an upgrade to 8GB of RAM if I get a little spending scratch for Christmas.
 
Jun 2, 2005
15,516
4
0
Dallas
#3
RAM limit means physical RAM that can be put on the board. The VRAM has nothing to do with it.
 

Bobobie

Registered User
Oct 1, 2005
11,463
2,035
586
Bay City Michigan
#4
Well, I didn't see your post until just now :). Can the motherboard run that processor at full speed? AMD likes to keep things backwards compatible, and just because you can put in faster processor doesn't always mean you'd want to. I found that out building a budget game machine for a family member.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#5
However, I have not been able to find out if that 8gb is inclusive of the RAM on my video card (896mb) or not.
It's not.
Got two different people telling me that VRAM isn't part of the addressing limit on a motherboard. Any dissenting opinions?
Just that the addressing limit is not an issue for the motherboard, but rather the CPU architecture. And I would add that according to wikipedia, on current systems that limit is 256 Terra-bytes. That should leave us some wiggle room for a few more centuries of advancements in storage technology.

As far as I know, addressing limits were only a problem on 32 bit microprocessors, back in the early 90s.

The 8 GB limit is due to the number of slots on the motherboard. Yours has 4, each can be fitted with 2GB.
 

Hate & Discontent

Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Aug 22, 2005
15,777
1,343
628
#6
Well, I didn't see your post until just now :). Can the motherboard run that processor at full speed? AMD likes to keep things backwards compatible, and just because you can put in faster processor doesn't always mean you'd want to. I found that out building a budget game machine for a family member.
The last BIOS update for my motherboard officially supports up to the Phenom II 940. Plenty of people on Overclocker.net have got 965's running on the same motherboard without problem. Just requires a couple tweaks to get the clock multiplier and voltages set correctly, since the motherboard doesnt recognize it natively. I'm already running DDR2 800, so the ram will be a bottleneck, but not a horrible one. The main reason for the upgrade is Battlefield 3 - the renderer is CPU intensive, and seems to be coded around tri-core processors and larger. My old A64 x2 6000+ just doesn't cut it in BF3, despite running Skyrim quite well. Several people in GC I have talk to have weaker video cards, comparable RAM, and tri-core processors, and MUCH smoother gameplay experience.

It's not.

Just that the addressing limit is not an issue for the motherboard, but rather the CPU architecture. And I would add that according to wikipedia, on current systems that limit is 256 Terra-bytes. That should leave us some wiggle room for a few more centuries of advancements in storage technology.

As far as I know, addressing limits were only a problem on 32 bit microprocessors, back in the early 90s.

The 8 GB limit is due to the number of slots on the motherboard. Yours has 4, each can be fitted with 2GB.
After I posted this, and started thinking back, I realized that what I was remembering as a past motherboard issue was actually running 4GB of RAM on 32bit Windows XP. It wasn't showing all 4 GB due to the OS, not the video card I had at the time.