use the entire allowable 2gb memory range of MS-DOS 7.0. If you have the
memory, Win95 will really use it. Further this memory management code
was not changed between Win95 and Win95 OSR2 - therefore, ALL versions of
Win95 work the same in this area.
Fact: Win98 uses the same memory management as Win95 with a few
performance tweaks for speed.
Fact: Socket-7 motherboards (up until about a year ago) could not cache
more than 64mb of memory. However, some of these motherboards support a
2nd TAG RAM chip which did in fact allow them to cache more memory.
Fact: The cache has everything in the world to do with performance, but
does NOT limit how much memory Windows95 can use. In DOS (and let's not
forget that Win95 is merely a graphic shell sitting on top of DOS),
applications are loaded from the TOP of memory. As more apps are loaded
(whether from win95 or from the dos commandline), more lower memory is
used. The reason Win95 runs so slow on machines with > 64MB that don't
cache more than 64MB, is that Win95 is loaded in this upper UNCACHED
memory. Even if you gobble up enough memory to break into the cached
portion of memory, Win95 is still in control and it's position higher in
UNCACHED memory governs performance of any apps loaded with it.
Therefore, all of the programs you run in Win95 on such a system will run
slower.
Fact: Most (and probably ALL) Pentium2 motherboards cache more than 64mb.
Fact: Just because the guy you're referrring to owns a computer store,
doesn't necessarily guarantee he knows much about the dynamics of memory
usage, and it's quite obvious that he doesn't.
>Sorry if I was mistaken, but that is the information I received
>from a guy who owns his own computer company. He said Windows 95
>wouldn't utilize more than 64 megs of RAM, I upgraded to 128
>anyways.
>Geez, going to Papyrus sure gave you an attitude.
>Pardon anyone who gets wrong information and mistakenly forwards
>it on while trying to help someone.
>>No he's not correct. No version of Win95 has ever had a 64MB limit on
>>addressable RAM. The confusion is twofold. First you have chipsets
>>that can only cache 64MB of RAM (the VX and TX Socket7 boards for
>>example). Windows uses a top-down
>>approach to memory, which means just what it sounds like, with higer
>>memory being filled first. Thus if your MB can only cache 64MB of RAM
>>and you're using 128MB, any memory-resident parts of the OS and any
>>apps loaded in the upper 64MB and will perform as if there was no L2
>>cache (this is a BadThing). Adding to this confusion is that fact that
>>himem.sys is loaded while Windows is booting, which you might remember
>>from Win3.1 can only manage up to 64MB. However once Windows is
>>finished loading it unloads himem.sys and manages memory on its own.
>>The m***of the story is that Win95 can utalize much more than your
>>average user will ever put in their machine (the actual addressable
>>limit according to MS is 2GB).
>> - Eric
>>>he's correct in that some early versions of Win95 don't- but not all.
=========================================================
John Simmons - Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12)
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
John Simmons - Barbarian Diecast Collector
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
If you want to send me email, go to either of the URL's
shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame.
=========================================================