Windows 7 Windows 7 32-bit with full 4 GB or 8 GB RAM support

unawave

New Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2009
Messages
176
The Russian Programmers Group "staforce" has written a small program witch removes the lock in the kernel of the 32-bit version of Windows 7.

With such an unlocked (patched) kernel all 32 bit versions of Windows 7 suddenly can use almost the entire 4 GB of RAM, 8 GB of RAM - up to 64 GB of RAM.

The patch program automatically makes a copy of the kernel file, then removes the lock and integrates the new kernel file as an extra boot menu entry in the Windows 7 boot menu. Then you have the option to start Windows 7 either as usual with the original kernel or with the modified kernel. Details see Link Removed.
 
Solution
pweegar said:
I don't know if I would really trust this russian program or not.
Click to expand...
I have installed the patch and it works fine - even with 8 GB RAM.
I do a virus scan from a Linux live CD with three up-to-date virus scanner: Avira Antivirus, Bitdefender and Kaspersky Anti Virus (also a Russian program !). Up-to-date virus signatures were loaded from Internet. And I don't find any harmful.
fjgold said:
Then the D/L link shows the file removed.
Click to expand...
??? The download link works.
fjgold said:
My bet is that the file service requires a paid membership to D/L.
Click to expand...
No paid membership is necessary.
Sort by date Sort by votes
This is really interesting. I think all it does for the x86 CPUs is only to show the maximum amount of RAM installed, but not really use it. Even with the Physical Address Extension, x86 architecture can address no more than approx. 4 Gbs.

Anyway if I had an x86 CPU with more than 4 Gb of RAM, I'd give this patch a go.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
cybercore said:
Anyway if I had an x86 CPU with more than 4 Gb of RAM, I'd give this patch a go.
Click to expand...

It even makes sense with 4 GB of RAM:
I have installed 4 GB of RAM (4x1 GB) - but with Windows 7 32 Bit I only can use 3.25 GB of RAM. What for I have paid for 4 GB RAM - when I only can use 3.25 GB ?
If I had paid for a 1 terabyte hard disk and could only use 750 GB I also would be angry.​

I borrowed from a friend 4x2 GB RAM modules - and the test shows that I can use all of this 8 GB RAM.

And it is even possible that specific applications can use more then 2 GB of RAM. This feature is named "AWE" ("address windowing extension" - see wikipedia Address Windowing Extensions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). But this is a Windows API - so the software must support it.

With the borrowed 8 GB RAM I do this test:
I installed "VMware Player 3" and created a virtual machine with 5 GB of RAM. And this works.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I would definitely keep a complete a complete backup/image just in case. When you start messing with the Kernal you are possibly asking for a lot of headaches
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geynske006 said:
But won't that be harmfull for your pc?
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Microsoft sells "Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition". This version ist also a 32 bit version and supports up to 64 GB of RAM. Do you mean using of this version is harmful ?
geynske006 said:
there must be a reason why it's locked no?
Click to expand...
Microsoft sells "Windows 7 Starter" 32 bit. This version supports only 2 GB of RAM. What's the reason for that ?​

And in "Windows 7 Starter" you can't change the desktop wallpaper. What's the reason for that ?​
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Super Sarge said:
I would definitely keep a complete a complete backup/image just in case.
Click to expand...
Or make a parallel VHD installation ("Ultimate" only). You only need 15 GB of hard disk space for the VHD file. You have 30 days to activate Windows 7 – enough time to test the patch. After this you easily can delete the VHD file.​
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OK, Have any of you folks tried to D/L this file.
Going to the linked site initially brought up all kinds of crapware popups and popunders, some listed by WOT as unsafe.
Thank goodness I'm running Firefox sandboxed.
I don't appreciate these kinds of surprises.
Then the D/L link shows the file removed.
My bet is that the file service requires a paid membership to D/L.
Having this kind of experience just trying to D/L the patch doesn't
give me a warm fuzzy feeling about the patch itself.

At any rate I would also bet that a 64 bit processor is required.
The limitation for 32 bit processors/OS's is a mathematical limitation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
AWE is actually a way to use virtual memory. There are a few restrictions on using AWE. For an explanation go here:
Address Windowing Extensions (Windows).

I don't know if I would really trust this russian program or not. 32 bit OS's address 2^32 (approx 4 gb) of RAM. To use more, the OS must use various technologies such as PAE (Physical Address Extensions) and AWE. Then too, your motherboard would need to support large amounts of RAM. It's not just a simple matter of flipping a switch and saying, ok, now I can access more than 4 GB RAM.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well put, pweegar.
An example: my chipset can't see all 4 GB of installed ram even though my Core2Duo processor is 64 bit.
My computer originally came with a Core Duo processor that isn't 64 bit, I later upgraded to a quicker Core2Duo when it became available.
There is a newer chipset that supports 4 GB or more of ram with the Core2Duo but it still needs a 64 it OS or PAE to use all of it.
All is not lost however, even with only 3 GB usable in my machine my (2) 2 GB matched pair of Corsair ram is running in full synchronous Dual Channel mode. If I were to have tried to save money by installing a 2 GB and a 1 GB stick (since 3 GB is all I can use) I would be running in asynchronous Dual Channel mode with no speed advantage.

I can't change my chipset because I'm using a notebook computer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
pweegar said:
I don't know if I would really trust this russian program or not.
Click to expand...
I have installed the patch and it works fine - even with 8 GB RAM.
I do a virus scan from a Linux live CD with three up-to-date virus scanner: Avira Antivirus, Bitdefender and Kaspersky Anti Virus (also a Russian program !). Up-to-date virus signatures were loaded from Internet. And I don't find any harmful.
fjgold said:
Then the D/L link shows the file removed.
Click to expand...
??? The download link works.
fjgold said:
My bet is that the file service requires a paid membership to D/L.
Click to expand...
No paid membership is necessary.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
The fact that you can only use 3.25 of your total 4 in memory, is a different issue. The .75 is being used by your system.
It has been around, as the OP indicates, since 2003.

" and the test shows that I can use all of this 8 GB RAM."

Which test was that? I have a chip problem on one of my computers. It will run perfectly well on 2Gbs. Putting in 4 gbs causes, among other small problems, the Windows dual boot menu to vanish, and I , by default , boot into the main OS. During the boot period, the computer is in basic VGA mode unitl it intercepts the OS. In the desktop, the various areas (system information etc) show I am using the full 4GBs. I have no indication that anything is responding faster. A memory check, however, shows I have a failure on 2GBS.

A 32 bit OS can only use 4GB of memory total, that means if you have 4GB of ram and your graphic card has 1GB of ram, you have a total of 5GB of memory. Out of that 5GB of memory, you can only use 4GB total. 1GB the graphic card will take up, so now the 32bit OS can only use 3GB.
Enabling PAE, will limit the OS to 2GB total. What PAE does is dedicate 2GB to OS and the other 2GB to anything other then the OS. Some think that some how PAE, can magically make a 32bit OS use more then 4GB, which is impossible. Perhaps a visual from MS itself might help sink it in, you can see it here: Link Removed due to 404 Error
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RAK said:
The fact that you can only use 3.25 of your total 4 in memory, is a different issue. The .75 is being used by your system.
Click to expand...
As shown on the Internet site the 0.75 GB is not strictly linear.
With 0 MB or 128 MB Graphic card RAM the usable RAM is 3.5 GB
With 256 MB, 512 MB or 1024 MB Graphic card RAM the usable RAM is 3.25 GB​

RAK said:
unawave said:
and the test shows that I can use all of this 8 GB RAM
Click to expand...
Which test was that?
Click to expand...
My test (page file was disabled): With 8 GB RAM I do this test: I installed "VMware Player 3" and created a virtual machine with 5 GB of RAM. And this works.​

RAK said:
I have no indication that anything is responding faster.
Click to expand...
In Windows 32 bit any single application can use 2 GB of RAM. The remaining 2 GB is used for the operating system (unless you use the /3GB switch - than any single application can use 3 GB of RAM - the remaining 1 GB is used for the operating system).​

So: When you use e.g. 4 applications and every single application uses 1 GB of RAM then 2 inactive applications are swapped to the page file - and this is slow because hard disk access is much slower then RAM access. So you only see a performance enhancement when you use many applications which uses much RAM - and when page file is involved.​

RAK said:
Some think that some how PAE, can magically make a 32bit OS use more then 4GB, which is impossible.
Click to expand...
In your quoted link from Microsoft you can read:
"support for PAE memory is typically associated with support for more than 4 GB of RAM"​

RAK said:
Perhaps a visual from MS itself might help sink it in, you can see it here: <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEdrv.mspx" target="_blank">Physical Address Extension - PAE Memory and Windows</a>
Click to expand...
But your quote shows just the opposite:
In first table you can read:​


Maximum memory support with PAE:
  • Windows 2000 Advanced Server, 32 bit, 8 GB of physical RAM​
  • Windows 2000 Datacenter Server, 32 bit, 32 GB of physical RAM​
  • Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition, 32 bit, 32 GB of physical RAM​
  • Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition, 32 bit, 64 GB of physical RAM​
  • Windows Server 2003 SP1, Enterprise Edition, 32 bit, 64 GB of physical RAM​
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So mathematical laws don't apply according to the russians concerning the use of ram in a 32 bit system.
Even in english I don't trust this program.
From my experience with Linux I know how fragile a kernel can be so I won't use any "patch" that messes with the kernel.
Especially if the patch purports to help do something the math says can't be done.

My take on this debate: If you are using a 32 bit OS it is mathematically impossible to use more that 4 GB of ram.
There is no "switch" in the kernel that can be turned off\on to avoid this mathematical certainty.
Possibly MS has placed a limit in the kernel so that no more than 4 GB can be used in 32 bit windows to prevent the OS from
trying to do something it can't do.
To bypass a protective feature like this would be foolhardy in IMHO.

Even if you have a system with a 64 bit processor and the chipset\motherboard supports more than 4 GB of ram
You still can't use more than 4 GB of ram with a 32 bit OS.
Install a 64 bit OS and be done with it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
  • Solved
Windows Vista Slow internet with windows 7 64 bit 4 GB Ram
Replies
8
Views
19K
kemical
R
  • Solved
Windows 7 8 GB RAM Nightmare
Replies
3
Views
4K
patrickt
P
M
  • Solved
Windows 7 The General Differences Between Windows 7 32-bit and 64-bit.
Replies
16
Views
27K
NEWTON PEDROZA
N
K
  • Solved
Windows 7 Enable support for 4 gb or more ram in 32-bit
Replies
5
Views
22K
Matt