I just built a machine for use with vista. I forgot about the 32bit memory addressing so now I have to decide if it would be better to have more system memory or more graphics memory.

specs of the machine:

intel quad 6600
4 gb ram
512 mb nvidia 8500gt video card

With this setup I see 3327 Mb of ram.

I could swap the video card with another machine I have, it's a 7600GS card with 256mb of ram. I'm thinking I'd then have more memory availble to windows (probably 256mb more).

I'm not a gamer, but I want to run vmware on this machine so I think I'd be better off with more memory but I still want to be able to run Aero.

So what does more memory on the video card do for you? Any input?

If you are not a gamer, then it is absolutely a no-brainer: RAM is way more important for you than any video memory. Vista Aero works fine with an old 6600GT with 128MB.

Run Windows Experiece Index (WEI) benchmarking tool included with Vista using both cards and see the differences in scores (Graphics) between the 2 video cards. To get acceptable Aero performance you need to get a score of 3.0 in the Graphics (Aero) category.

While Vista could see 256 MB more memory (at most) with the other card, I doubt if this will translate to smoother running VMWare unless you are running multiple VMs at once. Even then an additional 256 MB is not that much.

I am running Vista 32 bit using a quad core CPU with 4 GB of RAM and an 8800 GTS with 640 MB vram and the OS could see 3324 MB of Physical RAM (Task Manager). VMWare Workstation runs fine even with 2 guests running simultaneously (Linux at 512 MB, Windows Server 2003 at 1024 MB allocation).

If you need to run more VMs concurrently, you should probably be running Vista 64 bits.

With this setup I see 3327 Mb of ram.
The reason you see 3327 MB of RAM is due to motherboard design, not the video card. Motherboard video chips use system RAM but the video cards you have do not. The video card has it's own RAM. More video RAM is usually better (but not always.) I would keep using the 8500GS video card. It should outperform the 7600GS and the extra video RAM will help boost performance with high definition graphics.

These are two very different things.

System RAM reduces usage of the windows swap file and speeds up most applications, provided they need the added memory. The 3.25GB limit you have encountered is due to using a 32-bit OS. The only way to full address the 4GB is to use xp-64 or Vista 64. Linux also does it.

VRAM on GPUs is used for texture processing during rendering of 3D game graphics. Increased VRAM is only useful if your GPU has the processing power to deliver those high-res textures. To put simply, an 8500gt is a bottom of the line card, unsuitable for serious gaming (but an excellent HTPC card). As such, no amount of increased VRAM will do you any good. Anything more than 256MB of VRAM is only useful for x800 and x900 level cards from either maker (i.e. x1950xt, 8800GTS). Lesser cards simply don't have the processing power to take advantage of the increased VRAM.

In your case the 7600GT will improve your gaming performance, but only because it has a faster graphics engine, and only in 3d gaming.

System RAM reduces usage of the windows swap file and speeds up most applications, provided they need the added memory. The 3.25GB limit you have encountered is due to using a 32-bit OS. The only way to full address the 4GB is to use xp-64 or Vista 64. Linux also does it.


Exactally, For the life of me I don't understand the reluctance of people to use 64 bit vista, especially on a loaded up Quad Machine. I did have some reservations Myself about using Vista 64 when I built MY Quad machine last March but those concerns have long since evaporated. My biggest concern
was driver support but that reallly has turned out to be a none issue. Unless you have a a bunch of archaic software that might have 16 bit installer files..
Ive only had one older program that I might have liked to use on the New rig that I haven't been able to install & use but i have it on 2 other machines so it no big deal for me. I can honestly say after using vist64 since March I don't have any Major issues or complaints with the OP System.

MY WEI Scores are all 5.0's Across the board & the system just crusies
through tasks.... typical DVD Backup Rip, Decrypt, Burn to DL DVD Disk 16 to 18 miniutes start to finish Vs, Closer to 45-48 minutes on my X2 4400+ HTPC system and I dont really consider this system to be any slouch.

The reason you see 3327 MB of RAM is due to motherboard design, not the video card.

no it's not, the motherboard sees the memory actually. It's simply an issue with 32 bit addressing, and the amount of memory on your video card definately affects it. more here...http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

I guess I should have went with 64bit but I didn't realize it was more mainstream now, last time I checked driver support was pretty dodgy.

Driver support within Vista64 Itself is very good, as far as generic drivers go,
virtually any newer vista certified hardware Must come with Both 64 & 32 Bit drivers, and a lot of older hardware will Install under X32Vista system in Vista64 and run just fine. As Mentioned I was initially really concerned about driver issues myself after talking with a bunch of guys I know that had been running XP64 bit, but not anymore .

To get acceptable Aero performance you need to get a score of 3.0 in the Graphics (Aero) category.
I bought a refurb machine a few months ago for little more than what Vista costs. The score on the integrated card was either 2.7 or 3.0 (I don't recall now which number went with what category). No wonder it was so cheap. Still, that is disappointing on HP's part. Aside, just last week I upgraded the video to 8600GT and the Aero score is now 5.9.


For the life of me I don't understand the reluctance of people to use 64 bit vista
I wondered a similar thing. My cpu is 64 bit but it came with 32 bit vista.

Why all this emphasis on the WEI score? It seems like a totally artificial number. You can get a good idea of how PC will perform in gaming, office work or multimedia by carefful inspection of it's components. I would hesitate to put too much stock in a number invented by MS.

To the users of Vista-64, do you use it as a sole OS or dual boot with another OS? I am re-installing my OS this weekend, and with SP3 looming, I am loathe to give up good ole XP32.

Why all this emphasis on the WEI score? It seems like a totally artificial number. You can get a good idea of how PC will perform in gaming, office work or multimedia by carefful inspection of it's components. I would hesitate to put too much stock in a number invented by MS.

To the users of Vista-64, do you use it as a sole OS or dual boot with another OS? I am re-installing my OS this weekend, and with SP3 looming, I am loathe to give up good ole XP32.
Actually, I found WEI very useful on at least one occasion. A friend of mine was having video problems with his new laptop bought from an MDG retailer so he took it to my place with the hope that we could find a fix. It turns out it needed new video drivers installed.

I also decided to run Vista's benchmarking tool just to compare the performance of his laptop with mine. The MDG's WEI scores were much lower than those of my laptop and this got us puzzled as the MDG was supposed to have similar specs to my laptop (dual core, same speed rating, same memory size). Upon investigation, it became clear that the reason for the low WEI scores were that MDG sold my friend a Dual Core Celeron instead of a Core 2 Duo. Yes, it appears MDG took advantage of the confusion over Core 2 Duo, Core Duo and Celeron Dual Core monickers. Long story short, my friend was able to get the laptop replaced after threatening to go to small claims court... he actually paid more for the MDG laptop compared to what I paid for mine.

So there you have it, one possible use for WEI scores... to avoid getting ripped off.

On the Quad I am useing Vista64 as a stand alone OP Sys. We Have been real
happy with it but like all versions of vista it is a resource Pig, but luckily This PC has plenty to spare.
My wife actually did manage to obtain our first BSOD last night though, still not sure what she did to upset it, but it rebooted fine and continued & finished the job it was doing when it locked up & died, the program she was using just had an update a couple of days ago,& has not given us any problems previously could have been somthing with the new update that it didn't like.

Dual boot until you get used to Vista. It is annoying when you first get it going. XP MUST be installed first.

dual booting with vista installed first



http://www.tweakvista.com/Article39206.aspx