Re: XP msinfo32.exe reported vs installed physical memory
From: Ron Martell (ron_at_onlinehelp.bc.ca)
Date: 03/18/04
- Next message: dev: "Re: Remote Procudre Call Terminates"
- Previous message: Ron Martell: "Re: What are the minimum hardware requirements to run XP Pro"
- In reply to: dwebb: "XP msinfo32.exe reported vs installed physical memory"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 04:20:44 GMT
"dwebb" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>Just upgraded PC OS from ME to XP. Motherboard has 3 SIMM
>banks with 128 MG each for a total of 384MB. BIOS finds
>and reports 384MB, XP System tab under control panel
>correctly reports 384MB, Norton Utilities reports 384MB,
>BUT msinfo32.exe (System Information 7.0)reports 256MB--
>WHY? Is this a known problem with msinfo32.exe in XP?
>Coundn't find any info in knowledge base or downloads. So
>is XP really only seeing and using 256MB or the 384MB?
Yes. System Information in Windows XP has been known to report the
wrong amount of RAM under some circumstances, usually when there are
multiple RAM modules installed.
Provided that System Properties reports the correct amount of RAM this
is merely a cosmetic issue. I am not certain as to the status of
this item in terms of a fix for it.
Good luck
Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
-- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
- Next message: dev: "Re: Remote Procudre Call Terminates"
- Previous message: Ron Martell: "Re: What are the minimum hardware requirements to run XP Pro"
- In reply to: dwebb: "XP msinfo32.exe reported vs installed physical memory"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
