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


Recommended Posts

Which you don't know at all. Personally I think running patches like this is stupid, but I wouldn't be so quick to insist that it doesn't work. From a theoretical aspect, it can certainly work.

There is no such thing as a "PAE-aware" application. The 2GB limitation always applies, even on 32-bit versions of Windows that support more than 4GB (the server line.) The only way around this is for applications to do their own memory management by mapping chunks of memory in and out of their address space, but this is fairly rare. A few server programs did it years and years ago, but nothing else does.

Why doesn't it work? What are you basing this claim on? You do know that Microsoft sells a whole range of 32-bit operating systems that support up to 128GB of memory, right? It's called their server products. As you probably know, the server and client edition is virtually identical (to the point where binaries literally are identical for Vista and 2008). With this in mind, I don't know why you believe it is completely impossible to patch the part of the kernel and loader that decides how much memory you get to use. It doesn't have to be more than a few bytes to change.

"Theoreticaly" isn't real world. It doesn't work. Do some research.

Quit with the FUD please. 32 bit is 32 bit not 36.

"Quit with the fear, uncertainty and doubt?" What on earth does that sentence even mean?

Just because the CPU architecture is 32-bit, does not mean that the addressing has to be. Modern systems support >36-bit addressing, and this is implemented with three-level translation. It's a completely standard thing, supported by all platforms from Windows Server to OS X to Linux to FreeBSD to most other platforms still in development.

Why doesn't it work? What are you basing this claim on? You do know that Microsoft sells a whole range of 32-bit operating systems that support up to 128GB of memory, right? It's called their server products. As you probably know, the server and client edition is virtually identical (to the point where binaries literally are identical for Vista and 2008). With this in mind, I don't know why you believe it is completely impossible to patch the part of the kernel and loader that decides how much memory you get to use. It doesn't have to be more than a few bytes to change.

Is it that hard to read what I said before you respond?... This is not about server products or any of that. If the server products can already address more memory, then it would not need this.

For the second or third time, this is for the mainstream 32-bit system that you piece together from Newegg or whatever. NOT SERVER HARDWARE.

For this casual user with a 32-bit system, this will not work because the hardware and software will not allow it. That's it, no excuses. If you honest think it will work, go try it yourself and report back to us...

Seriously. Get a clue. It won't work. Do some research.

No, you get a clue. What I said was absolutely correct. I suggest that you contact Microsoft and Apple immediately and inform them that their products that support PAE do in fact not work. I'm sure they would be surprised to find out. You get right on that.

Is it that hard to read what I said before you respond?... This is not about server products or any of that. If the server products can already address more memory, then it would not need this.

For the second or third time, this is for the mainstream 32-bit system that you piece together from Newegg or whatever. NOT SERVER HARDWARE.

For this casual user with a 32-bit system, this will not work because the hardware and software will not allow it. That's it, no excuses. If you honest think it will work, go try it yourself and report back to us...

You are absolutely wrong. It is supported by most current consumer hardware. The server versions of Windows support it because they are licensed to use more than 4GB and because they do not have an artificial limit imposed for driver compatibility (which the client edition does.) The logic is that people who run the server edition are able to pick components that they know support it, so that the compatibility issue doesn't matter as much.

Now, whether this particular patch works, I do not know, but it is a simple fact that everything needed to support it is already present in Windows, but is just disabled in the client edition (which is mostly identical to the server edition, with different settings.) This means that it could certainly be possible to do it from a technical aspect. The people here who are claiming it doesn't work or can't be done, are not basing this claim on any facts.

Seriously. You need to do your homework. It's not gonna happen no matter what you wish in this world. You're wrong, let it go.

You need to state what I am wrong about. I have said several things, so please be specific. Am I wrong about it being possible to go beyond 32-bit addressing on 32-bit systems with PAE? Am I wrong about the fact that Microsoft sells 32-bit versions of Windows that support up to 128GB? Am I wrong about the server and client line being virtually identical? What am I wrong about? Be specific.

I am now tired of you. PAE was never an issue. I believe you brought it into the discussion. As far as the server/client issue. Do you not think that a company would even have a server/client if there wasn't an advantage and a purpose to either? Go away.

im amazed at people still wanting to use 4+ gigs of memory on a 32bit system, 32bit is on its way out so why use something that will not use all your memory, and not use something that will make a better overall computer system. I hope Windows 8 is the last of 32bit software and they move to 64bit windows with windows9. I have heard that the current windows server is the last of 32bit and the next will be only 64bit. It seems like people have had mixed results with PAE and that its not worth having it... in the end i think people should try both and see how the feel!

You need to state what I am wrong about. I have said several things, so please be specific. Am I wrong about it being possible to go beyond 32-bit addressing on 32-bit systems with PAE? Am I wrong about the fact that Microsoft sells 32-bit versions of Windows that support up to 128GB? Am I wrong about the server and client line being virtually identical? What am I wrong about? Be specific.

hdood, stop living under a rock and upgrade to x64.

And to everyone else, Windows does support 36bit addressing via PAE, but, it's a hardware problem with drivers etc. Server based products can be tailored to support it since it's a server environment, but for standard consumer hardware like Graphics cards etc, they need to be designed and have drivers to fully support it or you'll have system crashes and so on. This "hack" will only cause system instability which can be avoided by either just staying with 32bit version of Windows or upgrading to x64.

All this crap needs to stop, retail versions of Windows Vista/7 (I think some OEM copies) can go from 32bit to 64bit without any additional cost since the CD keys will work with both products.

x64 is no just about more memory, it's the extra CPU registerers etc that are good for speed increases for applications that support/take advantage of x64 based hardware. And if I hear someone say "Well, 32bit is 'emulated' in x64 version of Windows", please stfu, really, the performance differences for this type of 'emulation' is near to nothing.

  • Like 1
You are absolutely wrong. It is supported by most current consumer hardware. The server versions of Windows support it because they are licensed to use more than 4GB and because they do not have an artificial limit imposed for driver compatibility (which the client edition does.) The logic is that people who run the server edition are able to pick components that they know support it, so that the compatibility issue doesn't matter as much.

Now, whether this particular patch works, I do not know, but it is a simple fact that everything needed to support it is already present in Windows, but is just disabled in the client edition (which is mostly identical to the server edition, with different settings.) This means that it could certainly be possible to do it from a technical aspect. The people here who are claiming it doesn't work or can't be done, are not basing this claim on any facts.

Seriously, can you please stop going on about server hardware/software? For the fourth time, this is NOT about that.

If you want to convince us that this works, please go try it. I mean no disrespect, but you won't convince us with anything until you give us physical proof that it will work.

hdood, stop living under a rock and upgrade to x64.

And to everyone else, Windows does support 36bit addressing via PAE, but, it's a hardware problem with drivers etc. Server based products can be tailored to support it since it's a server environment, but for standard consumer hardware like Graphics cards etc, they need to be designed and have drivers to fully support it or you'll have system crashes and so on. This "hack" will only cause system instability which can be avoided by either just staying with 32bit version of Windows or upgrading to x64.

All this crap needs to stop, retail versions of Windows Vista/7 (I think some OEM copies) can go from 32bit to 64bit without any additional cost since the CD keys will work with both products.

x64 is no just about more memory, it's the extra CPU registerers etc that are good for speed increases for applications that support/take advantage of x64 based hardware. And if I hear someone say "Well, 32bit is 'emulated' in x64 version of Windows", please stfu, really, the performance differences for this type of 'emulation' is near to nothing.

Not emulated. Virtualized. ;)

Seriously. You need to do your homework. It's not gonna happen no matter what you wish in this world. You're wrong, let it go. Supported HARDWARE WISE- not SOFTWARE unless you have the correct OS.

What is likely happening with this patch is that they are modifying the kernel to act like the kernel from the server lines of Windows, which support more than 4GB on 32-bit. There is your OS support right there. Now what exactly are you saying won't work?

im amazed at people still wanting to use 4+ gigs of memory on a 32bit system, 32bit is on its way out so why use something that will not use all your memory, and not use something that will make a better overall computer system. I hope Windows 8 is the last of 32bit software and they move to 64bit windows with windows9. I have heard that the current windows server is the last of 32bit and the next will be only 64bit. It seems like people have had mixed results with PAE and that its not worth having it... in the end i think people should try both and see how the feel!

Most probably would LIKE to go to 64 bit, BUT 32 bit ONLY CPU's still do exist. And obviously 64 bit wont install if the CPU is only 32 bit. And the only way they'll be able to get out of 32 bit, is if they update everything. So, it'll support it

I am now tired of you. PAE was never an issue. I believe you brought it into the discussion. As far as the server/client issue. Do you not think that a company would even have a server/client if there wasn't an advantage and a purpose to either? Go away.

Please answer my question. PAE was never an issue? What do you mean? PAE is the feature that lets you use >32-bit addressing on 32-bit platforms (something you claimed wasn't possible).

Again, tell me what was wrong?

Was it that it is it possible to go beyond 32-bit addressing on 32-bit systems with PAE?

Was it that Microsoft sells 32-bit versions of Windows that support up to 128GB?

Was it that the server and client line is virtually identical?

Since you know for a fact that this patch can't work, could you take a few minutes to explain to us how the memory initialization during startup works in Windows, and how it differs between Vista and Server 2008? How do you know that the difference is any more substantial than simply setting a flag? It's not unreasonable to suspect this, so how do you know otherwise? I trust that you can enlighten us, since you clearly know the facts here.

Most probably would LIKE to go to 64 bit, BUT 32 bit ONLY CPU's still do exist. And obviously 64 bit wont install if the CPU is only 32 bit. And the only way they'll be able to get out of 32 bit, is if they update everything. So, it'll support it

Well, technically they do, but they're no longer made except for certain mobile processors. I doubt there's any great number of people out there with old 32-bit Pentiums or Athlons and >4GB of memory they're dying to get to work. When this topic comes up, it's almost exclusively people with fairly high-end modern hardware.

What is likely happening with this patch is that they are modifying the kernel to act like the kernel from the server lines of Windows, which support more than 4GB on 32-bit. There is your OS support right there. Now what exactly are you saying won't work?

What "patch"? The kernel is what it is. You can't alter 32 bit code to do what 64 bit code does. Go away with the FUD.

Seriously, can you please stop going on about server hardware/software? For the fourth time, this is NOT about that.

As I (and others) have stated, this patch is most likely making a hybrid kernel that has the memory support from the server software patched into the kernel for the client OS. That is why people keep mentioning the fact that the server version support it. You and ShamRocker1 are the ones who keep claiming that it simply isn't possible at all without stating any facts to back up your claims.

http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?do...ense/memory.htm

Read please.

That 32-bit editions of Windows Vista are limited to 4GB is not because of any technical constraint on 32-bit operating systems. The 32-bit editions of Windows Vista all contain code for using physical memory above 4GB. Microsoft just doesn’t license you to use that code.

ps. Please don't whinge that its about Vista, the same applies to 7

What "patch"? The kernel is what it is. You can't alter 32 bit code to do what 64 bit code does. Go away with the FUD.

I don't think you understand. The ability to use 36-bit addressing is already present in 32-bit Windows. It's solid, fully tested implementation that has been around for ages. If you want some examples of what the various 32-bit versions of Windows Server can support, you can click here.

The server and client version of Windows aren't two separate operating systems. They're the same OS, built from the same code, but with different settings. They even share many binaries (this makes servicing much easier.) It's perfectly rational to suspect that the configuration is decided at runtime with a simple flag, and that you can patch the kernel to enable the functionality that is really intended for the server editions. This doesn't have to be more than a few bytes.

It's a silly thing to do, and leaves your OS in an unsupported state, but it can be possible.

As I (and others) have stated, this patch is most likely making a hybrid kernel that has the memory support from the server software patched into the kernel for the client OS. That is why people keep mentioning the fact that the server version support it. You and ShamRocker1 are the ones who keep claiming that it simply isn't possible at all without stating any facts to back up your claims.

Well. We managed to get 4 pages of crap.

No, it didn't, and it isn't (supported).

Actually, XP did originally support it. The license limited it to 4GB, but you could use the whole 4GB with PAE (and not lose any address space to things like the graphics card.) It was disabled in SP1 because of compatibility issues with incorrectly designed drivers.

I don't think you understand. The ability to use 36-bit addressing is already present in 32-bit Windows. It's solid, fully tested implementation that has been around for ages. If you want some examples of what the various 32-bit versions of Windows Server can support, you can click here.

The server and client version of Windows aren't two separate operating systems. They're the same OS, built from the same code, but with different settings. They even share many binaries (this makes servicing much easier.) It's perfectly rational to suspect that the configuration is decided at runtime with a simple flag, and that you can patch the kernel to enable the functionality that is really intended for the server editions. This doesn't have to be more than a few bytes.

It's a silly thing to do, and leaves your OS in an unsupported state, but it can be possible.

Are you still talking about PAE? Reading this thread it seems to me that nobody denied the existence of PAE or its ability to extend memory usage in a 32-bit OS under the right conditions, but rather that it isn't practical for consumers using standard consumer hardware because of incompatibilities.

As I (and others) have stated, this patch is most likely making a hybrid kernel that has the memory support from the server software patched into the kernel for the client OS. That is why people keep mentioning the fact that the server version support it. You and ShamRocker1 are the ones who keep claiming that it simply isn't possible at all without stating any facts to back up your claims.

Well. We managed to get pages of crap.

Why did you quote me there without using quote tags??

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Hope all is well. I am in UK.  
    • I'm not happy with myself for it, but I've gone and got hold of it. Just another 45 minutes and I'll be Bond, James Bond. In my defence, IO's Hitman series is awesome, and I'm a sucker for 007. So while it might seem a bit simplified compared to Hitman, I'm sure I'll be right at home.
    • Or just check the script yourself ^^. I hate having a Microsoft account tied to my windows install.
    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      75
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      74
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!