Wrong Display or..?
#1
Posted 30 September 2008 - 11:42 AM
Before when I wuz Windows XP,it tells 512MB.But once I upgrade to Vista,the fact went abuse.So,is this "fact" is something that you all call "error" or is it REALLY as it is shown?
I'm confused.So I use another PC Information software...but still says the same.It's only that less 200Mb,1024MB.
#2
Posted 30 September 2008 - 12:45 PM
Look up on the BIOS instead - how much RAM is allocated for the graphics adapter?
#3
Posted 30 September 2008 - 03:39 PM
Take a look at this guys.It's real confusing me.
Before when I wuz Windows XP,it tells 512MB.But once I upgrade to Vista,the fact went abuse.So,is this "fact" is something that you all call "error" or is it REALLY as it is shown?
I'm confused.So I use another PC Information software...but still says the same.It's only that less 200Mb,1024MB.
It's not wrong. It's sharing your system memory.
756 (shared) + 512 (video card) = 1275 (roughly)
#4
Posted 30 September 2008 - 05:09 PM
It's not wrong. It's sharing your system memory.
756 (shared) + 512 (video card) = 1275 (roughly)
He's right, Vista introduces Virtual Memory for Video cards..though If I recall, it only uses actual RAM instead of a HDD.
I thought that was odd the first time I saw it too, but then I remembered hearing about that. This is one of those good features of Vista
#5
Posted 30 September 2008 - 06:51 PM
But I just don't get it.What's the benefit by doing that?Is it my performance will boost or something?
#6
Posted 30 September 2008 - 08:32 PM
Oh,VRAM sharing.I've just asked the PC vendor about this.
But I just don't get it.What's the benefit by doing that?Is it my performance will boost or something?
I assume it will give a boost for VRAM-hungry games, and it's not as bad to get a card with a limited amount of VRAM (like my 8600 GTS, which has only 256MB). I haven't looked into it for sure, though.
#7
Posted 01 October 2008 - 03:21 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users