4 ms·
I was trying to figure out why, if money was no object, they chose 4GB of RAM vs the 16GB they said the board supported. Then I remembered about the 32-bit OS 4
by ytjohn 7y ago
I was trying to figure out why, if money was no object, they chose 4GB of RAM vs the 16GB they said the board supported. Then I remembered about the 32-bit OS 4GB limit. While XP 64-bit came out in 2001, it was only for Itanium 64-bit processors. It wasn't until 2005 that XP and Server 2003 would have supported 64-bit, and therefore anything over 4GB.
Kind of a difficult time to plan your system build, here 64-bit processors are out, motherboards capable of supporting vast quantities of ram, but unable to utilize that outside of Linux. However, this "God Box" would have been excellent for 2004. Then in 2005, you could upgrade to XP Pro 64-bit, and go ahead and spend your unlimited funds to quadruple your RAM.
- 2J0 7y agoMy 2005 Dell dual Xeon 3.9Ghz box with 8GB RAM is floating around, we used VMware and more memory than that though and the nvidia card has half a gig and my box had four 15k 146GB Fujitsu drives on a LSI R10 with iirc 1GB BBU RAM cache , this was fiscal 04 iirc
- hnuser123456 7y agoPhysical Address Extension would've been an option, no?