On one of my crunchers (I7-3820, a Win 7 64-bit socket 2011 machine with Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 MB which I recently upgraded to a Xeon E5-2670 processor), just today I upgraded the RAM from 8GB to 16GB (4x2GB sticks of 2133MHz to 4x4GB of 1333MHz) to see if memory size was constraining my processing.

In BIOS I see 16GB of RAM; CPU-Z sees 16GB of RAM. But Task Manager still sees only 8GB of RAM. What is possibly wrong here that would cause this? I restarted the machine and TM still is seeing only 8GB of RAM, as before the upgrade...

---

Very weird... Windows repair install maybe ? (just an idea)

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

Not sure about the solution, but curious to see if the substantially slower memory (~40%) has any impact in your crunching.

---

Windows repair install maybe ? Be (just an idea)

Nope. It was a straight scratch install three years ago. The machine has been in service since about 20 June 2013. Never saw a problem like this before on any machine, except 32bit installs if > 4gb physically present. But this isn't related to that...

---

Not sure about the solution, but curious to see if the substantially slower memory (~40%) has any impact in your crunching.

Possible, but won't see that much diff in any event because the 8gb was running at 1600mhz since I wasn't running with XMP on.

---

On one of my crunchers (I7-3820, a Win 7 64-bit socket 2011 machine with Gigabyte GA-X79-UD3 MB which I recently upgraded to a Xeon E5-2670 processor), just today I upgraded the RAM from 8GB to 16GB (4x2GB sticks of 2133MHz to 4x4GB of 1333MHz) to see if memory size was constraining my processing.

In BIOS I see 16GB of RAM; CPU-Z sees 16GB of RAM. But Task Manager still sees only 8GB of RAM. What is possibly wrong here that would cause this? I restarted the machine and TM still is seeing only 8GB of RAM, as before the upgrade...

Hi,

If I remember correctly ... years ago I had set a fixed size swap file and the machine did not recognice a mem upgrade until I set the fixed swap file to a new (bigger) value.

EDIT: And for my memory problem I can see a reason: This was my 1000th post.

---

To overcome Heisenbergs:
"You can't always get what you want / but if you try sometimes you just might find / you get what you need." -- Rolling Stones

Nice idea...unfortunately, I have never messed with swap file size. I will look, though, and see what is there. Thanks for the suggestion.

---

I tried increasing the virtual memory size on the machine from the system-made 8111MB (same as TM reported for Physical Memory)to 16384MB but that had no affect. TM still reported 8111MB. I then restarted the machine; still the same - swap file size is 16384MB according to Windows, but TM reports 8111MB.

You know, this could get annoying...

---

If I select the Performance tab in Windows Task Manager and slide the mouse above the values, you may notice that the mouse gets into edit mode even though the values may not be changed.

This means that the value is what the Operating System (Windows) is seeing.

Also you could access Resource Monitor from this Tab, at least when it comes to Windows Ultimate.

If possible, pull out all the memory cards and insert one card only in the best suitable slot.

Turn off the computer and first get to the BIOS when turning back on.

If the BIOS is visible, a boot to Windows could be attempted.

Next insert one more card and do the same. Remember to turn off the computer each time, or at least turn off the main power switch.

If this still works, you could probably finish off with the remaining two cards at the same time, doing the same thing again.

My guess is that this will work if all the cards are OK.

If I select the Performance tab in Windows Task Manager and slide the mouse above the values, you may notice that the mouse gets into edit mode even though the values may not be changed.

This means that the value is what the Operating System (Windows) is seeing.

I don't know what you mean for me to do in the first sentence.
I do not understand this.

Also, Resource Monitor shows the same as TM, so far as I can see.

---

I think what he is inferring is that you can edit the values and he is suggesting that you try that.

Also, don't know if any of this is of help to you but have a look through this and see if any of it may help you..

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/66482-memory-set-maximum-amount-used-windows.html

---

In BIOS I see 16GB of RAM; CPU-Z sees 16GB of RAM. But Task Manager still sees only 8GB of RAM. What is possibly wrong here that would cause this? I restarted the machine and TM still is seeing only 8GB of RAM, as before the upgrade...

If you remove one video card?

What version BIOS do you have?
For the Rev 1.0 motherboard, to fully support your Xeon the F16 revision is required, F20 "Improves system compatibility" (although it doesn't actually tell you any more than that).
For the Rev 1.1 motherboard F20 is required to support Xeon E5 series CPUs (even though their CPU compatibility list for that motherboard shows your CPU being supported with the F16 version BIOS).

If you put the i7 back in, what memory is reported then?

---

Grant
Darwin NT

1) What does the video card have to do with it?

2) F16

As far as screwing around with the MB - I am getting (thanks, eBay) an ASUS Z9PE-D8 WS dual 2011 MB in a couple of days that will make this moot, so I don't want to fool around with this machine right now. Thanks for the suggestions, though.

Incidentally:

1) ASUS doesn't support v1, only v2 E5s. so my Rampage IV Extreme was worthless for this. Bummer.

2) Gigabyte BIOS list for F16 says added Ivy Bridge-E (i7) but not -EP (v2) CPUs BUT the CPU Support list explicitly says the MB does NOT support them (?) even though it lists a bunch of CPUs added in F16. Consistent but confusing...

---

Sometimes by "upsetting" a computer by, say, removing a video card it will do a sanity check on itself and recognise the memory installed correctly. This has been known to work, and it has been known to do nothing apart from cost you a few hours of muttering while you remove the card, see nothing has been changed, replace the card, see nothing has changed.

One thing worth trying, along similar lines, is to remover the memory and insert it back, swapping modules around. This effectively cleans the pins on both the modules and the motherboard.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

1) What does the video card have to do with it?

It shouldn't have anything to do with it, as the BIOS & other things show 16GB installed.
However your video cards have 4GB of RAM each, and you are missing 8GB from the Task Manager, so it would be interesting to see if removing a video card had any impact on memory availability as far as the Operating System is concerned.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

1) What does the video card have to do with it?

It shouldn't have anything to do with it, as the BIOS & other things show 16GB installed.
However your video cards have 4GB of RAM each, and you are missing 8GB from the Task Manager, so it would be interesting to see if removing a video card had any impact on memory availability as far as the Operating System is concerned.

Just try it as there is a few principles here that could be involved there.

Also, do you have the slowest RAM installed in the 1st slot of each memory channel?

Cheers.