logo elektroda
logo elektroda
X
logo elektroda

Can you install more RAM than your motherboard supports? Let's test!

p.kaczmarek2 9012 58
ADVERTISEMENT
Treść została przetłumaczona polish » english Zobacz oryginalną wersję tematu
  • A screenshot displaying the computer's RAM usage, showing 22.6 out of 23.9 GB in use (95%).
    Everyone probably knows that before adding RAM to a computer or laptop, you should check how much RAM the motherboard can support. If the hardware does not support more RAM, there is no point in trying to add it. But are you sure? Let`s check!
    Recently, there was a need to increase the RAM of one of the devices I use for work. The need itself is quite sudden, and the machine runs 24 hours a day and I didn`t want to replace it, so I decided to simply add memory...
    The patient in this topic is an ASUS N73SV laptop. Most sources list its maximum memory as 12GB:
    Screenshot of ASUS N73SV laptop model specifications.
    Screenshot showing the maximum RAM capacity for the ASUS N73SV laptop.
    The seller specified the same thing when I bought this laptop years ago.
    However, one of the websites timidly suggests that, contrary to the specifications, you can use more memory:
    Screenshot of a webpage detailing RAM upgrades for ASUS N73SV laptop.
    People on forums seem to confirm this:
    Forum post discussing the possibility of increasing RAM in a ThinkPad E460 laptop.
    The CPU specification specifies a maximum of 16GB:
    Screenshot of memory specifications with a maximum size of 16 GB.
    I will also add that at the moment all 3 slots inside are full (because there are 3, even though HWinfo shows 4), each has 4GB, for a total of 12GB.
    HWinfo before replacement:
    Screenshot from HWinfo software showing the system specifications of an ASUS N73SV laptop.

    It`s time to check what it is like in practice.
    I bought three sticks of 8GB each:
    Two 8GB SO-DIMM DDR3 RAM sticks on bubble wrap.
    Maybe we`ll replace one die at a time as a test.
    Exchange #1:
    There are two RAM slots in this Asus under the bottom flap:
    Two Kingston RAM modules installed in a laptop.
    After replacing:
    Two RAM modules installed in an ASUS N73SV laptop.
    We start it and... success, 16GB RAM:
    Screenshot of a task manager on an ASUS laptop showing 16GB of DDR3 RAM.
    HWinfo:
    Screenshot of HWiNFO64 program showing system specifications of ASUS N73SV.
    Exchange #2:
    This is now a test of the 4+8+8 configuration:
    Close-up of two DDR3 RAM modules installed in an ASUS N73SV laptop.
    Works! 20GB RAM:
    Task manager screen showing RAM usage at 20 GB.


    Exchange #3:
    The last RAM stick is under the keyboard:
    RAM inside ASUS N73SV laptop with open keyboard
    We list:
    8GB SODIMM DDR3 RAM module in ASUS N73SV laptop.
    Success, 24GB RAM!
    HWinfo:
    Screenshot of HWiNFO program showing ASUS N73SV laptop specifications with 24 GB of RAM.
    Interestingly, the memories are listed as "Unknown".
    Another mandatory memory test - mdsched : :
    ASUS N73SV laptop screen with diagnostic tool testing RAM.
    It really went through without errors:
    Windows interface showing 24 GB RAM usage on ASUS laptop.

    It`s time for a practical test with my target application, which requires a lot of RAM:
    System resource monitor showing RAM usage at 54% out of 23.9 GB. Screenshot of computer task manager showing RAM usage of 16.3 GB out of 23.9 GB
    It`s growing beautifully, over 16GB in use, everything is stable, but I want more:
    Screenshot of Task Manager showing RAM usage at 20.0 GB out of 23.9 GB available.
    And 22GB:
    RAM usage showing 22.6 GB out of 23.9 GB available on a monitor screen.
    22.6GB RAM in use, the equipment meets its intended use without any problems, no bluescreens.

    Summary
    Does this mean you should ignore the specs? Of course not. I am in no way encouraging anyone to do this. I consciously took the risk and it clearly paid off. In this particular case, it happened by luck. Everything works stably and already serves its purpose. Purchasing three memory sticks for about PLN 120 saved me from having to replace the entire equipment with something that... officially will support 24GB RAM. It`s true that it`s not my most powerful laptop, because I also have:
    Spoiler:
    Windows Task Manager window with the Performance tab showing RAM usage.

    but it will definitely be useful to me.
    I just wonder why it works... wasn`t there an 8GB stick at the time of production of this Asus and someone calculated the limit only by slots (3*4GB)? No, probably not... I won`t speculate, the bottom line is that it works.
    And now I`m asking you - have you also tried this type of modification? I invite you to discuss.

    Cool? Ranking DIY
    Helpful post? Buy me a coffee.
    About Author
    p.kaczmarek2
    Moderator Smart Home
    Offline 
    p.kaczmarek2 wrote 11822 posts with rating 9927, helped 564 times. Been with us since 2014 year.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #2 21021175
    LordZiemniak
    Level 15  
    Similarly on the qnap server, according to the specifications it only supports 8gb and after uploading 16gb it works perfectly :) )
  • #3 21021236
    Dale65
    Level 12  
    I have an old Dfi infinity board with Nforce4, AM2 platform without plus and an Athlon 64 x2 5600 processor. There are four slots, the manual states a maximum of 4GB, that`s how much is currently installed. I want to install Windows 10 on it, additional RAM will be useful. Does it make sense to invest more on this platform?
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #4 21021262
    krzbor
    Level 27  
    I will add that sometimes it is worth checking if there is a BIOS update. The amount of RAM was often increased in later versions. This is what happened on one of our servers.
  • #5 21021286
    ppc
    Level 18  
    Can you install more RAM than your motherboard supports? Can not. If it works, it means it supports more than you thought. But if you assume more than it supports, it won`t work.
  • #6 21021291
    E8600
    Level 41  
    The question is whether such a procedure does not excessively load the RAM power section?
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #7 21021323
    viayner
    Level 43  
    Hello,
    it all depends on the chipset and the board itself, I remember older boards that simply did not start after inserting too much memory, which is not entirely logical, because why wouldn`t it just use the available addresses and ignore the rest?
    Regards
  • #8 21021342
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    But you didn`t discover anything new, you only reminded or taught others that it can be done.

    This limitation that you omitted may be related to the organization of memory banks on the board (single-sided / double-sided).
    The memories have their own firmware (most of them) and it is not visible to an ordinary user.

    The specification quantity limitation itself may be physical and artificial. The manufacturer may do this consciously to distinguish between cheaper and more expensive equipment. It may be due to the time of origin of the equipment, because at the time of release and testing, no memory had yet been developed that met the requirements.
    They can even neuter the BIOS where the final one will be released in 10 years and it is unlocked, but no one will write about it anywhere.
  • #9 21021445
    speedy9
    Helpful for users
    Dale65 wrote:
    Nforce4, AM2 platform without plus and Athlon 64 x2 5600 processor. There are four slots, the manual states a maximum of 4GB, this is currently installed. I want to install Windows 10 on it

    Are you kidding? Here, RAM is not the problem, but component compatibility. Windows 10 the oldest that supports FXy. The latest drivers for nForce2 are for Windows 7.
  • #10 21021454
    flinc
    Level 28  
    If there is not enough memory, the processor takes over and adds memory in special cases in older PCs, looking at L2 cache 1Mb / 2Mb
  • #11 21021455
    dktr
    Level 25  
    The memory controller has been in the processor for a long time and its specifications should be checked to see how much memory it supports ;)
  • #12 21021510
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    dktr wrote:
    The memory controller has been in the processor for a long time

    We`re talking about old computers here (I ignore the lines "I have an old, 2-year-old corpse").

    Controller in the processor:
    AMD since 2003 AMD Athlon 64
    Intel since 2008 Intel Core i7, although not entirely because Pentium Pro before 2000. he had a substitute, although not in the same way as now.

    I will give an interesting example:
    Computer (laptop) with:
    Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor T6600 2M Cache, 2.20 GHz, 800 MHz FSB
    chipset: Mobile Intel GM45 Express <---- here is the ram controller
    -------------------------------------------------- --
    In this configuration the official max ram is 4 GB (realistically, 6 is possible GB ).


    Well, something`s not right here...
    Intel GM45 has a maximum specification of 8 GB and here is the controller, the processor has no controller!
    So why the limit to 4? GB ?

    The solution is the magic entry: DDR2 and DDR3 support.

    The processor + chipset combination can also be a technical reason for limiting the amount of memory.
  • #13 21021653
    Sam Sung
    Level 33  
    ppc wrote:
    Can you install more RAM than your motherboard supports? Can not. If it works, it means it supports more than you thought. But if you assume more than it supports, it won`t work.
    You contradicted yourself, because it is possible - at most it won`t work. (If we`re going to be literal.)
  • #14 21021742
    sq3evp
    Level 37  
    A board is a board, I would ask, has anyone checked how much RAM the system will support and whether the drivers will support the chipsets well?
    I had the opportunity to see it working on XP 32-bit with 16GB RAM - the board worked fine, the OS saw only what it could address (4GB), and the remaining memory was addressed by the application as a fast disk. The software is something like CAD with drivers from the software manufacturer.
  • #15 21021772
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    In the case of XP 32-bit, the main limitation is Microsoft and their philosophy.
    Artificial limitation with the explanation for plebs that "you have to buy" a professional, server, etc

    With "Physical Address Extension" (PAE), Grandpa NT addressed 64Gb at a time when for "Kowalski" 1Gb was cool and 4Gb was "good".
  • #16 21021945
    SylwekK
    Level 32  
    Recently I installed Win10 on a Lenovo laptop from 2007 that originally had Vista :) The laptop is an average device from that time, bought for a child, and the child has already grown up and bought a new, much better one.
    Such parameters
    Screenshot displaying processor and installed RAM information for a Lenovo laptop.
    I only replaced the HDD with an SSD and I can tell you that this ten is already running quite fast compared to what was there before (recently Linux Mint), and I`m thinking about adding a little more memory, because sometimes it still tends to slow down with the latest browsers and too many open sides :)
  • #17 21022075
    sq3evp
    Level 37  
    >>21021772
    You`re not entirely right - 32-bit systems will not address more RAM. Similarly with disk space.
    64-bit can do more - I don`t know if you`ve seen systems with RISC processors. There is a completely different organization - the limitation is the computer architecture, not the OS manufacturer.
    Linux on VM can run with 1 core CPU and 1 GB RAM without GUI. The issue of implementing support for the hardware layer
  • #18 21022229
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    sq3evp wrote:
    the limitation is the computer architecture, not the OS manufacturer

    In this case, the biggest limitation is the OS. Since 32bit NT could address 64Mb of RAM and 32bit XP could not.
    In the glory days of w7, there was a nice table showing how RAM was limited depending on the client`s budget:

    Ignoring 32bit, look at the 64bit bar.
    Table showing RAM limits for Windows 7 versions based on 32-bit and 64-bit architectures.

    And switching memory banks has already been used on 8-bit computers, and this is how it works under NT 32-bit.
  • #19 21022387
    tronics
    Level 38  
    >>21022075
    But that`s the point: thanks to PAE, it was possible to address up to 64GB of physical memory and operate it in a 32-bit system (even if a single process couldn`t go beyond 4GB anyway, but realistically less). The thing is that in Windows it was practically only available in server versions. In other versions, PAE was used only to implement NX-bit.
    Next - the processor word width, ALU width and GPR width have only a weak impact on the address possibilities, which are solved next to the execution units. For example, the 8-bit MOS 6502 had 8-bit registers and ALU, and addressed 64KB RAM (16b), the Motorola 68000 had 16-bit ALU, 32b registers, and addressed 24b RAM (16MB). 8-bit Xmegi could also address up to 24b. In the case of modern x86, you have 64-bit registers and 64-bit AGUs, but the physical memory, depending on the processor, can be addressed from 52 to 56b - because really, who needs more and why? Just a few years ago it was 40 to 48 bit.
  • #20 21022617
    Anonymous
    Level 1  
  • #21 21022655
    marweg1967
    Level 14  
    I have been using a DELL Vostro 3560 with 16 GB RAM for years. Officially it can be max. 8GB. Core i5-3210M processor, W7 64-bit system. Zero problems.

    I also had a motherboard with an AM3 socket, which managed to run 32 GB RAM instead of the "maximum" 16 GB.

    So it`s always worth trying if you can. And, as someone wrote earlier, it is worth having the latest BIOS. Which often helps with "unsupported" processors.
  • #22 21022701
    tronics
    Level 38  
    >>21022617
    If we write about memory, we write about memory, we cannot address memory or peripherals with something that does not have a direct impact on memory or peripherals. And so the entire area of addressable memory and peripherals for 68000 is 16MB. 24 bits, the youngest of which is not derived because it always jumps by 2 bytes. It is even different in x86-64, which operates on 64-bit addresses, but the space of virtual addresses is narrower (as I wrote about) and the space of physical addresses is even narrower. In other words, a significant portion of the entire 64b space is unusable in current processors and trying to "put anything in there" will throw an exception. From what I have read, it is no different in the case of ARM - there is also 48-52b of virtual space (and of course, again fewer physical addresses, and again an attempt to operate on addresses from outside the pool triggers an exception). So 64 bit x86 does NOT address 64b even though it can operate on 64 bit addresses. And Motorola 68000 does not address more than 24b even though it operates on 32-bit addresses.

    Now back to the topic - processors have had a memory controller built into them for over a decade. And this is the main limiting factor, the board only connects signals from the processor`s IMC to the DIMM slots. However, the board still has its share of limiting the amount/speed of memory support. It is enough that it only has 2 slots and this automatically imposes certain limitations. I do not rule out that the limitation may also result from the software limit in UEFI.

    @Zwierzak_PAH
    no, the memories do not have their own firmware. For there to be firmware, there must be a system that executes this firmware, and there is no such chip in the memories. DIMMs have a small EPROM memory chip with parameters - it allows you to detect what kind of memory it is and adjust the timings. This is SPD. And it is as public as possible for the user, it can be read. Few people know, but processors have a built-in SPI and I2C controller (even several)... And these interfaces are used to communicate with other systems on the motherboard and with SPD. +DP/HDMI.
  • ADVERTISEMENT
  • #24 21022766
    sq3evp
    Level 37  
    This can be discussed here.
    I once had an HP WorkStation - a PC designed like a server and had 8 memory slots.
    It could work in Dual Channel and Quad Channel mode - the condition was cooled memory and the appropriate type, which was described in the manual. The BIOS update allowed for the use of more memory as the Xeon was upgraded to a higher model.
    Win7 64-bit handled it, Win10 Prof too.
    In the end it was probably 2xXeon and 64GB RAM (only 8x8GB due to the cost of RAM which exceeded the entire cost of the computer).
    We can discuss here, but the bottleneck is always addressing - the hardware layer will do its job, that`s why we invented DualChannel and Quad Channel for RAM.
    I tested on the above computer and there was a difference - the RAM was the same, only its organization was different and the boot OS was almost no difference, but memory-hungry applications loaded much faster.
  • #25 21023414
    acctr
    Level 38  
    In new equipment, the mere existence of slots for removable memory will become less and less common.
    The equipment is increasingly stripped of all "unnecessary features" such as removable memory, a disk, or a mechanical audio jack for connecting headphones.
    Helpful post? Buy me a coffee.
  • #26 21023422
    tronics
    Level 38  
    Oh, that`s probably why the DDR6 and PCIe 6 standards have already been agreed, USB (currently in the 4.0 standard) and nvme (@pcie) are still being strongly developed. Things like you write are more the domain of the bitten apple or cheap laptops. Unless you think that computers such as workstations or servers will lack everything you mentioned... Because if they don`t lack there, they won`t be missing in PC desktops either. And there is no indication that anything will change.
  • #27 21023490
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    acctr wrote:
    In new equipment, the mere existence of slots for removable memory will become less and less common.
    The equipment is increasingly stripped of all "unnecessary features" such as removable memory, a disk, or a mechanical audio jack for connecting headphones.


    It`s not the producers` fantasies that decide. The accountant plays the first violin. They will make as many holes as your heart desires just to sell it.

    I don`t know where these thoughts come from, but looking at what is on offer, there is no shortage of slots and sockets. And some fancy motherboards are like monsters capable of miracles.
    In mine, I counted from memory, there are over 32 holes where you can stick something. Because there are 16 ports on the back.
  • #29 21023551
    Zwierzak_PAH
    Level 28  
    They have as much as the customer expects in a specific device.

    Because I have been reading fairy tales about the twilight of desktop computers for 30 years.
    And they were supposed to be replaced by laptops, then advertisements for the miracle of tablets where people on the couch type dozens of data in Excel, fancy smartphones with docking stations, keyboards, flocks of NUC computers, super thin and compact All in One.

    I saw with my own eyes people who took it seriously and tried to work in the style presented to them by marketers. Tears in eyes, broken pencils... Howling NUC fans, laptops, swearing...

    And Mrs. Zosia from accounting is stress-free because her boss didn`t like the miracles of advertising and marketing vision.
  • #30 21023702
    tronics
    Level 38  
    >>21023506
    Er, yeah...
    https://www.qnap.com/pl-pl/product/ts-h1090fu/specs/hardware
    :)

    But apart from real server applications, i.e. taking into account home NAS, you still have USB and SATA/NVMe... And since there is no RAM slot... what`s the point? In ARM versions it is not necessary at all, in x86 versions it is only an additional cost, and this is a very specific application, not a home computer. In turn, NUCs usually have both SATA, M.2 and SO-DIMM...

Topic summary

The discussion revolves around the possibility of installing more RAM than a motherboard officially supports, using an ASUS N73SV laptop as a case study. Users share experiences where they successfully exceeded the specified RAM limits, citing examples from various devices, including QNAP servers and older motherboards. Key factors influencing RAM compatibility include chipset capabilities, BIOS updates, and the memory controller's specifications. Some users emphasize that while it may be possible to install more RAM, it could lead to issues such as excessive load on the RAM power section or compatibility problems with the operating system. The conversation also touches on the evolution of hardware limitations and the trend towards devices with non-removable memory.
Summary generated by the language model.
ADVERTISEMENT