Jump to content

Photo

If <2GB RAM on non-PAE system, can I use Standard (PAE, & new kernel) instead of Legacy (non-PAE & old kernel)?

2GB PAE Non-PAE 32bit Standard Legacy

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 25 April 2017 - 06:44 PM

We have a eeePC 1000HE.  that's a Atom N280* 1.666ghz, and I'm pretty sure it's non-pae,

as it does not allow to expand beyond 2GB of RAM. 

 

Edit: I corrected this from Celeron which many sources had it as.  Asus's website lists it as an Intel Athom N280

 

PAE is for a different kind of memory addressing/mapping, allowing to go beyond 2GB,

but we'll never go beyond that in this machine, 

 

I would like to know if I can use the Standard 32bit edition instead of the Legacy non-pae version. 

For the first 2GB, will both the for-PAE and the non-PAE address it in the same manner, using the same standard? 

Or do they even address the first 2GB differently? 

 

The reason: it is my understanding that the latest Kernel patches a major vulnerability, which, I assume, would still be present in the older 3.2 kernel. 





A big thank you to everyone who contributes to Bodhi Linux


#2 Randy

Randy

    Bodhi-Care

  • Members
  • 649 posts
  • LocationFort Wayne, IN USA

Posted 26 April 2017 - 12:49 AM

Yes, You should be able to install the non-pae.  


Randy Fry



Linux Addict!

#3 Charles@Bodhi

Charles@Bodhi

    Old Faithful

  • Moderators
  • 4611 posts
  • LocationZeist, The Netherlands

Posted 26 April 2017 - 09:34 AM

You can check that in terminology

cat /proc/cpuinfo

If the line with flags has a mention for pae than your processor can handle a kernel with pae enabled. The mobo might not be wired for it, but AFAIK the eeepc 1000 was OK.

 

Enjoy,

Charles



#4 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 08 May 2017 - 04:19 AM

Yes, You should be able to install the non-pae.  

No, I am asking if I can use the standard 32 bit, instead of the Legacy (non-pae),

since it will never go beyond 2gb. 



#5 Randy

Randy

    Bodhi-Care

  • Members
  • 649 posts
  • LocationFort Wayne, IN USA

Posted 08 May 2017 - 08:54 AM

See Charles post.  Sorry, I misunderstood. 

 

If your system supports pae then yes, you can use a pae kernel with less than 3 GB of ram on your system.


Randy Fry



Linux Addict!

#6 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 10 May 2017 - 03:11 AM

thanks guys, that's good to know.  

when my daughter lets me approach her netbook again, I'll give it a try and let you know how it goes. 



#7 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 23 May 2017 - 06:50 PM

You know guys... 

 

I am realizing that my original question is kind of a dumb one: 

since non-pae systems stop at 2GB, all of them would be =<2GB. 

if the pae version could be used on that, 

they wouldn't have to bother making a Legacy non-pae version. 



#8 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 11 June 2017 - 05:09 PM

Do the 32-bit versions take advantage of dual-core? 

 

32-bit PAE? 

NON-PAE? 

 

thanks



#9 Jeff

Jeff

    Lead Developer

  • Developer
  • 12522 posts
  • LocationBloomington, IL

Posted 11 June 2017 - 06:19 PM

32bit operating systems will use multiple core if the application you are using is written to do so. 



#10 Timmi

Timmi

    Member

  • Members
  • 78 posts

Posted 12 June 2017 - 07:41 PM

32bit operating systems will use multiple core if the application you are using is written to do so. 

 

Does the app not sit atop the OS, and the OS determines how it interacts with the CPU? 

 

And even for apps that may not take advantage, does an OS not allow the cores to juggle different apps' tasks concurrently, when the CPU is designed for that? 

 

And if you had an app that "could" take advantage, but it is running in an OS that does not, would that not impede this app from taking advantage of it? 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: 2GB, PAE, Non-PAE, 32bit Standard, Legacy

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users