Is 512meg RAM really 511meg?

[Mike7]

About an hour ago, I installed an additional 256meg of RAM in my Pentium III 500Mhz. (BE6 motherboard. Computer purchased from ABS Computer, in the final weeks of 1999.) It already had 256meg (2 128meg PC 133 things).

My semi-ept, at best, when it comes to upgrading a computer. But adding memory is more-or-less within my capabilities.

Okay, I installed the additional RAM, powered up the computer, and all seemed fine. But just out of curiosity, I decided to check on System Information (Norton 2001), and under memory it reports "Total Physical Memory 511 MB (535822336 Bytes)."

Shouldn't it report 512 MB?

Is a report of 511 MB normal? (It's Kingston Value RAM, btw.)

Now, the 1 MB difference, in and of itself, doesn't bother me any. I mean, it's not like I could get by with 512 MB, but 511 MB just won't prove sufficient.

But I'm wondering whether this might be indicative of some flaw with my RAM that is likely to manifest itself in unpleasant ways, somewhere down the line.

Advice? Suggestions? Comments?

 

[DaiShan]

nope the only flaw is within the software, don't worry about it.

 

[Mike7]

Thanks for the reassurance, DaiShan.

I didn't really want to put more money into the computer, since I'll probably be replacing the PIII within the next year or so. But I figure RAM is cheap, and I plan on upgrading to WinXP in the near future (and XP is said to be more RAM-hungry than is my current Win98 OS).

'Course, I also dropped $141 for a new hard drive, just the other day. But I'll be able to move it from this computer to whatever new computer I wind up buying.