Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6901233
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 27, 20262026-05-27T07:38:51+00:00 2026-05-27T07:38:51+00:00

An excerpt of Wikipedia’s article on Physical Address Extension : x86 processor hardware-architecture is

  • 0

An excerpt of Wikipedia’s article on Physical Address Extension:

x86 processor hardware-architecture is augmented with additional address lines used to select the additional memory, so physical address size increases from 32 bits to 36 bits. This, theoretically, increases maximum physical memory size from 4 GB to 64 GB.

Along with an image explaining the mechanism:

enter image description here

But I can’t see how the address space is expanded from 4GB to 64GB. And 4 * 512 * 512 * 4K still equals 4GB, isn’t it?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-27T07:38:51+00:00Added an answer on May 27, 2026 at 7:38 am

    x86 processors running in 32-bit mode uses page translations for memory addresses. This means that there is a mapping layer between the address used by the code (both kernel and user mode) and the actual physical memory. E.g. in Windows all processes map the image of the .exe file to the same address.

    The mapping layer between the virtual and physical addresses can normally only map 4GB of memory. With PAE enabled, the 32 bit virtual addresses are mapped 36 bit physical addresses. Still, a single process cannot access more than 4GB at a single time. That’s what you see in the image you’ve pasted, the 32-bit address space of one process. You can also see that the PTE (Page Table Entry) containing the physical address is 64 bit wide.

    A PAE aware application can swap in and out different parts of memory into the visible address space to make use of more than 4GB of RAM, but it can only see 4GB at any single point in time.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Here's an excerpt from a Wikipedia article: In contrast to the GET request method
In what language was MSDOS originally written in? The Wikipedia Article implies either C,
Here is a little snippet of code from Wikipedia's article on malloc(): int *ptr;
I've written an implementation of Bresenham's algorithm in Python (following the Wikipedia article ),
Excerpt from a book: A float value consists of a 24-bit signed mantissa and
Excerpt from my JavaScript console: > 0 in [1, 2] true Why?
Here is an excerpt from my code: xtype: 'image', src: 'http://www.sencha.com/files/blog/old/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sencha-logo.png', left: '50%', top:
Here is excerpt from my larger JavaScript file: function dashboardConfig() { $(window).on('resize', function ()
This is an excerpt of some c++ code, that i'll have to explain in
Below is an excerpt from an .svg file (which is xml): <text xml:space=preserve style=font-size:14.19380379px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;font-stretch:normal;text-align:start;line-height:125%;writing-mode:lr-tb;text-anchor:start;fill:#000000;fill-opacity:1;stroke:none;font-family:DejaVu

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.