Windows 10: PAE patch updated for Windows 10 - Is ths True?

I have seen a lot of websites stating there is a new patch for those who are still running Windows 10 Pro 32 Bit, (Like Myself). I don't think this can be done, I have followed instructions, and nada. This was posted on a World Press Blog, it seemed credible, but didn't work. Anyone with Windows 10-Home/Pro Editions have tried a Patch to a PAE?

PatchPae (v2) by wj32.
Tested on: Windows Vista SP2, Windows 7 SP0, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, Windows 10 (build 10586)
== Installation ==
1. Open an elevated Command Prompt window.
2. cd C:\Windows\system32.
Make sure the current directory is in fact system32.
[[ For Windows 8, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10: ]]
3. C:\WherePatchPaeIs\PatchPae2.exe -type kernel -o ntoskrnx.exe ntoskrnl.exe
This will patch the kernel to enable a maximum of 128GB of RAM.
[[ For Windows Vista and Windows 7: ]]
3. C:\WherePatchPaeIs\PatchPae2.exe -type kernel -o ntkrnlpx.exe ntkrnlpa.exe
This will patch the kernel to enable a maximum of 128GB of RAM.
4. C:\WherePatchPaeIs\PatchPae2.exe -type loader -o winloadp.exe winload.exe
This will patch the loader to disable signature verification.
5. bcdedit /copy {current} /d "Windows (PAE Patched)"
This will create a new boot entry. A message should appear:
The entry was successfully copied to {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx}.
[[ For Windows 8, Windows 8.1 and Windows 10: ]]
6. bcdedit /set {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx} kernel ntoskrnx.exe
This will set our boot entry to load our patched kernel.
[[ For Windows Vista and Windows 7: ]]
6. bcdedit /set {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx} kernel ntkrnlpx.exe
This will set our boot entry to load our patched kernel.
7. bcdedit /set {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx} path \Windows\system32\winloadp.exe
This will set our loader to be our patched loader.
8. bcdedit /set {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx} nointegritychecks 1
This will disable verification of the loader.
9. bcdedit /set {bootmgr} default {xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx}
This will set our boot entry to be the default.
10. bcdedit /set {bootmgr} timeout 2
This will set the timeout to be shorter.
Note: you can change this timeout to whatever you like.
11. Restart the computer and enjoy.
== Removal ==
To remove the patch:
* Run msconfig, click Boot, highlight the entry named "Windows (PAE Patched)", and click Delete.
* Delete the files ntoskrnx.exe (or ntkrnlpx.exe) and winloadp.exe from C:\Windows\system32.
== Updates ==
When Windows Update installs new updates on your computer, you should run Step 3 again to ensure
that you have the latest version of the kernel.
== Compiling ==
To compile PatchPae2, you need to get Process Hacker and build it.
The directory structure should look like this:
* ...\ProcessHacker2\lib\...
* ...\ProcessHacker2\phlib\...
* ...\src\PatchPae2.sln

Source: https://wj32.org/wp/2016/02/01/pae-p...or-windows-10/

:)

 

PAE Patch for Microsoft Windows 10 32 bit Build 14393.82

Ruth Buruga Thank you for Support.

Best Regards.

 

PAE Patch for Microsoft Windows 10 32 bit Build 14393.82

Someone knows how can I activate PAE in this build number ?

Thanks for any help !

 

The 4 GB RAM limit in client versions of Windows is a license limit and enforced by the kernel. Any method of circumventing this would be in violation of Microsoft's EULA and I will would not consider helping with this even if I had a solution, which I don't.

For reasons which I will not go into a successful patch of Windows 10 would be more difficult and less likely with Windows 10 than for previous versions.

I would recommend using a 64 bit version of Windows 10 if you want more than 4 GB RAM.

One of the reasons why Microsoft disabled the ability to access RAM above 4 GB is that some drivers behave very badly in such an environment. The results are unpredictable but unpleasant. As the problem does not occur in unmodified versions of Windows developers have little reason to fix this.

 

Thanks for the reply, I should stop the thread if it is in violation. My apologies, I didn't know. I lost this as solved. Thanks again!