>>721116710
Better than anyone's 32-bit x86 system.
>>721116712
Sort of. Windows has weird limits, but it's technically a per-process limit of 4GB in the architecture. Before 64-bit CPUs were common in the Intel/AMD world, Windows allowed physical address extensions, which allowed it to access multiple 4GB pages (x86 Unixes could do this by default, but it was a Windows server feature you had to enable via a boot flag on the MS side). So you had stuff like MS SQL opening separate processes for database tables and the system being able to swap between them (which made rapid accesses to multiple pages ungodly slow, since it had to shift addressing every time it accessed a different page).
TL;DR Windows desktop was even worse, as it had a 2GB limit per process by default in a 32-bit executable, and you could make it Large Address Aware, which upped it to 3.5.