AOA AOA AOA Folding For Team 45 AOA Files Home Front Page Become an AOA Subscriber! UserCP Calendar Memberlist FAQ Search Forum Home


Go Back   AOA > Software > OS, Software, Firmware, and BIOS
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Arcade Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2002, 05:41 PM
superally's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: scotland
Posts: 16

Best performing virtual memory settings in XP?

Hi folks

Hopefully an easy question here - just upgraded from 256MB SDRAM to 512MB DDR2100 (ECS K7S5A board). I'd expected the machine (1700XP+) to be quicker than it was before, and it is, but still seems to be using vast amounts of pagefile (like, it's using 100MB of "my" RAM and 190MB of pagefile).

Dr.Pepper question - if I set the pagefile to 0, hence forcing it to use the 512MB DDR and nowt else, what's the worst that can happen?

I've made the change and so far nothing seems to have crashed on me, and since the machine only really works hard when it's running GTA3 I can't think why it would ever need more than 512MB to run anyway, but......

The way it's runing now relative to what it was doing before actually persuades me that rather than go back to using the pagefile I would cough up the extra 71 quid for another 512MB of DDR, but I'd rather not if I don't have to.

Any thoughts???

Many thanks

Ally
__________________
AMD 1700XP+
ECS K7S5A
512MB DDR2100
Radeon 7500
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2002, 05:56 PM
Samuknow's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Posts: 8,459
Send a message via MSN to Samuknow

I'm at a loss here. I can't wait to see the answer for this one.
__________________
"FEAR NOT" Isaiah 41:10
eVga 680i SLI 122-CK-NF68-A1
E6400 @ 3.3 @ 1.25V
2 x 8800 GTS SLI
3 x 21" Sony Trinitron
Tuniq 3 modified case.
PSU - Tuniq 950 watt Miniplant review
AOA Team fah
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2002, 06:11 PM
superally's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: scotland
Posts: 16

I'm kind of hoping that doesn't mean this is the dumbest question ever to hit the boards.... :-)

A
__________________
AMD 1700XP+
ECS K7S5A
512MB DDR2100
Radeon 7500
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 18th June, 2002, 06:37 PM
SteveI's Avatar
AOA Staff
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,946

Quote:
Originally posted by superally
I'm kind of hoping that doesn't mean this is the dumbest question ever to hit the boards.... :-)

A
Absolutely not.. (I'm sure there are plenty dumber , j/k) I have a friend who does this, but not sure how. I think he told me that when it is running out of RAM, XP automatically starts forcing the virtual memory to increase. This will slow down the system to a crawl, but then it works fine. To have it go back to using 0 virtual, you have to force it again. It can be tedious, but he seems to like it. (I run 512 DDR as well, but I'm too lazy to play with it.)

I don't expect you to have any problems... The worst that can happen is the sys runs out of memory, and gives you an error message, and you have to reboot. If you tell me where to change it, I'll putz around with it too. (that's how lazy I can get.)
__________________
AOA Team fah
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 19th June, 2002, 05:24 AM
Áedán's Avatar
Chief Systems Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 11,799

Re: Best performing virtual memory settings in XP?

Quote:
Originally posted by superally
Dr.Pepper question - if I set the pagefile to 0, hence forcing it to use the 512MB DDR and nowt else, what's the worst that can happen?
The worst? The OS dies because there's no available memory for it to allocate for something important. Unlikely, as the OS likes to try and keep itself safe.

When/if you create a pagefile, if you have multiple disks, place the pagefile on the MOST used partition of the LEAST used disk. Don't have more than one pagefile per physical disk.

Also, if you preset the pagefile(s) to the same minimum and maximum size, the OS doesn't have to spent time resizing the pagefile to take into account growing/shrinking memory use. This all takes time.

Lastly, if you're going to create a pagefile(s), ensure that the disk(s) have been defragmented first. That way the pagefile ends up being contigious rather than broken up.


AidanII
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 19th June, 2002, 08:03 AM
Spode's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain
Posts: 1,439
Send a message via MSN to Spode

I usually just set mine fixed at max and min of 512, that ay it doesn't have to resize it as aidan is saying.

Surely the computer only uses the page file after it's filled up the ram?
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 19th June, 2002, 08:17 AM
Áedán's Avatar
Chief Systems Administrator
 
Join Date: September 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 11,799

Quote:
Originally posted by Spode
Surely the computer only uses the page file after it's filled up the ram?
That'd be nice, but NT/2K/XP seems to page stuff even if it doesn't need to. Wonder if it might be untouched memory pages, or old memory pages that haven't been used for a while.

That way, the FS cache can remain a sensible size even if programs have allocated all memory, and failed to use half of it.

AidanII
__________________
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 19th June, 2002, 08:23 AM
superally's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: scotland
Posts: 16

Looks like I'm going to stick with this for now - I've been trying to load the machine this morning to see what happens and haven't got it much over 270MB or so of committed memory, so I think that's a big enough margin for error. It's definitely faster (although as Spode points out XP should really use the physical stuff before the pagefile - I'm surprised they haven't sorted that out)

SteveI - if you want to give it a go, try

Control Panel / System / Advanced / Performance...Settings / Advanced / Virtual Memory...Change / Select "No Page File"
OK out then reboot.

Cheers

Ally
__________________
AMD 1700XP+
ECS K7S5A
512MB DDR2100
Radeon 7500
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are these respectable memory settings? Rondog AMD Motherboards & CPUs 7 28th February, 2005 11:40 PM
Memory settings on 8kdaj espent EPoX MotherBoards 1 26th August, 2004 03:12 PM
1T & 2T memory settings available in 8rda+ willz EPoX MotherBoards 2 8th July, 2003 07:19 AM
memory settings in bios sirtoby EPoX MotherBoards 11 23rd December, 2002 07:26 PM
Memory settings Pinky AMD Motherboards & CPUs 3 21st February, 2002 03:44 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23 AM.


Copyright ©2001 - 2007, AOA Forums

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0