Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

How Much Virtual Memory?


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

Poll: Virtual Memory you have allocate? (64 member(s) have cast votes)

Number which is the closest to your allocated Virtual Memory

  1. 0 (1 votes [1.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.00%

  2. 250 (1 votes [1.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.00%

  3. 500 (6 votes [6.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.00%

  4. 750 (12 votes [12.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.00%

  5. 1000 (18 votes [18.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.00%

  6. 1250 (14 votes [14.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.00%

  7. 1500 (20 votes [20.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  8. 2000 (28 votes [28.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 28.00%

Vote Please sign in to vote.

#21 Ben.MW

Ben.MW

    New WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 16 January 2007 - 11:10 PM

:( I'm bogged down at 250mb... because I'm saving for 2x512mb Kingston Matching RAM as well as Intel Core 2 Duo Blah blah blah...

#22 lareeth

lareeth

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 1,169 posts

Posted 16 January 2007 - 11:36 PM

:( I'm bogged down at 250mb... because I'm saving for 2x512mb Kingston Matching RAM as well as Intel Core 2 Duo Blah blah blah...


he he he, im about to buy 4x1GB of RAM :D

#23 Ben.MW

Ben.MW

    New WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 36 posts

Posted 17 January 2007 - 12:00 AM

:blink: Really???

:cry: Don't mock me...

Edited by Ben.MW, 17 January 2007 - 12:00 AM.


#24 Morphyus

Morphyus

    New WinMatrixian

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 20 January 2007 - 02:32 AM

If you have 1GB of RAM or better you don't really need a paging file, but I let Windows allocate it anyway.

I've read that shutting off your paging file speeds up your PC because RAM is much faster than your hard drive, but when I tried it, I didn't see any noticeable difference.


I very seldom agree with Microsoft but on this one I would have to say that they are right and the tweakers lose on this one. I will tell you why! It is like the Canon/Nikon argument...for every guy I find that says Canon, I can find one that says Nikon.

Nikon has designed the system so that it is interchanging between "real memory" and "virtual". It is based on the premise that there is some type of A.I. going on here that keeps the system from bogging itself down. The actual ram that you have is given to the priority stuff and the stuff that is aggresseive but the system knows just when to switch off and use viryaul stuff. It is some sort of hybrid deal I'd say. I have seen my system become very sluggish when disabling the pagefile and I am using 2048 mb of DDR2 memory at 533 mhz. I have alway let the facts be my guide and trust I have tweak and experimented and reformatted quite a bit to say this really has not helped me.

#25 Merforga

Merforga

    Iron Man = Fe Male?

  • Member
  • 1,090 posts

Posted 20 January 2007 - 03:38 AM

I have 512MB, and I will be getting a new gaming PC in the next month or so. Since I'm an intense gamer, what should my Virtual Memory be?

#26 LiLLTOtech

LiLLTOtech

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 973 posts

Posted 20 January 2007 - 02:55 PM

@Merforga
Page files should be 1.5 times of RAM (Read the first page)
512 MB RAM = 768 MB Virtual Memory
768 MB RAM = 1152 MB Virtual Memory

#27 timbertide

timbertide

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 1,317 posts

Posted 02 February 2007 - 08:33 PM

1500 MB

#28 chinese boy

chinese boy

    New WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 20 posts

Posted 03 February 2007 - 08:04 AM

mine:256MB in all.
MAX:640MB
MIX:also 640MB

#29 MonkeyMan09

MonkeyMan09

    New WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 14 posts

Posted 24 March 2007 - 08:09 PM

I have 1.0 gb physical and 2.0 gb virtual

#30 _deXter_

_deXter_

    The Lord of the Scripts

  • Member
  • 306 posts

Posted 26 March 2007 - 05:17 AM

This thread is riddled with factual errors. Its a common myth that pagefiles need to be set 1.5 times the size of your physical memory. This doesn't apply to modern OSes anymore! (XP/Vista etc)

There is no fixed formula as such to calculate pagefile size- it entirely depends on the type of applications you run, the OS and CPU architecture, your usage patterns, etc; which is why its recommended that you set your OS to manage the pagefile by itself.

Another myth is that the minimum and maximum size must be set the same to gain performance improvements- the idea here is that this will avoid fragmentation problems. Since it isn't recommend to fix the pagefile size yourself, you can avoid fragmentation by creating a dedicated partition for the pagefile. On that note, its worthwhile noting that pagefile fragmentation is not a problem, since a pagefile's contents are accessed randomly and not sequentially. So unless your pagefile is fragmented in 100s of little pieces (which is very unlikely), its not worth the effort to defragment your pagefile. Oh and if you're giving your pf a dedicated partition, set its cluster size to 4 KB.

Btw, on Vista, the pagefile size varies between a min of physical RAM + 300MB to a max of physical RAM*3. So for a 1gig system, you'd find the pagefile varying between 1.3 <-> 3 gigs. (the pagefile would never exceed 4 GB for a 32 bit system, and 16TB for 64 bit).

Also, DO NOT disable your pagefile regardless of the amount of RAM you're having! You won't get any performance benefit (since windows won't unnecessarily swap out memory), and you'll more than likely face errors from certain applications that require memory. This is especially critical in Vista, where the pagefile is used to store a lot of data such as search indices and is used extensively for SuperFetch. Vista needs to have a dynamic pagefile for optimal performance since it dynamically assigns the the Kernel address space, amongst other things.

Once again, its best you let windows manage the pagefile size. (XP/Vista)

Edited by _deXter_, 26 March 2007 - 05:31 AM.


#31 FalseAgent

FalseAgent

    your average joe (tm)

  • Elites
  • 6,694 posts

Posted 26 March 2007 - 07:38 AM

thanks guys, I turned back memory paging on, it helps performance quite alot.

#32 ksbrace

ksbrace

    New WinMatrixian

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 24 April 2007 - 11:39 AM

I know this topic has been idle for a month, but I just found it.
WXP 1GB RAM
Perhaps it is something about the corporate setup we have, but my colleagues and I have noticed that our pagefiles occasionally suddenly get badly fragmented (with severe performance loss) even when we set the max and min pagefile sizes to the same value. When the machine is dragging (long boot -- our corporate setup has lots of startup activity) and a defrag doesn't help, we look at our pagefiles. A couple of days ago mine had 1254 fragments, and it was adding a couple of minutes (!!) to my boot time! I kept thinking it had hung but the disk was still going. Applications were often hanging for 10 seconds at a time. Anybody looking over my shoulder would ask "What's wrong with your machine?" A couple of reboots and full defrags didn't help. When this happens I set the pagefile size to 0, defrag, then set it back up to 1022 again (the minimum size that it doesn't complain about) to get it clean. Sometimes it grabs the same fragmented space again anyway, so I have to do it in two steps: Down to 100, defrag, down to 0, defrag, up to 1022. The improvement is dramatic when I get it down to 1 or 2 fragments!
By the way, how do I delete pagefile.sys when my virtual memory is off so it won't reuse it when I go back to normal virtual memory? The file \pagefile.sys doesn't show up in a search for filenames containing "pagefile", and I don't see it at c:\pagefile.sys. Only the defrag reports that it is still there. Sometimes it grabs the same fragmented space when I go back to normal virtual memory because pagefile.sys is still there, and is often too big to defrag effectively while it is a normal file.

#33 _deXter_

_deXter_

    The Lord of the Scripts

  • Member
  • 306 posts

Posted 24 April 2007 - 01:13 PM

I know this topic has been idle for a month, but I just found it.
WXP 1GB RAM
Perhaps it is something about the corporate setup we have, but my colleagues and I have noticed that our pagefiles occasionally suddenly get badly fragmented (with severe performance loss) even when we set the max and min pagefile sizes to the same value. When the machine is dragging (long boot -- our corporate setup has lots of startup activity) and a defrag doesn't help, we look at our pagefiles. A couple of days ago mine had 1254 fragments, and it was adding a couple of minutes (!!) to my boot time! I kept thinking it had hung but the disk was still going. Applications were often hanging for 10 seconds at a time. Anybody looking over my shoulder would ask "What's wrong with your machine?" A couple of reboots and full defrags didn't help. When this happens I set the pagefile size to 0, defrag, then set it back up to 1022 again (the minimum size that it doesn't complain about) to get it clean. Sometimes it grabs the same fragmented space again anyway, so I have to do it in two steps: Down to 100, defrag, down to 0, defrag, up to 1022. The improvement is dramatic when I get it down to 1 or 2 fragments!
By the way, how do I delete pagefile.sys when my virtual memory is off so it won't reuse it when I go back to normal virtual memory? The file \pagefile.sys doesn't show up in a search for filenames containing "pagefile", and I don't see it at c:\pagefile.sys. Only the defrag reports that it is still there. Sometimes it grabs the same fragmented space when I go back to normal virtual memory because pagefile.sys is still there, and is often too big to defrag effectively while it is a normal file.


How much free space are you having? If your files are scattered around and you have low free space, then expect your PF to get fragmented. I highly recommend setting your pagefile to "System Managed". Please do not turn it off, it'll cause compatibility problems with many programs.

If fragmentation is getting to be a problem, make a 2-3 GB partition next to C: and set your pagefile there. Keep it dedicated for the pagefile and nothing else. This should take care of the fragmentation. Once again, let windows manage your PF and do not turn it off!

#34 ksbrace

ksbrace

    New WinMatrixian

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 24 April 2007 - 03:49 PM

Don't worry, I was only turning it off for a couple reboot/defrag cycles to prompt Windows to reallocated it cleanly when I turned it back on (since defrag won't fix it while it is allocated). I have 40% free space on my disk now.

What is the advantage of letting windows manage the PF size? That is the default setup for us, and that's when we noticed the quickest PF fragmentation. Individuals like me began moving to fixed size PF to deal with this, but I'm the first to experience fragmentation with fixed size. It seems to happen suddenly, but I'm not sure what event triggers it.

I agree that putting the PF on its own partition would be a good idea. 2-3 GB sounds like a good size to me too. How do I tell windows where to put the pagefile? Thanks!

How much free space are you having? If your files are scattered around and you have low free space, then expect your PF to get fragmented. I highly recommend setting your pagefile to "System Managed". Please do not turn it off, it'll cause compatibility problems with many programs.

If fragmentation is getting to be a problem, make a 2-3 GB partition next to C: and set your pagefile there. Keep it dedicated for the pagefile and nothing else. This should take care of the fragmentation. Once again, let windows manage your PF and do not turn it off!



#35 _deXter_

_deXter_

    The Lord of the Scripts

  • Member
  • 306 posts

Posted 24 April 2007 - 06:57 PM

• Goto System Properties (Win+Break -or- sysdm.cpl) -> Advanced -> Performance (Settings) -> Advanced -> Virtual Memory (Change).

• Now select your drive that currently has the pagefile (eg: C:) and Set it to "No paging file". Select another drive, (eg: D:) and choose "System managed size".

• Reboot.

(Btw, make sure that the drive you set your PageFile to is formatted as NTFS! Also, there is a PF defragmentation utility by Microsoft you can use in case your PF is fragmented.)

Edited by _deXter_, 24 April 2007 - 07:02 PM.


Want to comment?

Register or Sign In to go completely ad-free!