Memory..and Virtual Memory.

**SPOFF** · 05-22-2008, 07:50 PM

Today I was snooping around and ran into something called "Virtual Memory" on my system. It said 2MB minimum required and 768MB allocated with 3069MB "recommended". So what do I do?

I am a complete (fill in the term) when it comes to computer stuff so my eyes are always wide open. I Googled it.

Turns out: When my hired geeks reinstalled XP back in January, they found some bad RAM. I had had two sticks of Corasir 512, and one stick of original Dell 512. Total 1.5 GB. They hooked out the two Corsair....one was bad, and left the single 512 Dell. Then..(I speculate) they adjusted Virtual Memory to 768MB. ie..1.5 times RAM. This seems to be the default VM recommended based on RAM.

When I got the computer back, I then asked Corsair if they would replace the "Pair" with new memory. (Corsair has a "Lifetime" Warranty). They responded by sending me two new sticks of 1024....essentially doubling what I had asked for.

So I put them in...without knowing that I maybe should upgrade my "Virtual Memory". I did that today. SPOFF

**Paxx** · 05-22-2008, 07:53 PM

Check 'let windows manage my virtual memory' and be done with it. That additional memory should take care of your blurries also.

**SPOFF** · 05-22-2008, 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by Paxx

Check 'let windows manage my virtual memory' and be done with it. That additional memory should take care of your blurries also.

Thanks PAXX. I'l check on that. I learn something every day.

SPOFF

**SPOFF** · 05-22-2008, 08:12 PM

I just made that adjustment and it now says I have 2046 MB of VM. Will that figure "Float" according to current needs? That figure is LESS than "Windows?" recommended. (3069MB)

My Googling indicated you can't have TOO Much VM. SPOFF

**Paxx** · 05-22-2008, 08:14 PM

Yes it will float if you checked let windows manage it. You'll be fine.

**Paxx** · 05-22-2008, 08:16 PM

In my above post, 'That additional memory should take care of your blurries also.'

Should read.

That additional RAM memory should take care of your blurries also.

**noell** · 05-22-2008, 09:17 PM

This is definitely the FWIW department.....

I keep a 5MB (Yes. That's no typo. It says 5MB) Page File on C: (that's only because some programs protest if there is no Page File on C: ) and then put my "main" Page File in its own partition on a separate physical drive sized at 5120MB (2.5 X my RAM size) for both the initial and the max size. I do that because I like the theories I read somewhere a long time ago that said (A) best Page File performance is obtained by getting most of your Page File activity away from your busiest drive (that's usually C: ) and (B) if you make the initial and max size the same, Windows does not have to spend its time calculating how big the Page File should be. In reality, whether I did something like I just described (or one of the many other configs I wasted time trying) or simply let Windows take care of it all, it made no difference to anything as best I could tell. So, unless you want to subscribe to a theory that "seems" to make sense, just let Windows do it because it does as good a job at it as anything else I've ever tried.

....Noell

**WallysWorld** · 05-23-2008, 12:01 PM

I split my paging file between two separate physical drives. Drive C, where FS is installed, has a 2GB paging file while drive D has a 3GB paging file. I read on the internet that splitting your paging file on two separate drives (if you have two drives, that is) speeds up the reading of the data from the paging file.

**Paxx** · 05-23-2008, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by noell

In reality, whether I did something like I just described (or one of the many other configs I wasted time trying) or simply let Windows take care of it all, it made no difference to anything as best I could tell. So, unless you want to subscribe to a theory that "seems" to make sense, just let Windows do it because it does as good a job at it as anything else I've ever tried.

....Noell

Seems to me he is recommending to let windows manage it. Since SPOFF is a self-described non-tech person I recommend letting windows manage it.

**Paperflyer** · 05-23-2008, 12:46 PM

There is a slight benefit when using a dedicated page file partition in that this pagefile (read: virtual memory) will neither fragment nor make other files fragment. However, if you defragment your drives regularly anyway, this should not be a problem.

Linux for example always tries to use a dedicated partition with a special filesystem as virtual memory (called swap). Many Windows servers are set up that way, too.
Windows circumvents this extra partition by mounting a file (pagefile.sys) as virtual memory file system, which might impose a very tiny performance decrease due to the aforementioned fragmentation problem. But outside the server world this should not be measurable.