[Log In ] [New Posts] []
Go Back   GotApex? Forums Forums > General Topics > Hardware
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-27-2001, 02:02 PM   #1
ribitch
Rear Admiral Upper Half
 
ribitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,672
Send a message via AIM to ribitch
win2k pagefile size

OK, here is my setup:

1.2 GHz t-bird w 266fsb
640 MB PC133
Dual 7200 RPM Maxtor 20.0 GB drives in raid 100 stripe

I just bought 512 MB to make my 640 MB. My question is how big of a swap file should i run? I used to run 1.5 times my system ram. That would make a 960 MB pagefile. What do you recommend for optimal performance?
__________________
http://ribitch.com/ipod.html
ribitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2001, 03:01 PM   #2
Dave_7
Captain
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: L.A..... Costa Mesa... Whatever, Man!
Posts: 1,824
I say keep it fixed at 512 MB. Min 512 / Max 512.




Dave.
Dave_7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2001, 08:39 PM   #3
sho.gun
the lemonizer
 
sho.gun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Calabasas, CA
Posts: 5,373
Send a message via AIM to sho.gun
Yeah, too much will just waste space on your hard drive, 512 is probably good if you already have 640.
sho.gun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2001, 08:45 AM   #4
TommyBoomfiger
 
Posts: n/a
your pagefile *should* be 1.5 x the amount of physical ram, so if you have 512mb you should set your pagefile to 768mb. the lower you set it, the bigger the chance of memory errors. many people are confused by memory errors when they know that they enough memory, but thier pagefile is just too small. i think its a good idea to put your pagefile on a drive which you dont use as much because there is a lot of file swapping between the memory and the pagefile. if ifs on another drive, then your computer will be able to write to the pagefile and do whatever it needs on the other harddrive much more efficiently. you should never set your pagefile lower than the amount of physical ram in your box.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2001, 06:03 AM   #5
Jeffbx
Fleet Admiral
 
Jeffbx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,390
Send a message via MSN to Jeffbx
Chosen has it half right -

DO set your page file on a different drive then the OS if possible. This can avoid an issue called disk contention where the OS is trying to do something at the same time the swap file is trying to read/write. This results in the disk heads hopping back and forth between two different areas on the HD. This was much more of a problem back in the day when RAM wasn't practically free.

However, keep your swap file at 1.5x RAM for a minimum and set the max to about 2-2.5x RAM. The OS will only reserve the minimum amount unless it needs more. By setting it to a fixed amount (same min and max) you risk memory errors.
Jeffbx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2001, 07:01 AM   #6
TommyBoomfiger
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Jeffbx
However, keep your swap file at 1.5x RAM for a minimum and set the max to about 2-2.5x RAM. The OS will only reserve the minimum amount unless it needs more. By setting it to a fixed amount (same min and max) you risk memory errors.

Where the hell did my MCSE training go??? Thanks for the reminder Jeff, this is exactly what the pagefile settings should be, and this is what windows should automatically set it at so you really dont need to intervene.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2001, 09:33 AM   #7
ribitch
Rear Admiral Upper Half
 
ribitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,672
Send a message via AIM to ribitch
thanks for the help. I have it set at 960 MB. I have a 10 gig drive that i think i might throw in and move the swap file there.
ribitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2001, 03:32 PM   #8
qmanchu
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
qmanchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 165
Question

Whoa, hold on a second here guys. I thought this 1.5x (min) to 2.0x (max) swapfile was only applicable back in the days of Windows 3.x. I mean, are you telling me that if I filled my motherboard to a max of 2GB of RAM, I should be setting aside 3.5GB as a minimum? Sounds a bit extreme if ya ask me.
qmanchu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2001, 10:00 PM   #9
TommyBoomfiger
 
Posts: n/a
yeah that does seem a little extreme, but thats the way its supposed to be. if you dont, you will probably have memory allocation problems. i didnt think much of this when i bought 1 gig (up from 128) i started to have some major memory issues. it seemed kind of strange to me that with 1 gig, i would get all these problems, but it turned out to be the pagefile.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2001, 06:13 AM   #10
Jeffbx
Fleet Admiral
 
Jeffbx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,390
Send a message via MSN to Jeffbx
Quote:
Originally posted by qmanchu
Whoa, hold on a second here guys. I thought this 1.5x (min) to 2.0x (max) swapfile was only applicable back in the days of Windows 3.x. I mean, are you telling me that if I filled my motherboard to a max of 2GB of RAM, I should be setting aside 3.5GB as a minimum? Sounds a bit extreme if ya ask me.

That's right - here's the scoop from MS:

http://support.microsoft.com/support.../Q197/3/79.ASP
Jeffbx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:31 PM.