Too much memory is no good??

[CLEANER]

When I use only 512Mb of memory (DRDRAM800) I get better score in 3DMARK2001 than when I use 1024Mb (About 7800 with 512Mb, 6800 with 1024Mb). Are there any problems using 1024Mb of RAM under WinXP Pro?? I wanted to install more RAM because I do a lot of photo & video editing....

My PC config is :-

Asus P4T
P4 1.7G (at 2G)
Radeon8500LE (at 275/275)
512Mb or 1024Mb of DRDRAM800

Any advise would be appreciated!!

[Placid]

With that large amount of memory if you have xp's virtual memory set to auto you probably have a swap file close to 2gb.
Try setting a fixed one to around 400mb and see if it makes a difference.

[bobt17]

with that much memory i think u could accualy disable the swap file......

[Sworkhard]

Actually it depends on whether one is going to use files that are over 850Mb or not. If not virtual memory can be disabled but otherwise it should stay enabled

[Cluster]

Try setting the swapfile off, if when digital editing, things get really slow, give the swapfile about 100-200mb. Hope this helps get those scores up.

Cheers:beer:

[Yodums]

Anything 512 and over you shouldn't even be using a swap file.

If you do it should be very minimal like 128megs.

Yodums

[LJ5L]

Again, turning the swap file in Windows is the silliest thing ever. Only a newbie would do that

Here's what a swap file is for: programs allocate memory for themselves regardless of if they are using it or not.

Say an application reserves 100mb for it's operations. Now if you had a swap file, the program would for example load 10mb of data into RAM and increase the swap file by 100mb. This is a logical increase, it's not going to write 100mb to the hard drive, it just allocates it just for that program.

Now if you had no swap file, the allocation will all go into RAM, and nothing else will be able to use that range, even if it's empty.

Think about it for a sec; memory will never ever be filled up 100% in this scenario, increased efficiency? Hardly.

Basic inter workings of a swap file.

[bobt17]

Originally posted by LJ5L
Again, turning the swap file in Windows is the silliest thing ever. Only a newbie would do that

Here's what a swap file is for: programs allocate memory for themselves regardless of if they are using it or not.

Say an application reserves 100mb for it's operations. Now if you had a swap file, the program would for example load 10mb of data into RAM and increase the swap file by 100mb. This is a logical increase, it's not going to write 100mb to the hard drive, it just allocates it just for that program.

Now if you had no swap file, the allocation will all go into RAM, and nothing else will be able to use that range, even if it's empty.

Think about it for a sec; memory will never ever be filled up 100% in this scenario, increased efficiency? Hardly.

Basic inter workings of a swap file.


yes but have u considered that the ram is alot faster then the hard drive? if u have alot of ram then disableing the swap file is a good thing to speed things up

[Placid]

Originally posted by LJ5L
Again, turning the swap file in Windows is the silliest thing ever. Only a newbie would do that

Here's what a swap file is for: programs allocate memory for themselves regardless of if they are using it or not.

Say an application reserves 100mb for it's operations. Now if you had a swap file, the program would for example load 10mb of data into RAM and increase the swap file by 100mb. This is a logical increase, it's not going to write 100mb to the hard drive, it just allocates it just for that program.

Now if you had no swap file, the allocation will all go into RAM, and nothing else will be able to use that range, even if it's empty.

Think about it for a sec; memory will never ever be filled up 100% in this scenario, increased efficiency? Hardly.

Basic inter workings of a swap file.

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is."

[LJ5L]

bobt17, you obviously still don't get it, but ok.

Placid, are you insinuating that this theory does not hold true in practice? ;)

[Sonny]

Originally posted by LJ5L
Again, turning the swap file in Windows is the silliest thing ever. Only a newbie would do that.I totally agree with this. There is a reason for the Swap File to be there & this was explained properly by LJ5L.

Do any of you guys have as much ram as CLEANER? If so did you disable your swapfile? Repeating something that you have read doesnt mean that you are giving the right information. Why not do something less "daring" & just set the swap file to 128Mb then have your OS set to conservative swap file usage?

[M00CH]

i alway set my swap file to 2 - 2.5 times the amount of ram i have but i nere set it higher than 512 anyhting biger and programs will just start dumping info into the swap thus making access times slower.... i think

[LJ5L]

The key point here is also that both in theory and practice a swap file will not be used if there is enough physical memory; and should not affect overall computer performance directly either way.

If there is enough physical ram, the swap file will be just a logical place holder. If the swap file is 1000mb that does not mean there is 1000mb of paged data in it, its simply the combined size of all the place holders, and the file is empty.

[CLEANER]

It turned out to be the Radeon8500's known issue with the memory amout:-

http://support.ati.com/infobase/3985.html

I set AGP aperture to 128MB and that solved the problem.
Now, I get the same benchmark score with 1024Mb of memory.
It's not faster than with 512Mb but it's all good, I guess.
It's really interesting reading everyone's opinoion about the virtual memory size.
On my machine, setting it to 2Mb and 256Mb or 512Mb fixed size didn't make any difference at least on all the programs I run.
I guess WinXP has far better memory management than win98/ME.

Thanks a lot for all the replies here, I really appreciate them all.

[MadMan007]

That link about setting AGP aperature to 128MB should be a sticky...

[Grande Juan]

And here I thought I wanted to use my memory more and my HD less!

[Henry Rollins II]

Originally posted by CLEANER
When I use only 512Mb of memory (DRDRAM800) I get better score in 3DMARK2001 than when I use 1024Mb (About 7800 with 512Mb, 6800 with 1024Mb). Are there any problems using 1024Mb of RAM under WinXP Pro?? I wanted to install more RAM because I do a lot of photo & video editing....


The more modules, the crappier the perfomance. It is better to use one 512 Mb rather than two 256 Mb. Propably not very much though.

regards,
Henry.