virtual memory issue

[Guest]

Please help

When I am trying to save movie on the hard drive or CD, after about 50% work is done, the massage "low virtual memory" appears and program collapses
The file that has to be created is about 500 Mb, use Windows XP, W Movie Maker 2, Ram 380 Mb, two hard drives C:\1.3 Gb free, F:\60 Gb free

Will appreciate any advice
Eugen

 

[Warren Burch [MS]]

Hi Eugene,

Which drive is your swap file on? Try setting it to the larger drive.
To do this right click on "My Computer" select Properties, select Advanced,
CLick the Performance "Settings"" button, select the Advanced tab, click
"Change" button, if the drive selected for the swap file in your case is
your C: drive try changing it to your F drive and increasing the size
available to it.

Cheers
Warren Burch
Movie Maker Development Manager.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Please help:

When I am trying to save movie on the hard drive or CD, after about 50%

work is done, the massage "low virtual memory" appears and program
collapses.

The file that has to be created is about 500 Mb, use Windows XP, W Movie

Maker 2, Ram 380 Mb, two hard drives C:\1.3 Gb free, F:\60 Gb free.

 

[John Kelly]

Hi there,

The method recommended by the article discussing these issues at Microsoft
can be reduced to the following statements

1) The pagefile on C should be 1.5 times the size of your RAM
2) If more than one hard drive then a pagefile should also be created on one
other drive. This other drive should be the one least used by you or other
programs. XP will see this and concentrate its pagefile usage on that drive
rather than drive C having the overall effect of speeding such transactions
up.

As DDR RAM is so cheap I purchased 1.5GB for this machine and set the page
file as described above. Using the windows task manager program I have been
monitoring how much of these page files actually get used. I am pleased to
say that even when using MovieDV 6 (a non-linear video editor with 3D
capabilities) the pagefile is used very little. This is good because a
pagefile is using the least efficient storage medium, the hard drive. I no
longer have a page file on my C drive because of this. My D drive has the
pagefile and my E drive contains all my media files.

Hope this helps a little.

 

[CW]

I have read quite a few posts about MM2's use of memory
but am not quite clear about it. It is often said that
MM2 is a memory-gobbler, and I increased mine to 1GB
(333mhz DDR). With page file set to 1.5GB and a 2.8 Intel
processor, performance is generally pretty good, even
when editing/saving 30-60mins projects. If it does seem
to be slowing down a bit I check the Task Manager to see
how long before smoke will come out of the vents, and
always see that MM2's use of RAM is "only" around 250MB
and the Page File is barely being utilised.
So... even when going at full throttle, working its bits
off, it doesn't seem to me that RAM or virtual memory is
being stretched all that much. On the other hand, at
those times the CPU usage by MM2 is almost always 99%.
I realise the stresses and strains will vary according to
each PC's config and capabilities, and maybe I'm just in
a better some position than some users, with a decent
amount of memory like this, but it does seem to me that
CPU resource is a more critical factor than RAM or
Virtual??
I don't mean to sidetrack the original query too much,
but would appreciate thoughts...
Thanks
CW

 

[John Kelly]

Hi CW,

I completely agree with you. Once the minimum amount of memory has been
achieved, no amount of extra RAM will do anything at all. I have the 1.5GB
because of another graphics program, which will use as much as you can throw
at it. You have only to look at some the adverts on the web...3GHz machine
256MB RAM !!!! and you can bet that someone will buy it, find that its
processor is way overclocked etc etc and confused about why it is actually
slower than his old 2GHz.

My oldest son has recently purchased a full media centre machine....the
Front Side Bus speed is 800MHz and the CPU is 3.2GHZ compare that to the one
I am using here...the Front Side Bus speed is only 100MHz and the CPU is
2.0GHz therefore mine is working at a speed ratio of 20 and his at 4. Whilst
the CPU speed is always important, if the flow of data along the main bus is
slow the CPU will have to hang around waiting for the data. From this it
follows that for any given CPU speed the amount it is clocked up is also
very important. If my sons FSB was the same as mine, his machine would run
quicker, but not very much. As it is, it's incredibly fast !!...going
slightly green here