Running XP-Pro with no swap file - possible?

[Josef Gonko]

Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory. Very fast dual Xeon system.

What would be the effect and/or problems associated with eliminating the
swap file completely? It is possible?

I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into memory and eliminate all virtual
memory swaps.

Thanks, Joe

 

[Carey Frisch [MVP]]

Please review the following:

Virtual Memory in Windows XP
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.php

[Courtesy of MS-MVP Alex Nichol]

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.aspx

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

:

| Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory. Very fast dual Xeon system.
|
| What would be the effect and/or problems associated with eliminating the
| swap file completely? It is possible?
|
| I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into memory and eliminate all virtual
| memory swaps.
|
| Thanks, Joe

 

[Colin Barnhorst]

I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do not turn it off. With
2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still is used some. What you
want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce the number of staledated
hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram can actually slow things
down. As always use moderation.

 

[Jim Macklin]

Some programs may insist on having some virtual memory
(pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to run
completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4 GB of
space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that it will
be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have 2 GB
RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so you can
easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.

And read the article http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


message |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do not
turn it off. With
| 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still is used
some. What you
| want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce the number
of staledated
| hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram can
actually slow things
| down. As always use moderation.
|
| --
| Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
message
| | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory. Very
fast dual Xeon
| > system.
| >
| > What would be the effect and/or problems associated with
eliminating the
| > swap file completely? It is possible?
| >
| > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into memory and
eliminate all
| > virtual
| > memory swaps.
| >
| > Thanks, Joe
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Josef Gonko]

Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very interesting read!

I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always seems to swap out
images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it has to "re-load" a 133+
MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of memory. And, yes,
I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance within the program
too...

Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows the administrator to
specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific processor, specific
priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a permanent setting). There
are programs I use that would likely benefit from this...

 

[Jim Macklin]

You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech support.

Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds like
a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or Windows
3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner drivers,
USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often bloated)
software that is running, you may not have that much "free
RAM" left over.

You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop that
runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
applications with a higher priority.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


| Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
interesting read!
|
| I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
seems to swap out
| images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it has to
"re-load" a 133+
| MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
memory. And, yes,
| I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
within the program
| too...
|
| Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows the
administrator to
| specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
processor, specific
| priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a permanent
setting). There
| are programs I use that would likely benefit from this...
|
|
in message
| | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual memory
| > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to run
| > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4 GB of
| > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that it
will
| > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have 2 GB
| > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so you
can
| > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| >
| > And read the article http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
in
| > message | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do not
| > turn it off. With
| > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still is
used
| > some. What you
| > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce the
number
| > of staledated
| > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram can
| > actually slow things
| > | down. As always use moderation.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
| > message
| > | | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
Very
| > fast dual Xeon
| > | > system.
| > | >
| > | > What would be the effect and/or problems associated
with
| > eliminating the
| > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | >
| > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into memory
and
| > eliminate all
| > | > virtual
| > | > memory swaps.
| > | >
| > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Josef Gonko]

I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went with a
Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem though). Hopefully I
won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon, heh.

I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested. Never done that
before.

Thanks!
Joe

You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech support.

Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds like
a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or Windows
3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner drivers,
USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often bloated)
software that is running, you may not have that much "free
RAM" left over.

You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop that
runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
applications with a higher priority.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


| Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
interesting read!
|
| I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
seems to swap out
| images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it has to
"re-load" a 133+
| MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
memory. And, yes,
| I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
within the program
| too...
|
| Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows the
administrator to
| specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
processor, specific
| priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a permanent
setting). There
| are programs I use that would likely benefit from this...
|
|
in message
| | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual memory
| > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to run
| > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4 GB of
| > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that it
will
| > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have 2 GB
| > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so you
can
| > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| >
| > And read the article http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
in
| > message | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do not
| > turn it off. With
| > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still is
used
| > some. What you
| > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce the
number
| > of staledated
| > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram can
| > actually slow things
| > | down. As always use moderation.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
| > message
| > | | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
Very
| > fast dual Xeon
| > | > system.
| > | >
| > | > What would be the effect and/or problems associated
with
| > eliminating the
| > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | >
| > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into memory
and
| > eliminate all
| > | > virtual
| > | > memory swaps.
| > | >
| > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Jim Macklin]

XP Pro on a dual CPU board can support 4 GB per CPU or a
maximum of 8 GB. What OS do you intend to use and what CPU
when you expand that thing to 16 GB?

BTW, Intel reports on their website that their mobo with 4
GB installed will only have about 3.5 GB available because
some of the RAM is mapped to other uses.


|I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went
with a
| Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of
ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
| Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem
though). Hopefully I
| won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon,
heh.
|
| I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested.
Never done that
| before.
|
| Thanks!
| Joe
|
in message
| | > You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
| > extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech
support.
| >
| > Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
| > background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds
like
| > a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or
Windows
| > 3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner
drivers,
| > USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often
bloated)
| > software that is running, you may not have that much
"free
| > RAM" left over.
| >
| > You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop
that
| > runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
| > applications with a higher priority.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
message
| > | > | Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
| > interesting read!
| > |
| > | I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
| > seems to swap out
| > | images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it
has to
| > "re-load" a 133+
| > | MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
| > memory. And, yes,
| > | I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
| > within the program
| > | too...
| > |
| > | Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows
the
| > administrator to
| > | specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
| > processor, specific
| > | priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a
permanent
| > setting). There
| > | are programs I use that would likely benefit from
this...
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | | > | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual
memory
| > | > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to
run
| > | > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4
GB of
| > | > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that
it
| > will
| > | > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have
2 GB
| > | > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so
you
| > can
| > | > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| > | >
| > | > And read the article
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com>
wrote
| > in
| > | > message
| > | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do
not
| > | > turn it off. With
| > | > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still
is
| > used
| > | > some. What you
| > | > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce
the
| > number
| > | > of staledated
| > | > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram
can
| > | > actually slow things
| > | > | down. As always use moderation.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
in
| > | > message
| > | > | | > | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
| > Very
| > | > fast dual Xeon
| > | > | > system.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > What would be the effect and/or problems
associated
| > with
| > | > eliminating the
| > | > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into
memory
| > and
| > | > eliminate all
| > | > | > virtual
| > | > | > memory swaps.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Uncle John]

I have 4GB RAM and dual ddr but Windows only shows 3.5 RAM Is that not the
limit unless one uses PAE?

XP Pro on a dual CPU board can support 4 GB per CPU or a
maximum of 8 GB. What OS do you intend to use and what CPU
when you expand that thing to 16 GB?

BTW, Intel reports on their website that their mobo with 4
GB installed will only have about 3.5 GB available because
some of the RAM is mapped to other uses.


|I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went
with a
| Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of
ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
| Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem
though). Hopefully I
| won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon,
heh.
|
| I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested.
Never done that
| before.
|
| Thanks!
| Joe
|
in message
| | > You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
| > extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech
support.
| >
| > Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
| > background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds
like
| > a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or
Windows
| > 3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner
drivers,
| > USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often
bloated)
| > software that is running, you may not have that much
"free
| > RAM" left over.
| >
| > You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop
that
| > runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
| > applications with a higher priority.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
message
| > | > | Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
| > interesting read!
| > |
| > | I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
| > seems to swap out
| > | images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it
has to
| > "re-load" a 133+
| > | MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
| > memory. And, yes,
| > | I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
| > within the program
| > | too...
| > |
| > | Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows
the
| > administrator to
| > | specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
| > processor, specific
| > | priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a
permanent
| > setting). There
| > | are programs I use that would likely benefit from
this...
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | | > | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual
memory
| > | > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to
run
| > | > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4
GB of
| > | > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that
it
| > will
| > | > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have
2 GB
| > | > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so
you
| > can
| > | > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| > | >
| > | > And read the article
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com>
wrote
| > in
| > | > message
| > | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do
not
| > | > turn it off. With
| > | > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still
is
| > used
| > | > some. What you
| > | > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce
the
| > number
| > | > of staledated
| > | > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram
can
| > | > actually slow things
| > | > | down. As always use moderation.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
in
| > | > message
| > | > | | > | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
| > Very
| > | > fast dual Xeon
| > | > | > system.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > What would be the effect and/or problems
associated
| > with
| > | > eliminating the
| > | > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into
memory
| > and
| > | > eliminate all
| > | > | > virtual
| > | > | > memory swaps.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Jetro]

/PAE switch permits addressing > 4 GB (2^32 = 4,294,967,296 = 4 GB). The
PAE version of the kernel presents 64-bit physical addresses to device
drivers.

 

[Al Dykes]

I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went with a
Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem though). Hopefully I
won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon, heh.

I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested. Never done that
before.

Thanks!
Joe

Unless you are running one of the server versions of Windows (big
bucks) you won't be able to see more than 3GB. Even then, each
process (roughly an application) will only see 3GB, you'll just be
able to run more of them. The exceptoion to this is applications that
are written to be "PAE"-capable. These are typically server systems,
like Oracle and MSSQL database. I see no indication that Abobe PS is
PAE-capable (PAE: Program Address space extension, this is another TLA
for this that I can't recall now.)


It's possible that there is a RAMDISK package that uses memory above
the 4GB line that runs in w2k or XP, but maybe not. IMO ramdisks are
for dedicated applications, not general purpose machines. Your use of
PS may fit into this catagory.

I'd spend my money on 10kRPM disks in RAID0 pairs. SATA or SCSI.

I use photoshop, but not on huge images, or full time.

XP64 is nearly out (RC1 I think) and it's possible that an AMD64 mobo
running XP64 will use all the memory you can throw at it. PS will
still run in 32bits (and scream) buy the OS will be able to use
all your GB of ram as I/O buffers and cache.

Before I spend money on a PAE mobo-based system (which any mobo that
can run more than 4GB ram is) I'd buy an AMD64 system and run XP64.

Buy memory a GB at a time and learn to use perfmon.exe to see where
your system is bottlenecked, each time you make a change.

 

[Al Dykes]

I have 4GB RAM and dual ddr but Windows only shows 3.5 RAM Is that not the
limit unless one uses PAE?

Correct. ANd PAE is hardware, it has to be on your mobo.
ANy mobo that has slots for more than 4GB will have it. The OS
and applcation also have to be PAE-aware. w2k and XP are NOT.
I assume PS is not.

XP Pro on a dual CPU board can support 4 GB per CPU or a
maximum of 8 GB. What OS do you intend to use and what CPU
when you expand that thing to 16 GB?

BTW, Intel reports on their website that their mobo with 4
GB installed will only have about 3.5 GB available because
some of the RAM is mapped to other uses.


|I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went
with a
| Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of
ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
| Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem
though). Hopefully I
| won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon,
heh.
|
| I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested.
Never done that
| before.
|
| Thanks!
| Joe
|
in message
| | > You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
| > extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech
support.
| >
| > Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
| > background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds
like
| > a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or
Windows
| > 3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner
drivers,
| > USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often
bloated)
| > software that is running, you may not have that much
"free
| > RAM" left over.
| >
| > You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop
that
| > runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
| > applications with a higher priority.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
message
| > | > | Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
| > interesting read!
| > |
| > | I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
| > seems to swap out
| > | images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it
has to
| > "re-load" a 133+
| > | MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
| > memory. And, yes,
| > | I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
| > within the program
| > | too...
| > |
| > | Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows
the
| > administrator to
| > | specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
| > processor, specific
| > | priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a
permanent
| > setting). There
| > | are programs I use that would likely benefit from
this...
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | | > | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual
memory
| > | > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to
run
| > | > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4
GB of
| > | > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that
it
| > will
| > | > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have
2 GB
| > | > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so
you
| > can
| > | > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| > | >
| > | > And read the article
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com>
wrote
| > in
| > | > message
| > | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do
not
| > | > turn it off. With
| > | > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still
is
| > used
| > | > some. What you
| > | > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce
the
| > number
| > | > of staledated
| > | > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram
can
| > | > actually slow things
| > | > | down. As always use moderation.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
in
| > | > message
| > | > | | > | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
| > Very
| > | > fast dual Xeon
| > | > | > system.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > What would be the effect and/or problems
associated
| > with
| > | > eliminating the
| > | > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into
memory
| > and
| > | > eliminate all
| > | > | > virtual
| > | > | > memory swaps.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Uncle John]

Al

Thanks for providing a lot of interesting info about PAE. In my case I have
found with 4GB and 10 speed SATA disks the system is fast enough for
anything I want to do in Photoshop CS
--
Uncle John

I have 4GB RAM and dual ddr but Windows only shows 3.5 RAM Is that not the
limit unless one uses PAE?

Correct. ANd PAE is hardware, it has to be on your mobo.
ANy mobo that has slots for more than 4GB will have it. The OS
and applcation also have to be PAE-aware. w2k and XP are NOT.
I assume PS is not.

XP Pro on a dual CPU board can support 4 GB per CPU or a
maximum of 8 GB. What OS do you intend to use and what CPU
when you expand that thing to 16 GB?

BTW, Intel reports on their website that their mobo with 4
GB installed will only have about 3.5 GB available because
some of the RAM is mapped to other uses.


|I hear ya on the 2gb current ram size but that's why I went
with a
| Supermicro E7525 based board. It maxes at 16gb of
ddr2-3200 ecc memory.
| Their current ddr-2700 boards can use 32gb (slower mem
though). Hopefully I
| won't have a problem with the 16gb limit anytime soon,
heh.
|
| I'll look into the "software profiling" you suggested.
Never done that
| before.
|
| Thanks!
| Joe
|
in message
| | > You may be able to set Photoshop CS to see and use that
| > extra RAM. Check Adobe's help or email their tech
support.
| >
| > Remember, that Windows and the application, plus your
| > background applications are using RAM too. 2 GB sounds
like
| > a lot and it would have been in the days of DOS or
Windows
| > 3.x, but with XP, Photoshop, printer and scanner
drivers,
| > USB and Firewire drivers, and all the other (often
bloated)
| > software that is running, you may not have that much
"free
| > RAM" left over.
| >
| > You might setup a profile for use while using Photoshop
that
| > runs minimum services and you can set RAM to run
| > applications with a higher priority.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
message
| > | > | Thanks for pointing me to that article/link. Very
| > interesting read!
| > |
| > | I do a lot of work with Photoshop CS and Pshop always
| > seems to swap out
| > | images to the disk!! It is really annoying when it
has to
| > "re-load" a 133+
| > | MB file from the dern disk when the system has gobs of
| > memory. And, yes,
| > | I've tried cranking-up the Pshop mem usage allowance
| > within the program
| > | too...
| > |
| > | Perhaps it would be good to find a utility that allows
the
| > administrator to
| > | specify a program's (and all it's dll's) to a specific
| > processor, specific
| > | priority, and not to flush anything to disk (a
permanent
| > setting). There
| > | are programs I use that would likely benefit from
this...
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | | > | > Some programs may insist on having some virtual
memory
| > | > (pagefile) available even if they have enough RAM to
run
| > | > completely. Just because there may be 500 MB to 4
GB of
| > | > space reserved on the hard drive does not mean that
it
| > will
| > | > be used, RAM is always used first. But if you have
2 GB
| > | > RAM, I'd bet you have at least 200 GB hard drive so
you
| > can
| > | > easily afford to set aside 1 GB to VM.
| > | >
| > | > And read the article
http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(nojunk)@msn.com>
wrote
| > in
| > | > message
| > | > |I recommend that you keep the pagefile small but do
not
| > | > turn it off. With
| > | > | 2GB of ram the pagefile is used less, but it still
is
| > used
| > | > some. What you
| > | > | want to do is keep the pagefile small to reduce
the
| > number
| > | > of staledated
| > | > | hits. A large pagefile combined with a lot of ram
can
| > | > actually slow things
| > | > | down. As always use moderation.
| > | > |
| > | > | --
| > | > | Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
in
| > | > message
| > | > | | > | > | > Hello. My new system has 2gb of system memory.
| > Very
| > | > fast dual Xeon
| > | > | > system.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > What would be the effect and/or problems
associated
| > with
| > | > eliminating the
| > | > | > swap file completely? It is possible?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I'd much rather have EVERYTHING loaded into
memory
| > and
| > | > eliminate all
| > | > | > virtual
| > | > | > memory swaps.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Thanks, Joe
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

 

[Josef Gonko]

Hello to all that asked about how I intend to get around the 32-bit 4GB
limit. The PAE term used in many posts has not been a part of my
research...

The Supermicro board I purchased, the X6DAE-G2, is capable of addressing
16GB of DDR2-3200 ecc registered memory. Yes, the memory is expensive but I
only buy new PC's every 5 to 8 years. 2GB chips of the registered/ecc type,
which would go into each of the eight slots, are not yet available but they
will be soon (1GB's are for sure). And, hopefully the 2GB'ers will not make
me trade-in my vehicle in order to purchase them!

The two installed processors are Intel Xeon 3.2ghz/800mhz fsb EM64T's.
Therefore, they are Windows XP Pro 64-bit ready. I have yet to try the XP
64-bit release candidate... Nonetheless, watching Task Manager show the two
physical processors and two logical processors (due to hyperthreading) is a
treat. VirusScan appears to run only on the "fourth" processor which is
interesting to me as that one should be the "2nd logical processor"!! Then,
while doing GUI operations or firing-up another program kicks-in the other
"processors" shown in task manager. Setting processor affinities and
process priorities is the next thing for me to look into.

Furthermore, using a non DDR2 memory type (i.e. DDR-2700 I believe it is
called), Supermicro has a board that will support 32gb of memory (but I
opted for the higher bandwidth of DDR2-3200 as I do a lot of digital signal
processing on very large files such as 100MB or greater through FFT
filters). Getting the data to the processors is of crucial importance.
And, as previously mentioned, I do use Photoshop a lot also (amateur
medium-format photography is a hobby).

Anyway, if the board does not deliver to my expectations, Supermicro is
gonna get it, heh. My intention was to create a system that would be ready
for the 64-bit age. It has dual PCI-express slots (an x16 for the nVidia
9800 GT board) and an x4 one for SLI, three PCI-X high speed slots for 100
to 133mhz/64-bit RAID cards (and other cards), and one legacy PCI slot for
my good-ol Ego-Sys Waveterminal 192X audio card (I highly recommend it!!!
It records and plays back perfect sound with its professional ADC/DAC
converters!! Has TOSLINK optical out too. Check it out.).

BTW, I would have went the "Opteron way" but the processors are kind of out
of my price range... Tyan, I noticed just today, now has their Thunder K8WE
(S2895) board which supports two processors and does have the hypertransport
memory technology (which Intel chipsets lack) but still uses plain DDR
memory with a max of 16GB. But, it does have TWO x16 PCI-express slots
(that's a very high amount of potential SLI video bandwidth!!!). Just a few
weeks ago, I could not find an SMP Opteron board with PCI-express!! But,
now it is there to drool over. If Tyan produces a four Opteron processor
board with two x16 PCI-express slots, I may start crying though. Any boards
with more than dual processing seem to be for "servers only" which means
crummy integrated video and zero PCI-express slots.

If someone knows something I've catastrophically missed, please do let me
know!! Yes, 64-bit software that takes advantage of SMP and multi-threading
will have to be produced to take full advantage of the hardware. But, as I
mentioned that I do DSP work with audio, I've written my DSP software for
multi-threading (I'm a C++ and assembly programmer from previous years) so
at least MY software will take advantage of the hardware!
Thanks, Joe