swap file

[Steve James]

Hi

I am no PC whizz, so perhaps somebody could please give me a simple
explaination to this:-

Current PC (briefly)

2100 CPU
512Mb Ram
Win 98S/e and swap file on drive c
have games on drive d
Have two monitors one on an agp and one on a pci card

Idea is that hard drive head travel is reduced because drive c has the swap
file and drive d runs the games. I have a fixed swap file of 300 min/max and
have de-fraged after.

When I run a particular game that is quite intensive my norton performance
display shows 98% of swap file used.

Question- does that mean all 512Mb of Ram is used and almost all of the
300Mb of swap - just seems a lot to me ??

Many thanks in advance for any info

Cheers

Steve

 

[James]

Hi

I am no PC whizz, so perhaps somebody could please give me a simple
explaination to this:-

Current PC (briefly)

2100 CPU
512Mb Ram
Win 98S/e and swap file on drive c
have games on drive d
Have two monitors one on an agp and one on a pci card

Idea is that hard drive head travel is reduced because drive c has the swap
file and drive d runs the games. I have a fixed swap file of 300 min/max and
have de-fraged after.

When I run a particular game that is quite intensive my norton performance
display shows 98% of swap file used.

Question- does that mean all 512Mb of Ram is used and almost all of the
300Mb of swap - just seems a lot to me ??

Many thanks in advance for any info

Cheers

Steve

firstly does 98 recognise all that RAM? - I would be amazed if the whole RAM
is being used... Win 98 does not have a good reputation for memory
management and ME is even worse. Try putting the swapfile on the D drive and
see if that helps any. You could also try turning the swapfile off - then
delete the win386.swp file and do a defrag, after which turn the swapfile
back on.

 

[Steve James]

James

Put on the RAM meter in Norton as well and it seems all the RAM is not being
used, so it is going to the swap file before using all the 'actual' RAM.
From what you are saying that is a Win 98 issue...??, does XP manage this
better ?

Cheers
Steve

 

[James]

James

Put on the RAM meter in Norton as well and it seems all the RAM is not being
used, so it is going to the swap file before using all the 'actual' RAM.
From what you are saying that is a Win 98 issue...??, does XP manage this
better ?

Cheers
Steve

yes XP does work with memory much better - Win 9x had some problems... If
you have XP - go for it, you'll never look back....

James

 

[kony]

James

Put on the RAM meter in Norton as well and it seems all the RAM is not being
used, so it is going to the swap file before using all the 'actual' RAM.
From what you are saying that is a Win 98 issue...??, does XP manage this
better ?

Cheers
Steve

James is pretty much "full of it".

Win98 manages memory well enough, the minor difference is not at issue
here.

The allocated virtual memory isn't necessarily USED, all programs
allocate more than they use. If your swap file were that extensively
used you'd have HUGE periods of sluggishness while you had to wait and
watch the HDD light flicker away for several seconds (not to be
confused with the time it takes to load a game or new level).

There are 4 things you should do:

1) Uninstall Norton Utilities, or at the very least don't have them
running in the background.... the only really useful part of Norton's
utilities are the Scandisk and Defrag programs, and the defrag
wouldn't be all that useful except that Win98 has a bug in their
defrag that wasn't fixed until WinME so it's MUCH slower than it
should be, while Norton's is correct.

2) Move the swap file to the beginning of the second drive. Assign
it there then defrag with Norton's defrag to move it to the front of
the first partition.

3) Assign a vCache limit in your system.ini file, if it hasn't been
done already. The "[vcache]" entry should already exist, so find it
and add the line as shown:

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=393216

4) Set another parameter in the system.ini file for virtual memory
mode:

[386Enh]
ConservativeSwapFileUsage=1



Was there some specific problem with performance that prompted this
inquiry?

 

[Shep©]

James

Put on the RAM meter in Norton as well and it seems all the RAM is not being
used, so it is going to the swap file before using all the 'actual' RAM.

Norton's make crap software and this is just another bug in it.

From what you are saying that is a Win 98 issue...??, does XP manage this
better ?

Some think so.

There is no need to set a maximum.This is a common mistake as the
swapfile re sizing will be prevented if the,"Correct" minimum is set
for,"Your usage.


Again.If didn't pay for Norton's then remove it as it is itself a
cause of problems.

Swapfile usage is again,"Usage" dependant and,"System Specific".There
are no,"Rules-of-Thumb".
If you are a gamer,as I am,then you want to enable the,"Conservative
Swapfile Usage" so that windows will use as much physical RAM for the
game before swapping out.
It's also a common myth that Win9X/ME doesn't handle RAM well.There is
a small bug in the,"Dymanic Vcache" that inhibits program tracking
with systems with >512 meg of RAM.This however is easily fixed by the
same free program that will tweak your,"Conservative Swapfile usage2
e.g the free,"Cacheman".
This page explains it dead easy.
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/easy.html
Also the win386.swp is best placed on the fastest drive/partition
which is usually and or should be the system drive with enough space
for it to work.

Re-boot to safemode.Disable the,"Re-arrange Program files so Programs
may load faster" option in Defrag's settings as it's useless and then
defrag.Use the WinME defrag as it's around 8X faster,
http://www.comp-solve.com/defrag.htm
Set an arbitrary fixed minimum(see my page) swapfile.
Re-boot and monitor usage in your biggest game.
Reset to a minimum size you think it won't hit.
I have 512 meg of RAM for both win98/SE and Win XP and my win386.swp
has not been accessed since the correct minimum was set months ago
therefore no re sizing for my usage.

HTH








--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

 

[Mike Walsh]

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=65536

Would be more appropriate; 1/8 of system memory.

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:45:23 -0000, "Steve James"

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=393216

 

[kony]

[vcache]
MaxFileCache=65536

Would be more appropriate; 1/8 of system memory.

I"d have to disagree, there is no reason to do that, it will simply
limit the amount of code that can be ran from the vcache, requiring
rereading from the HDD more often. The cache releases memory to
applications when they need it. Having a smaller vcache is wasting
memory any time an application isn't using it.

 

[Spajky®]

2100 CPU
512Mb Ram
Win 98S/e and swap file on drive c

When I run a particular game that is quite intensive my norton performance
display shows 98% of swap file used.

Question- does that mean all 512Mb of Ram is used and almost all of the
300Mb of swap - just seems a lot to me ??

mine
setting in a sistem ini under

[386Enh]
ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1
PageBuffers=32
DMABufferSize=64
PerVMFiles=200
PagingDrive=x: (letter refers where the swap file is located)
MaxPagingFileSize=1024
MinPagingFileSize=0

[vcache]
NameCache=2048
MinFileCache=32768
MaxFileCache=49152
chunksize=4096

Save previous file for easy reverting back to your settings if you do
not like it!

(yes only 1Mb of swap file! not to disable it cause some progs do not
like that) /set it also in system properties/performance/advanced
sett./Virtual mem &
file sistem as netw.server ...

Try this & see if it suitable for you
it should speed up a bit your sistem IMHO ...



-- Regards & HAPPY NEW YEAR, SPAJKY ®
& visit my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
Celly-III OC-ed,"Tualatin on BX-Slot1-MoBo!"
E-mail AntiSpam: remove ##

 

[Steve James]

Was there some specific problem with performance that prompted this
inquiry?


Ye, flightsimulator slowed right down, but it was a corupt file in the end

so it is sorted, but never the less this info is worth having, many thanks
to all who offered help

Cheers

Steve

 

[James]

Hi

I am no PC whizz, so perhaps somebody could please give me a simple
explaination to this:-

Current PC (briefly)

2100 CPU
512Mb Ram
Win 98S/e and swap file on drive c
have games on drive d
Have two monitors one on an agp and one on a pci card

Idea is that hard drive head travel is reduced because drive c has the swap
file and drive d runs the games. I have a fixed swap file of 300 min/max and
have de-fraged after.

When I run a particular game that is quite intensive my norton performance
display shows 98% of swap file used.

Question- does that mean all 512Mb of Ram is used and almost all of the
300Mb of swap - just seems a lot to me ??

Many thanks in advance for any info

Cheers

Steve

the other point I should have made was - putting games on the D drive is in
effect slowing things down here, why? - because many of the games
dependencies are part of the OS (Direct X and C++ runtimes etc) - So in
effect when you play a game, both drives are being accessed to retrieve
different parts of the game. If you had games installed on the C drive and
your swap file on your D drive, you may notice an increase in performance,
because the swap file would not interfere with the access to the game files.

James (or should that be 'Full of it James')
Cheers

 

[kony]

the other point I should have made was - putting games on the D drive is in
effect slowing things down here, why? - because many of the games
dependencies are part of the OS (Direct X and C++ runtimes etc) - So in
effect when you play a game, both drives are being accessed to retrieve
different parts of the game. If you had games installed on the C drive and
your swap file on your D drive, you may notice an increase in performance,
because the swap file would not interfere with the access to the game files.

James (or should that be 'Full of it James')
Cheers

Sorry to have offended you.

Usually it doesn't matter performancewise, the game level loads and
only minimal access during gameplay. If there's any swapfile activity
at all we may as well stop worrying about where the files are, it's
wasted effort to consider that until after adding more memory to the
system.

 

[Steve James]

Hi Shep

I am going to give this a try thanks, perhaps you could just clarify a point
for me though?

I change my system.ini to add conservativeswapfileusage=1 ok got that,
this will make it use all my RAM

If I use a VM min of say 100 to start with (as you suggest on your website)
and no max, will CPU cycles be wasted re-sizing the swap.?, my aim is to use
the RAM but not at the cost of any CPU power

Cheers

Steve

 

[Shep©]

Hi Shep

I am going to give this a try thanks, perhaps you could just clarify a point
for me though?

I change my system.ini to add conservativeswapfileusage=1 ok got that,
this will make it use all my RAM

Yes so long as the game code is also written to allow this.Most are.

If I use a VM min of say 100 to start with (as you suggest on your website)
and no max, will CPU cycles be wasted re-sizing the swap.?,

No.That's the point.Once you allocate the correct minimum(and 10 meg
is only a starter but may even be enough) then that 100 meg<whatever>
will not resize as windows never needs more however should at any
point windows require more then it can expand as stated mine hasn't
for months if not years.

my aim is to use
the RAM but not at the cost of any CPU power

Which is what setting the correct minimum does with the added
advantage that user allocated space never gets fragmented hence the
defrag,"Before" setting the correct minimum to secure that space as de
fragmented

Cheers

Steve

--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

 

[Shep©]

Yes so long as the game code is also written to allow this.Most are.

No.That's the point.Once you allocate the correct minimum(and 10 meg
is only a starter but may even be enough) then that 100 meg<whatever>
will not resize as windows never needs more however should at any
point windows require more then it can expand as stated mine hasn't
for months if not years.

Correction.10 meg should have read 100 meg but this is only arbitrary
number to get started anyway.

Which is what setting the correct minimum does with the added
advantage that user allocated space never gets fragmented hence the
defrag,"Before" setting the correct minimum to secure that space as de
fragmented

--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

 

[James]

Sorry to have offended you.

Usually it doesn't matter performancewise, the game level loads and
only minimal access during gameplay. If there's any swapfile activity
at all we may as well stop worrying about where the files are, it's
wasted effort to consider that until after adding more memory to the
system.

If more memory can be added of course!

 

[Steve James]

Got it ! thanks again

Correction.10 meg should have read 100 meg but this is only arbitrary
number to get started anyway.




--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

 

[Steve James]

Shep

Latest, I have added conservationswapfileusage=1 to the system.ini, changed
to 'let windows handle the swap file' de-fragged and oaded flightsim and
add-ons the system monitor reports that the swap in use is 348Mb max and
100Mb of Physical ram is not used. So it would seem
conservativeswapfleusage=1 does not work.

Also

I cannot set no maximum in the VM settings the ok box is gray until
something is entered, any ideas

Cheers

Steve

 

[Shep©]

Shep

Latest, I have added conservationswapfileusage=1 to the system.ini, changed
to 'let windows handle the swap file' de-fragged and oaded flightsim and
add-ons the system monitor reports that the swap in use is 348Mb max and
100Mb of Physical ram is not used. So it would seem
conservativeswapfleusage=1 does not work.

Also

I cannot set no maximum in the VM settings the ok box is gray until
something is entered, any ideas

Cheers

Don't use the system monitor,it's flawed.
Use Cacheman.It has the option to show real usage.
Also don't get confused by,"Allocated" swapfile.
In Cacheman click on the Info Tab/History graph and leave it running
in the background minimized.Then try the game/s and see what your
Pagefile usage has been.

Steve

--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs download,
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

 

[kony]

Shep

Latest, I have added conservationswapfileusage=1 to the system.ini, changed
to 'let windows handle the swap file' de-fragged and oaded flightsim and
add-ons the system monitor reports that the swap in use is 348Mb max and
100Mb of Physical ram is not used. So it would seem
conservativeswapfleusage=1 does not work.

Well you've spelled/typo'd it wrong both tries... not to criticize,
but perhaps you spelled it wrong in system.ini too?

Do not rely on system monitors, just take our word for it, the setting
helps. Allocated and used swapfile space are two different matters.

Also

I cannot set no maximum in the VM settings the ok box is gray until
something is entered, any ideas

Yes, you set "let windows handle it" so you don't have the chioce
anymore.

I'd set it to manual, 1st partition on 2nd HDD, 200MB fixed minimum
and no max (in other words, when you do the manual setting it will
copy the max available space on the partition into the max setion for
you automagically. Afterwards, defrag with Norton's Speedisk set to
defrag the swapfile too, to move it to front of drive as a contiguous
unfragmented file (at least for the inital minimum size you set).