what is page file usage history?

[lenny]

Hi,
I am running XP Pro SP2 with 392mb ram and a 1200 celeron processor and 2
screens. When I have a number of programs or windows open, Word, Outlook,
Adobe Golive and a couple of Internet explorer windows the whole computer
just runs soooooo slow. The mouse still moves around ok but everything takes
for ever to refresh or change. When I have task manager open the CPU Usage
hovers between 14% and 80% but the PF Usage looks to be very high at over 2
thirds of the graph at a constant 627MB. Why is this and what is the Page
File Usage and how can I improve this?
Cheers
Lenny

 

[Raymond J. Johnson Jr.]

| Hi,
| I am running XP Pro SP2 with 392mb ram and a 1200 celeron processor and 2
| screens. When I have a number of programs or windows open, Word, Outlook,
| Adobe Golive and a couple of Internet explorer windows the whole computer
| just runs soooooo slow. The mouse still moves around ok but everything
takes
| for ever to refresh or change. When I have task manager open the CPU Usage
| hovers between 14% and 80% but the PF Usage looks to be very high at over
2
| thirds of the graph at a constant 627MB. Why is this and what is the Page
| File Usage and how can I improve this?
| Cheers
| Lenny
|

For what you're trying to do, you need more RAM and a Pentium processor, in
that order. Page file usage is a function of available RAM, in general.
More RAM, less swapping. You should have at least 512Mb. BTW, I don't think
you have 392Mb now. 384, maybe.

 

[TDP]

Hi,
I am running XP Pro SP2 with 392mb ram and a 1200 celeron processor and 2
screens. When I have a number of programs or windows open, Word, Outlook,
Adobe Golive and a couple of Internet explorer windows the whole computer
just runs soooooo slow. The mouse still moves around ok but everything takes
for ever to refresh or change. When I have task manager open the CPU Usage
hovers between 14% and 80% but the PF Usage looks to be very high at over 2
thirds of the graph at a constant 627MB. Why is this and what is the Page
File Usage and how can I improve this?
Cheers
Lenny

You are trying to do a hell of a lot with the cpu that you have,I would
suggest looking at a cpu upgrade.hope this helps.TDP.

 

[lenny]

Thanks,
Why the Pentium? What is wrong with a Celeron?
It is time to upgrade. I have been thinking about it for some time. Any
suggestions on Motherboard. I use 2 screens and do quite a bit of graphics
work, Photoshop, golive and video editing.
Cheers

 

[lenny]

Why is it that 2 years ago a 1200 processor would have been fantastic but
today it is hopelessly outdated!

 

[Raymond J. Johnson Jr.]

| Thanks,
| Why the Pentium? What is wrong with a Celeron?
| It is time to upgrade. I have been thinking about it for some time. Any
| suggestions on Motherboard. I use 2 screens and do quite a bit of graphics
| work, Photoshop, golive and video editing.
| Cheers

There's nothing inherently wrong with the Celeron, it's just that your usage
would probably benefit from the extra speed and processing power Pentium
offers.

 

[Raymond J. Johnson Jr.]

| Why is it that 2 years ago a 1200 processor would have been fantastic but
| today it is hopelessly outdated!

It's not the speed, per se, but the architecture. And 2 years ago a 1.2 GHz
Celeron would not have been any more fantastic than it is now, given the way
you're using it.

 

[lenny]

Given the way that I am using it, what do you recommend I get?

 

[Haggis]

just as a generalization....fastest processor /MB combo you can afford :>
and working with graphics , a high video card and as much RAM as you can
throw at it

 

[Ron Martell]

It's not the speed, per se, but the architecture. And 2 years ago a 1.2 GHz
Celeron would not have been any more fantastic than it is now, given the way
you're using it.

Celeron CPUs do give good performance and are fair value for the price
that is charged for them.

I have been running a 1.7 ghz Celeron for a couple of years now and it
is fully adequate for everything that I need to do.

There are only minor differences in the CPU architecture between
Celerons and the comparable Pentium models, mostly doing with Internal
cache size and internal bus speed. These do make a difference in
performance, but it is not the tenfold or so difference that others
would imply.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

 

[Ron Martell]

Hi,
I am running XP Pro SP2 with 392mb ram and a 1200 celeron processor and 2
screens. When I have a number of programs or windows open, Word, Outlook,
Adobe Golive and a couple of Internet explorer windows the whole computer
just runs soooooo slow. The mouse still moves around ok but everything takes
for ever to refresh or change. When I have task manager open the CPU Usage
hovers between 14% and 80% but the PF Usage looks to be very high at over 2
thirds of the graph at a constant 627MB. Why is this and what is the Page
File Usage and how can I improve this?
Cheers
Lenny

Check for actual usage of the page file, that is active memory content
being relocated from RAM to the page file so as to free up that RAM
for other, currently more important, uses.

MVP Bill James has written a free utility that reports this
information and it can be downloaded from
http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm or from
http://billsway.com/notes_public/WinXP_Tweaks/

If that utility reports actual page file usage of 50 mb or more on a
regular basis then additional RAM would likely provide a performance
improvement.

You might also want to check out what you are loading when the
computer boots up by using Start - Run - MSCONFIG and comparing the
list in the Startup tab with the checklist at
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.php

And you can tune up the way Services are loaded and configured at
Startup by using http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm


Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

 

[Raymond J. Johnson Jr.]

Celeron CPUs do give good performance and are fair value for the price
that is charged for them.

I have been running a 1.7 ghz Celeron for a couple of years now and it
is fully adequate for everything that I need to do.

There are only minor differences in the CPU architecture between
Celerons and the comparable Pentium models, mostly doing with Internal
cache size and internal bus speed. These do make a difference in
performance, but it is not the tenfold or so difference that others
would imply.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada

I agree. I've been using a 1.1Ghz Celeron for about 3 years and it does
me just fine. I was looking at the OP's usage, though, and it appears
that he could probably benefit from the extra processing power. It's
always best to try RAM first, though.

 

[lenny]

thanks for all that info. I guess I was trying to run to much all at once
but when you have 2 screens it is easy to get carried away. I didn't mention
that BNR2 was open as was Golive and Photoshop. Everything was going so slow
though even when the only thing that I wanted to do was move or close a
window.

I agree about the Celeron points. They are not as bad as all that and they
are a lot cheaper.
I will take another look at the RAM situation but from my experience once
you get over 300MB the computer performance hasn't really changed much
especially with a 1.2GHz processor. I could double that I suppose but am not
sure if the Motherboard can take it. Computers.....What Fun!

 

[Nepatsfan]

You might want to take a look here:

http://www.petri.co.il/pagefile_optimization.htm


Nepatsfan

 

[Ron Martell]

thanks for all that info. I guess I was trying to run to much all at once
but when you have 2 screens it is easy to get carried away. I didn't mention
that BNR2 was open as was Golive and Photoshop. Everything was going so slow
though even when the only thing that I wanted to do was move or close a
window.

I agree about the Celeron points. They are not as bad as all that and they
are a lot cheaper.
I will take another look at the RAM situation but from my experience once
you get over 300MB the computer performance hasn't really changed much
especially with a 1.2GHz processor. I could double that I suppose but am not
sure if the Motherboard can take it. Computers.....What Fun!

It all depends on how much actual page file activity is occuring. If
Windows is frequently moving memory content from RAM to the page file
so as to allow that RAM to be used for other currently more important
uses and then is subsequently moving that content back from the page
file to RAM because it is needed again then that is going to slow your
machine down noticeably.

Under these conditions adding more RAM will reduce or even eliminate
this writing out to and reading back from the page file. That means
that these operations will be completed at least 1,000 times faster
than if the page file is involved.

Windows XP manages and uses RAM somewhat differently from the old
Windows 9x (95,98,98SE,Me) versions of Windows and it does respond
well to added memory when the computer usage is such that added memory
is advisable, even on systems that already have 1 gb of RAM installed.

The swap file usage reporting utility that I referred to in my
previous post is perhaps the best available tool for assessing the
status of your machine's memory usage. Use it, and if it does report
actual page file usage of more than 50 mb on a regular basis then your
system would benefit from adding more RAM equal to at least the
largest value reported by the page file usage monitor.

Good luck


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."