Windows virtual memory low!! Why???

[mojouk]

Hi.

I use alot of 3D graphics programs and because I can't afford an apple mac (and don't really want one anyway), I've got a PC which I would say is fairly high spec:

3.2GHz Pentium IV (800FSB, Hyperthreading 540)
Intel i915G Grantsdale-G motherboard (LGA 775)
1.5GB PC3200 DDR 400MHz Dual Ram (2 x 512 MB Dual channel memory and 2 x 256MB)
200GB HDD (SATA, 7200rpm)
X300SE PCI-E 128MB graphics card (soon to be upgraded to 6600 GT)

But, it's still not fast enough for me, aside from the graphics, which is way too slow at refreshing my screen (when I'm working on 3D programs).

I keep on getting messages from Windows, saying that the "Virtual memory is too low" and that it will borrow memory from elsewhere on my PC, and that some programs might stop working correctly.

Is there something I could do to get the maximum performance out of my PC? Or maybe I need to upgrade and take the 2 x 256MB and replace it with another 2 x 512MB, to make it 2GB in total? (which would only be 512MB more)

My computer seems really slow compared to my University computers which are 2 x 3GHz multiproccessors, with 2GB RAM, and they are amazing, and I'm wondering how I can get my computer to work ALOT faster. Obviously its never gonna be as fast as my Uni. computers.......but one can only try!!

 

[erebon]

First: Using 1.5 Gigs of Ram puts off the dual channel featere at least for one of the channels. I assume you have 3x512 MB? Put in another 512 MB and it will be enough as Windows wont get much faster anyways.

Second: Are you sure your HDD is only 20 Gigs?

Third: Your Gfx Card is not the least bit good. Even a FX5600 or Radeon 9700 would have served you better...

I don't think that you could get much more performance at home. Even if you overclock your system extremly and use a powerful cooling it wouldn't give you much gains. At least I don't think it'd be worth it. Try using Linux. The bird uses multiple processors much better...

 

[crazylegs]

(start, run, msconfig) and on the startup tab uncheck any programs you don,t need running when you turn your pc on.

And on the services tab make sure you are not running any little nasty programs that are taking your resources, anything that shouldn't be there or looks suspect uncheck.

(ctl alt dlte) and make sure you haven't got a zillion applications running in the background.

You be surprised how much of your system resources can be freed up by carrying out these operations on a regular basis...

I'm not saying this will end your problem but your pc will be better off for it...hope it helps dude....

 

[floppybootstomp]

It wouldn't hurt to swap out the 2 x 256 with 2 x 512, would it? Apart from costing you around £100.00, that is.

I would have thought a machine that highly specced could run 3D grafix programs effortlessly, but it would appear not.

The virtual memory uses hard disk space, I believe, as temporary memory. How much hard disk space do you have free? If your drive is approaching full, that may be your problem.

Also, a good defrag would help.

I'm not sure if this is viable but is there not some way you could partition off around 10Gb of your disk and point Windows' virtual memory to it?

Like I said, I'm not sure if you could do that, I'm not that familiar with XP virtual memory settings.

Also, I believe a video card upgrade would help.

 

[Ian]

That PC actually looks pretty high spec, apart from the graphics card. Certainly not enough to give low memory warnings for most applications.

What sort of programs are you getting problems with, is it CAD or something similar?

 

[muckshifter]

Not a bad system ...

However, you already have hit a couple of pointers yourself.

University computers which are 2 x 3GHz multiprocessors, with 2GB RAM

Point 1 ... 2 x CPU = 2 operations at the same time. 1 x CPU = 1 operation only.

Point 2 ... Graphics, but a lot of people forget a simple solution ... install the correct drivers for your monitor. Have you a good monitor? Dual PCI-E http://www.nvidia.com/page/sli.htmlSLI would be another solution.

"Dual-Channel mode" is a little over-hyped and although you could see 3-5% improvement over STD mode, it's not always the case.

Windows XP is pretty dam good at handling your memory, and I have seen a system with 1gig of memory still complain. 4 sticks of 512 won't give you much of an improvement over 1gig, especially if the software cannot use it.

Many people have experimented with "virtual memory" ... as Floppy stated, it's when windows needs to use your HD as an alternative ... some have success, others end up with a re-install. Do some reading on the subject and see if you could benefit. I personally have no need to "mess about" with my system in that respect, I'll let Windows do the job for me.

The use of "msconfig" to disable services is to be frowned on ... msconfig should only be used as diagnostics tool. Frankly, I don't recommend you change any of the services from the default installation of XP. Yes, you may pick up a tiny performance gain by fiddling with the settings, but it won't be anything substantial. It's just my opinion, but if you are in a situation where these gains are necessary to achieve an increased level of system performance, it would be wiser to upgrade the physical system to one that is adequate to benefit from the XP operating system. With the level of memory on your system you'll see no gain.

An easier solution to the above is to stop programs from running in the background that are not needed ... those you see in your 'task-bar' can all be turned off, one way, or another. Ask yourself, how many are actually needed?

All in all you have a good system; personally I would have opted for AMD 64bit with dual PCI-E SLI as a foundation to build on.

 

[mojouk]

I'm using CAD programs that require alot of high resolution rendering.

I've had this computer for only a month, so there isn't much on it......except about 12 huge programs, like Photoshop, Quark, Microstation, Illustrator, Maya.....etc.

But the Hard Drive is almost empty.

I actually would have gone with a dual PCI-E SLI motherboard, with a bigger RAM capacity, but the PC I already have was bought with gift vouchers from PC World......so I didn't really have much choice and decided to go with the above PC (listed in the first post). I thought it was quite a good price for £680 (minus the 1GB RAM ofcourse, which I added)

I don't want to start overlocking because I don't think it'll make a huge difference,.....but I'm thinking I'll be selling this PC and get one custom built in a few months time, maybe a dual processor an MB with a dual graphics slots.