XP never using >1 GB memory

[Gustaf]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3), so that there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB; there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad did the same with his laptop, a seller told him that there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because XP can't handle it. But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the settings so that it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there anything I need to know before meddling with them?

Gustaf

 

[Alias]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3), so that
there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB;
there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad did the same with his laptop,
a seller told him that there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because
XP can't handle it. But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the
settings so that it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there
anything I need to know before meddling with them?

Gustaf

Try using PhotoShop or some other graphic intensive program and you will
see more than 1GB being used. XP only uses what it needs to get the job
done.

Alias

 

[Malke]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3), so that
there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB;
there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad did the same with his laptop, a
seller told him that there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because XP
can't handle it. But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the settings
so that it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there anything I
need to know before meddling with them?

The salesman who told your Dad that XP can't handle more than 1GB was wrong.

Unless you are using memory-intensive programs like Photoshop, AutoCAD,
Matlab or the like, 1GB of RAM is more than adequate for Windows XP. If
your system isn't using the full 2GB, it's because it doesn't need to! You
don't need to "tweak" anything.

OTOH if you are experiencing problems that you thought would be solved when
you added RAM and they weren't, post back with a full description of those
problems. If that is the case, they probably have nothing to do with the
amount of physical RAM in your system.

Malke

 

[Tim Slattery]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3),
so that there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even
close to using 2 GB; there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad
did the same with his laptop, a seller told him that there's no use
installing more than 1 GB, because XP can't handle it.

The seller had no idea what he was talking about. 32-bit XP can handle
4GB of RAM....well subject to the considerations discussed at
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html. In practice, 32-bit XP will
not be able to use more than about 3.2GB.

But you probably won't need to use more than 1 or 2GB unless you are
running LOTS of programs simultaneously, or running something that
demands LOTS of RAM, like image processing programs (editing hi-res
images) or video editing software.

But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the settings so that it
uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there anything I need
to know before meddling with them?

No meddling needed. It knows what's there, and it will use it when it
needs it.

 

[Gustaf]

OTOH if you are experiencing problems that you thought would be solved when
you added RAM and they weren't, post back with a full description of those
problems. If that is the case, they probably have nothing to do with the
amount of physical RAM in your system.

Thanks all for responding.

The problem is that the laptop has become very slow, and doubling the RAM didn't help. It takes several minutes to get to a usable state from power on. Opening and closing programs can be very slow as well. And since the harddisk is working constantly when it's bogged down like this, I thought there was a lot of swapping going on, and thought it would become faster with more RAM.

My main suspect now is F-Secure AntiVirus. It's using some CPU whatever I do, and sometimes a lot. I used F-Secure for many years, and used to be happy with it, but it has become bulkier with every release. So next time I'm replacing it with Node32, the solution I use at work. Node32 never seem to use any CPU, but I've seen it catch viruses!

I remember in earlier versions of Windows, there were settings for "virtual memory", but I haven't found those in XP. Is just totally automated?

Gustaf

 

[Malke]

The problem is that the laptop has become very slow, and doubling the RAM
didn't help. It takes several minutes to get to a usable state from power
on. Opening and closing programs can be very slow as well. And since the
harddisk is working constantly when it's bogged down like this, I thought
there was a lot of swapping going on, and thought it would become faster
with more RAM.

My main suspect now is F-Secure AntiVirus. It's using some CPU whatever I
do, and sometimes a lot. I used F-Secure for many years, and used to be
happy with it, but it has become bulkier with every release. So next time
I'm replacing it with Node32, the solution I use at work. Node32 never
seem to use any CPU, but I've seen it catch viruses!

I remember in earlier versions of Windows, there were settings for
"virtual memory", but I haven't found those in XP. Is just totally
automated?

As I suspected, your computer's slowness has nothing to do with the amount
of physical RAM in the system. At this point you should do systematic
troubleshooting, which doesn't include messing with the pagefile settings.

1. The First Question Of Troubleshooting: If the problem is new, what
changed between the time things worked and the time they didn't?

2. The Second Question of Windows Troubleshooting: what is the malware/virus
status of the machine? If you think it is clean, what programs (and
versions) did you use to determine this?

Be sure the computer is clean:
http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/page2.html#Removing_Malware

Do not skip the preparatory work.

3. If the computer is completely virus/malware-free and still slow and you
believe the culprit is F-Secure (as the answer to The First Question
perhaps), disconnect your computer from the Internet (unless it is behind a
router) and uninstall F-Secure. If that solves the issue, then you know
F-Secure doesn't play nicely with your machine. If that doesn't solve the
issue, do clean-boot troubleshooting.

How to Troubleshoot By Using the Msconfig Utility in Windows XP -
http://support.microsoft.com/?id=310560

The free Autoruns program is very useful for managing your Startup -
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx - Autoruns

Clean boot in Windows XP - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/310353

Clean-boot advanced troubleshooting in Windows XP -
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/316434

Also see:

Slow or Sluggish Computer:
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/slowcom.htm
http://aumha.org/a/health.htm - Take Out the Trash

5. And don't neglect to make sure that the hard drive isn't in PIO Mode per
MVP Hans-Georg Michna's information here:

http://winhlp.com/?q=node/10

If this is the case, your hard drive may be failing and it would be wise to
back up your data (A Good Thing in any case) and run a hard drive
diagnostic utility downloaded from the drive mftr.

http://www.elephantboycomputers.com/page2.html#Hardware_Tshoot

Malke

 

[Alias]

Thanks all for responding.

The problem is that the laptop has become very slow, and doubling the
RAM didn't help. It takes several minutes to get to a usable state from
power on. Opening and closing programs can be very slow as well. And
since the harddisk is working constantly when it's bogged down like
this, I thought there was a lot of swapping going on, and thought it
would become faster with more RAM.

My main suspect now is F-Secure AntiVirus. It's using some CPU whatever
I do, and sometimes a lot. I used F-Secure for many years, and used to
be happy with it, but it has become bulkier with every release. So next
time I'm replacing it with Node32, the solution I use at work. Node32
never seem to use any CPU, but I've seen it catch viruses!

I remember in earlier versions of Windows, there were settings for
"virtual memory", but I haven't found those in XP. Is just totally
automated?

Gustaf

So uninstall F-Secure and see if the slowness goes away, although I
doubt it. I suspect there's some kind of non viral malware on your
machine. What anti malware programs do you use?

Alias

 

[Paul]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3), so that
there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB;
there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad did the same with his laptop,
a seller told him that there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because
XP can't handle it. But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the
settings so that it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there
anything I need to know before meddling with them?

Gustaf

Here is your homework assignment.

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx

Now, the problem is, getting a copy of the testlimit
program, so you can play with it. I would have
thought the file would be on Sysinternals, but
perhaps it is only included with his book now.
In any case, I was able to find a non-descript
version of the program here. I tested it
enough, to get a demonstration of it working,
and that is what is described below.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060913215548/http://www.sysinternals.com/Files/Testlimit.zip

Now, what is wrong with this file ? Well,
it appears the staff at web.archive.org don't
care about careful archiving. Their archiver is
ripping the last byte off every data file that gets
archived (like archived downloads). So the ZIP
is "damaged", which is a challenge for the users
of the archive site, to fix.

When you double click on that file, to unzip it,
there may be a claim it is corrupted. I tried
to use my hex editor this morning, and it refused
to extend the file (and I don't know why it is
doing that). I used a copy of PKZIP and PKZIP
repaired the file, and allowed me to unzip it.
So that will be a challenge for you, to get
it to unzip. But the reason it won't unzip, is
there is a byte missing from the end. If your
hex editor is working, just add a byte (00) hex
to the end of the file.

Assuming you get it unzipped, this is what you do.
In Startrogram:Accessories is a thing called
Command Prompt. It opens a window in which you
can type commands. Mine shows the current
directory as C:\Documents and Settings\Paul
when started.

If you type in there

cd My Documents

that should change the directory to something
like C:\Documents and Settings\Paul\My Documents.
That would correspond to the My Documents folder
on your desktop, as near as I can tell.

Copy the testlimit.exe file from the unzip step,
into "My Documents". That way, you won't have to
learn too much about using the "cd" or change
directory command.

Once the file is in position, at the command prompt type

testlimit -m 16

What that does, is allocate memory in 16MB chunks.

If you have the Task Manager open (control-alt-delete)
and click the Performance tab, just before executing
that command, you can watch that single task
(testlimit) eating your system memory.

My computer only has 2GB of memory. When the testlimit
program stops allocating memory (because it cannot get
any more), it reports "2000 MB" on my machine. That may
be related to the 2GB/2GB split for the address space
on my machine. You may observe a similar limit, unless
the system has been booted to be large address aware.
In which case, a different limit might be seen.

I think Photoshop users see similar issues, with
a limitation on memory usage. A program like
Photoshop has a control, which affects what
percentage of available memory will be used.
Photoshop has its own notions of memory management,
and perhaps (just a guess), you might see up to about
1.8GB of memory used. But this may not represent
the system limits as such, and what you're seeing
is Adobe's opinion of what a safe amount of memory
is, that can be allocated without upsetting the
usage of the computer.

To stop the testlimit program, you can type <control> c.
With the mouse clicked on the window, holding down
control and typing "c", is a signal to the program
to stop. I had to do it a couple times, before the
program would exit. You can also try just closing the
Command window as well.

When the program is stopped, Task Manager should show
a much smaller total memory usage. That is because
when testlimit stopped execution, it gave up the
memory it laid claim to.

The purpose of this experiment, is to show you how
a Windows program can get pretty close to 2GB, without
the user working up a sweat. Running two large programs
could use closer to 4GB of memory, and so on. So
at some point, the extra memory helps you run
multiple big programs. I don't recommend messing
with the machine further, unless you're prepared to
repair the consequences. (Setting the machine to be
large address aware, is OK if you're a rocket scientist
who can put everything back if there are problems.)

HTH,
Paul

 

[Gustaf]

1. The First Question Of Troubleshooting: If the problem is new, what
changed between the time things worked and the time they didn't?

I can only describe it as a gradual change. Even with F-Secure, I can't recall a sudden decrease in performance. At least not to the state it is today.

2. The Second Question of Windows Troubleshooting: what is the malware/virus
status of the machine? If you think it is clean, what programs (and
versions) did you use to determine this?

F-Secure. I also keep an eye on the /Run folder in the Windows registry, and Startup folder on the Start Menu, to keep the amount of processes at a minimum.

[snip!]

Found many other useful suggestions here, and I'll go through it. Thank you very much!

I report back if I find something that makes a marked difference. In general though, I find it hard to measure and compare slowness on computers. In my experience, it takes days before I can say "it has become faster, generally" or "I didn't make any difference".

Gustaf

 

[Twayne]

1. The First Question Of Troubleshooting: If
the problem
is new, what changed between the time things
worked and
the time they didn't?

I can only describe it as a gradual change. Even
with
F-Secure, I can't recall a sudden decrease in
performance. At least not to the state it is
today.

2. The Second Question of Windows
Troubleshooting: what
is the malware/virus status of the machine? If
you think
it is clean, what programs (and versions) did
you use to
determine this?

F-Secure. I also keep an eye on the /Run folder
in the
Windows registry, and Startup folder on the
Start Menu,
to keep the amount of processes at a minimum.
[snip!]

Found many other useful suggestions here, and
I'll go
through it. Thank you very much!
I report back if I find something that makes a
marked
difference. In general though, I find it hard to
measure
and compare slowness on computers. In my
experience, it
takes days before I can say "it has become
faster,
generally" or "I didn't make any difference".
Gustaf

You seem to have said originally that the machine
has become annoyingly slow. You really should
explain that better, like how & when it's slow,
but ... fixes you can't notice speeding anything
up were not the core problem. When you address
whatever the core problem is, the increase in
speed might not be enough, but it will be easily
noticeable.

My guess, since you appear to put a lot of trust
in F-secure is that you hare a malware infestation
you're not aware of; things F-Secure doesn't check
for. You need to gather together an arsenal of at
least three spyware detectors, update everything
including AV, and run the scans. Lots of
discussion in previous threads about various
spyware/malware scanners people here use; check
them out. Try searching these groups for
spyware or malware in the bodies of the
posts.

Regards,

Twayne

 

[Twayne]

Here is your homework assignment.

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx

Now, the problem is, getting a copy of the
testlimit
program, so you can play with it. I would have
thought the file would be on Sysinternals, but
perhaps it is only included with his book now.
In any case, I was able to find a non-descript
version of the program here. I tested it
enough, to get a demonstration of it working,
and that is what is described below.

Sysinternals is now owned by Microsoft. I don't
think Mark went with it, but his writings are
excellent. So search the MS site for sysinternals
stuff.

Regards,

TWayne

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3),
so that there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even
close to using 2 GB; there seem to be a limit at 1 GB.

There is no such Windows XP limit.

When dad did the same with his laptop, a seller told him that
there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because XP can't handle it.

The seller is completely wrong. The actual limit is 4GB, and the
amount of that that you can actually use varies, but is normally
around 3.1GB.

But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the settings so that
it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there anything
I need to know before meddling with them?

No, there are no such settings and there's nothing that needs to be
done.

How much RAM did you have before, and why did you increase it to 2GB?
How much RAM you need for good performance is *not* a
one-size-fits-all situation. You get good performance if the amount of
RAM you have keeps you from using the page file, and that depends on
what apps you run. Very few people need anywhere as much as 2GB, and
the reason you "never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB" is
almost certainly that the apps you run have no need to use that much.

If you increased the RAM to 2GB because you thought it would solve a
problem you were having, almost certainly it was the wrong thing to
do. If that's the case, forget about using so much RAM, and for the
help you need, explain here in detail what the problem is.

 

[Paul]

Here is your homework assignment.

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx

I've tried a few more experiments, and to say the least, the
results are bizarre.

I have a Core2 Duo computer with 2GB of memory, and tried
Adobe Photoshop 6 (tryout version, which cannot save files).
It has a preference to set what percentage of memory the
program will use. The preference panel allows the setting
of "100%" memory usage, but it doesn't work that way. It
won't use 100%.

The most I can get Photoshop to use, is about 1100MB.
To do that, I create a New blank image, then use the
Add Noise filter, to ensure the entire block of memory
is written. Windows "reserves" memory first, and the
memory doesn't seem to be truly used, until it is written to.
That is, as near as I can tell from looking at Task Manager.

I tried GIMP 2.4, a free image editor, and it seems to have
a limit as well, as to how much memory it will use. And if
that program is put under pressure, it can take several
minutes for the program to quit.

The "testlimit" program I mentioned in the previous post,
seems to be "reserving" memory, without actually using it.
So it isn't as much of a test, as using a program.

The most aggressive program I've been able to find so far,
is Prime95 from Mersenne.org. Their most recent versions
are a bit on the wimpy side, and won't take more than 1600MB
of the 2GB installed. But I did find an older version, which
doesn't seem to be as nice to the system.

This version claims to be able to use 1919MB of the 2GB total,
but in fact uses about 1800+ MB. So it is making pretty
good usage of the available memory. Using Task Manager, you
can see the program "hold" its reservation of RAM (Commit stays
at a constant level), but the used bytes change as each test is
unloaded, and the next test case is started.

To test with this one -

1) Download ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/archived_executables/p95v2213.zip
2) Create a separate folder, and unzip the contents there.
3) Double click Prime95.exe
4) When the program starts, it will prompt "Join GIMPS" or
"Just Stress Testing". Select "Just Stress Testing".
5) In Options:CPU you can set the amount of memory to use.
You can reduce it initially, so your computer will still
be responsive.
6) Select Options:Torture_Test, to start the test.
7) Use Test:Stop, then Test:Exit, to completely get rid
of the program.
8) To reset the program, you can delete the "local.ini" and
"prime.ini" files in the folder holding "Prime95.exe),
as those two files hold preferences.

When you're running the test, you can use Task Manager
(control-alt-delete) to watch the Commit Charge and
Physical Memory - Available.

So I was able to use most of my memory, with that
one program.

Paul

 

[Phisherman]

I recently replaced the RAM in my laptop (running Win XP SP3), so that there's now 2 GB. But I never see Windows come even close to using 2 GB; there seem to be a limit at 1 GB. When dad did the same with his laptop, a seller told him that there's no use installing more than 1 GB, because XP can't handle it. But surely, there must be a way of tweaking the settings so that it uses 2...? Where are those settings, and is there anything I need to know before meddling with them?

Gustaf

Windows XP, either 32-bit or 64-bit, can address 2 GB of RAM. You
might benefit from extra RAM when playing some games, resident
applications that require a lot of memory or large-file editing.
Adding memory over 1 GB is not going to help the majority of tasks, so
this upgrade may not be a good value for your money, plus it adds some
heat to the computer. Unlike XP, 2GB is recommended for Vista.

 

[Phisherman]

Thanks all for responding.

The problem is that the laptop has become very slow, and doubling the RAM didn't help. It takes several minutes to get to a usable state from power on. Opening and closing programs can be very slow as well. And since the harddisk is working constantly when it's bogged down like this, I thought there was a lot of swapping going on, and thought it would become faster with more RAM.

My main suspect now is F-Secure AntiVirus. It's using some CPU whatever I do, and sometimes a lot. I used F-Secure for many years, and used to be happy with it, but it has become bulkier with every release. So next time I'm replacing it with Node32, the solution I use at work. Node32 never seem to use any CPU, but I've seen it catch viruses!

I remember in earlier versions of Windows, there were settings for "virtual memory", but I haven't found those in XP. Is just totally automated?

Gustaf

 

[Phisherman]

Thanks all for responding.

The problem is that the laptop has become very slow, and doubling the RAM didn't help. It takes several minutes to get to a usable state from power on. Opening and closing programs can be very slow as well. And since the harddisk is working constantly when it's bogged down like this, I thought there was a lot of swapping going on, and thought it would become faster with more RAM.

My main suspect now is F-Secure AntiVirus. It's using some CPU whatever I do, and sometimes a lot. I used F-Secure for many years, and used to be happy with it, but it has become bulkier with every release. So next time I'm replacing it with Node32, the solution I use at work. Node32 never seem to use any CPU, but I've seen it catch viruses!

I remember in earlier versions of Windows, there were settings for "virtual memory", but I haven't found those in XP. Is just totally automated?

Gustaf

Yes, XP has virtual memory management of RAM. You can adjust how much
hard drive space Windows can use for paging, but it is recommended to
leave the default settings. Low memory can cause a lot of hard drive
thrashing and hurt performance. But, I suspect something else is
going on here. Take a serious look at your running processes,
especially when the machine slows down. Do a thorough scan for
malware. You may want to try Avast! or AVG (both have free versions)
for your anti-virus protection; sometimes anti-virus can bog down a
specific system.

 

[Donald]

the slowness of the laptop is probably spyware. download and run spybot
search and destory, malwarebytes antimalware, and adaware. run these
programs and your system should come right back up.
xp runs great at 1 gig, i run 4 because of gameing and photoshop.
multiple large gig files quickly kill ram off.