Couldn't I theoretically...

[Some1ne]

Hey, what's stopping you from running 4GB of system RAM and disabling the paging file altogether?

Probably the P2 mainboard.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Some1ne

Hey, what's stopping you from running 4GB of system RAM and disabling the paging file altogether?

Probably the P2 mainboard.

This idea is foolish to begin with. The P2 does not have the processing power to make this as useful as it could be.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I don't think that many CF cards in RAID would be stable.

It would work just fine until you exceeded the write cycles on the cards. CF is no less "stable" than any other storage technology; if anything, the lack of moving parts would make it extremely unlikely to fail.

IMO you should try to find a way to use DDR memory to do this; it doesn't need to retain its information once the system is shut off. Should be much cheaper and much faster.

Gigabyte's i-RAM (and several other similar products) let you use DDR SDRAM as a virtual drive (although capacity is generally only 4GB). Bandwidth is higher with DDR SDRAM, but the big win with either is the (essentially) zero response time.

Hey, what's stopping you from running 4GB of system RAM and disabling the paging file altogether?

This is really most useful in situations where you need more than 4GB of data in RAM (for instance, you could use such an array as a fast scratch drive for photo or video editing, or as extra storage for a large database). Completely disabling the page file in Windows is actually not such a great idea (see numerous threads in the OS forum), since some apps are not happy if it's not there, and if you need more RAM at any point than you physically have, your system will basically die.

The OP was positing a situation where you cannot have a large amount of system RAM... but in this case, it's probably just easier to upgrade to a CPU that can actually use 4GB of RAM. I mean, hell, you can even build a 64-bit system and install 8GB of RAM or more if you want, but then you need 64-bit software to use the extra memory.

Just let it go, man. Let it go. 😛 Or use Linux/UNIX for that dinosaur.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I don't think that many CF cards in RAID would be stable.

It would work just fine until you exceeded the write cycles on the cards. CF is no less "stable" than any other storage technology; if anything, the lack of moving parts would make it extremely unlikely to fail.

IMO you should try to find a way to use DDR memory to do this; it doesn't need to retain its information once the system is shut off. Should be much cheaper and much faster.

Gigabyte's i-RAM (and several other similar products) let you use DDR SDRAM as a virtual drive (although capacity is generally only 4GB). Bandwidth is higher with DDR SDRAM, but the big win with either is the (essentially) zero response time.

Hey, what's stopping you from running 4GB of system RAM and disabling the paging file altogether?

This is really most useful in situations where you need more than 4GB of data in RAM (for instance, you could use such an array as a fast scratch drive for photo or video editing, or as extra storage for a large database). Completely disabling the page file in Windows is actually not such a great idea (see numerous threads in the OS forum), since some apps are not happy if it's not there, and if you need more RAM at any point than you physically have, your system will basically die.

The OP was positing a situation where you cannot have a large amount of system RAM... but in this case, it's probably just easier to upgrade to a CPU that can actually use 4GB of RAM. I mean, hell, you can even build a 64-bit system and install 8GB of RAM or more if you want, but then you need 64-bit software to use the extra memory.

Just let it go, man. Let it go. 😛 Or use Linux/UNIX for that dinosaur.

It's really more of a pentium system I'm thinking of. I refuse to let it go because a Pentium 200, believe it or not is quite fast and is sufficient for processing more tasks than people believe it should... It also just simply be an experiment because it'd be a good way to put CF cards that are too small of capacity to be used in a SLR camera but large enough to be useful which is why I made this thread...

 

[CrispyFried]

yup a Pentium 200 with 128 ram is fine for open office and web/mail even older games.

does it have ISA slots? find an EMS board or two 🙂

for speed a decent 8 meg cache HD is probably youre best bet.. maybe an add in PCI PATA or SATA (or combo) card if you want UDMA 6 or SATA speed. something you can later put in a newer computer when the P200 finally is retired with honors.

I do like the CF bit just for the sheer rube goldberg factor lol But youll eat the erase-write life up on them in no time.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: CrispyFried
yup a Pentium 200 with 128 ram is fine for open office and web/mail even older games.

does it have ISA slots? find an EMS board or two 🙂

for speed a decent 8 meg cache HD is probably youre best bet.. maybe an add in PCI PATA or SATA (or combo) card if you want UDMA 6 or SATA speed. something you can later put in a newer computer when the P200 finally is retired with honors.

I do like the CF bit just for the sheer rubr goldberg factor 🙂 But youll eat the erase-write life up on them in no time.

Yes it has ISA slots, what would the EMS board be used for? What is an EMS board?

 

[CrispyFried]

Expanded Memory Standard (System?).

Its RAM on an ISA board, Im not sure what capacities they were up to towards the end, but they were great for RAM drives. The RAM ran at the ISA bus speed but its still probably faster than a HD. Put the page file on that.

edit: hmm thinking back they may of topped out at 16 megs a board or something.. not so good. try googling EMS and LIM (Lotus-Intel-Microsoft) <- its their standard.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: CrispyFried
Expanded Memory Standard (System?).

Its RAM on an ISA board, Im not sure what capacities they were up to towards the end, but they were great for RAM drives. The RAM ran at the ISA bus speed but its still probably faster than a HD. Put the page file on that.

edit: hmm thinking back they may of topped out at 16 megs a board or something.. not so good. try googling EMS and LIM (Lotus-Intel-Microsoft) <- its their standard.

Oh, I know what your talking about, those were used in 286 systems and lower because you couldn't upgrade the ram.. Yea that wouldn't exactly be a good idea, even on a pentium system, that'd be slow. The ISA bus was 16MB/s on 16bit and even slower at 8MB/s on the 8 bit bus making for some slow ram and I tell you right now, HDDs are much faster these days. Seek times would be good but thats it...