DigDog
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2011
- 14,275
- 2,737
- 126
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
- Mar 15, 2007
- 4,762
- 0
- 76
The way this works is that the GPU is given a relatively small area of system memory area that is mapped for the device. You can actually check this yourself from device manager and under the resources tab for the Graphics card you will literally see the memory addresses assigned to the device. On a 32 bit machine this will be somewhat different but mine currently show:
FA000000 - FAFFFFFF - 1MB
D0000000 - D7FFFFFF - 128MB
D8000000 - D9FFFFFF - 32MB
A0000 - BFFFF - 0.125 MB
For a grand total of 161.125MB of address space for a GPU running in SLI on 64 bit Windows 7. In addition it uses some IO ports as well and an IRQ but that is the amount of memory mapped space the device is assigned. So no the entire VRAM is not mapped into memory, what actually happens is we can load stuff we want in VRAM into this address space and then have it copied etc by sending commands to the GPU. VRAM is not 100% mapped even when we have a 64 bit OS and we could map it all.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
1. That article uses nothing but console ports which were designed to run on a system with 512MB (Xbox360) of ram or 256+256MB (PS3)
2. There are some games which are known to be ram intensive, none of them are tested by the article.
3. Even if the game itself doesn't need more ram, in real usage you are going to multi task. I often get a warning message from window saying it has ran out of ram on my 16GB system due to browsers alone, and I need the browsers open when gaming as I typically game in borderless window mode to have quick access to guides and walkthroughs and the like
At least their conclusions are fair:
2. There are some games which are known to be ram intensive, none of them are tested by the article.
3. Even if the game itself doesn't need more ram, in real usage you are going to multi task. I often get a warning message from window saying it has ran out of ram on my 16GB system due to browsers alone, and I need the browsers open when gaming as I typically game in borderless window mode to have quick access to guides and walkthroughs and the like
At least their conclusions are fair:
Even though they only tested console ports that don't require much ram, they at least recognize that people might need more for non gaming reasons.
Last edited:
If you get low memory warnings with 16GB, something is seriously messed up with your Windows install. I never got them even with my old system with 4GB of RAM. In fact, you're not supposed to get any warnings from running out of physical RAM. It should just transparently begin to page data to disk, which will of course reduce performance significantly but not cause any error messages to appear.
Also, again most PC games are limited to 2-3GB of VAS since they have to be compatible with 32-bit Windows. It will be several more years before the installed base of 32-bit OS is small enough that developers dare make 4+GB of address space a requirement.
Also, again most PC games are limited to 2-3GB of VAS since they have to be compatible with 32-bit Windows. It will be several more years before the installed base of 32-bit OS is small enough that developers dare make 4+GB of address space a requirement.
Schmide
Diamond Member
- Mar 7, 2002
- 5,684
- 912
- 126
The reality is most games do and will continue to run in a 32-bit space. Why? Because it is more efficient on current hardware. Even when things move to 64-bit programs, most of the benefits will come not from the extra memory, but the extended registers. I'm not saying the extra memory won't clear up some bottlenecks, they will; but it will come in the form of larger texture caches and more transparent level changes. (I.e. the sandbox will be better)
Lets look at it this way. If we just look at 1gb of memory, and touch/copy it over and over, on the highest end processors, you can do this approximately 20 times in 1 sec. (I.e. high end memory systems run at ~20gb/s) So with 8-16gb you're looking at nearing 1 operation per byte per second.
So what are the pro/cons that we get from pure 64bit code.
You get 8 more registers and each register is now double the size. (SSE registers are also doubled in number)
Pro - You have more registers to work with and calls can use these to pass arguments without using the stack. Ability to do conversion/exchanges/jump logic between general purpose and SSE obviously improved.
Con - Pointers now have double the memory footprint, as much as the above takes things off the stack, the things that go on the stack are now twice the size. Using the above registers also requires a larger instruction. (modrm byte) Context switches have to deal with the extra registers. So basically your code footprint goes up a bit.
Flat memory model.
This is all pro. No longer do you have to use memory windows to exchanged data over the bus. Video memory is a flat space, as are other buffered devices. If you do need to do inter-process communication, it obviously has a simpler model as well.
Lets look at it this way. If we just look at 1gb of memory, and touch/copy it over and over, on the highest end processors, you can do this approximately 20 times in 1 sec. (I.e. high end memory systems run at ~20gb/s) So with 8-16gb you're looking at nearing 1 operation per byte per second.
So what are the pro/cons that we get from pure 64bit code.
You get 8 more registers and each register is now double the size. (SSE registers are also doubled in number)
Pro - You have more registers to work with and calls can use these to pass arguments without using the stack. Ability to do conversion/exchanges/jump logic between general purpose and SSE obviously improved.
Con - Pointers now have double the memory footprint, as much as the above takes things off the stack, the things that go on the stack are now twice the size. Using the above registers also requires a larger instruction. (modrm byte) Context switches have to deal with the extra registers. So basically your code footprint goes up a bit.
Flat memory model.
This is all pro. No longer do you have to use memory windows to exchanged data over the bus. Video memory is a flat space, as are other buffered devices. If you do need to do inter-process communication, it obviously has a simpler model as well.
Schmide
Diamond Member
- Mar 7, 2002
- 5,684
- 912
- 126
Regardless of physical ram, you're still limited by the 32-bit pointer size. Most programs are compiled without the /LARGEADDRESSAWARE option so they are limited to 2gb of ram physical or virtual.
It would take a lot for a browser to run out of memory, especially since they operate their own disk caches, taltamir is more likely running into poorly coded javascript not getting requested objects.
Next gen consoles have 8GB RAM (irrespective of type), their OS's are almost guaranteed to be 64-bit only, more and more console ports will be developed with that memory in mind. This isn't the puny 512MB of current consoles anymore. Games WILL use a pile of RAM, its only a matter of time. Personally I have 4GB in my laptop and work PC, 2GB in my tablet and 16GB in my gaming box.
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,000
- 126
4GB is not optimal for gaming. A lot of newer 32bit games are LAA and will push 4GB usage on 64-bit Windows, especially with custom assets. The same applies to source ports of old games that use new content.
Even if you run a lean system, you’ll have nothing left for Windows if the game is pushing 4GB by itself. So 6GB is better, but 8GB is the optimal sweet-spot, especially with current prices.
Even if you run a lean system, you’ll have nothing left for Windows if the game is pushing 4GB by itself. So 6GB is better, but 8GB is the optimal sweet-spot, especially with current prices.
Deders
Platinum Member
- Oct 14, 2012
- 2,401
- 1
- 91
Which games? the only one i've seen to have windows say it is running out of memory at 4GB (even when it has over half a GB free to play with and only 250MB of the swapfile used) is Rome II.
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,000
- 126
Gamebryo and CryEngine games will push 4GB if you load custom content (e.g. texture packs, mods, etc).
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
Of course there is nothing wrong with my windows install. I checked memory usage and it is all used by my browsers (as I explicitly stated before). Split about evenly between chrome, firefox, and iron (chromium derivative). well... used to be split evenly, I am carefully culling my firefox windows to keep its usage at a minimum to avoid this problem
Restarting all 3 browsers with a "reopen last windows/tabs" option reduces it a bit as there are memory leaks, but its still over 10GB used.
I do not have it disabled. It is set to 1GB
And that will be the real game changer. Although some PC only games already use 64bit executables and utilize more than 4GB, they are rare. In a year every console port will have a MINIMUM ram requirement of 8GB (what consoles will have) and recommended of 16GB... just like every console port today has a minimum requirement of 512MB (what PS3 and xbox360 consoles have)
Last edited:
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
The three browsers I usually have open:
1. Firefox for features chrome does not have (eg: sidebar bookmarks).
2. Google chrome for main browsing due to its awesome speed
3. Iron (Chromium derivative #1) for being logged in with a separate second google account, and for stuff I prefer to keep private.
The tow browsers I occasionally use:
4. CoolNovo (Chromium derivative #2) because I set all my browsers to "reopen last open tabs on startup" and I need a seperate browser to be used for nothing but opening links. That is, I set it as my default browser so that I can double click a desktop shortcut or an irc shortcut or some such and NOT have it reopen 50 pages (in case I had chosen to close my real main browser, chrome).
5. IE because I sometimes need to do compatibility testing. As well as the very rare occasional IE only site (typically government or public education site)
How many years ago was that? My work laptop and my dad's PC both have 2GB of ram and can barely handle 5 pages, much less 50.
Last edited:
Deders
Platinum Member
- Oct 14, 2012
- 2,401
- 1
- 91
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
Weird, you must go to really light sites then...
That or maybe you are doing a ton of paging? What browser are you using? In chrome you can hit shift+esc and then click "stats for nerds" to see the memory consumption of chrome, firefox, and IE
Schmide
Diamond Member
- Mar 7, 2002
- 5,684
- 912
- 126
??? Page file should be at least equal to you installed ram size.
I'll never understand why people mess with it?
I can about guarantee you let windows manage your pagefile and your errors will go away!!!
Edit: I have 170 pages open now = ~ 2.2gb
Last edited:
Deders
Platinum Member
- Oct 14, 2012
- 2,401
- 1
- 91
Usually searching for computer hardware sources, I usually check in task manager. Firefox is one process, but it's handy to know that stats for nerds covers all 3.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
No, it should be however much you actually need.
Upgrading the physical RAM reduces the need for it, not increase it.
Because windows defaults to 1.5x the amount of physical RAM you use, which on a 16GB of RAM machine is 24GB, which is a huge chunk out of an SSD drive.
The word "error" is misleading, it doesn't make any mistake, it merely runs out of paging space (pagefile+ram).
And of course it will reduce such messages if I let it eat up 24GB of SSD for a pagefile.
However, they would not be eliminated entirely thanks to memory leaks and the fact I would just leave more windows open until I fill up that extra space.
some of us choose to run without a pagefile. why? because ssd is slow.
if running out of ram. just buy more physical ram. pagefile is a bandage for not enough ram.
HeXen
Diamond Member
- Dec 13, 2009
- 7,832
- 37
- 91
I make use of my 12gb's. What I do is alt/tab out of one game, load another...basically I keep about 3 games running at all times in memory and use sleep instead of shutdown.
The benefit here is that I can toggle instantly to where I left off. Though some games don't alt/tab out all that great but most do. Great way for any gamer to make use of their ram if they have enough. It just sits in ram and doesn't consume any further resources, of course saving is a good idea before alting out.
Pagefile has always been a debatable topic, I do it just to save SSD space and never had an issue, I don't see the big deal in even debating about it, consider it personal preference.
The benefit here is that I can toggle instantly to where I left off. Though some games don't alt/tab out all that great but most do. Great way for any gamer to make use of their ram if they have enough. It just sits in ram and doesn't consume any further resources, of course saving is a good idea before alting out.
Pagefile has always been a debatable topic, I do it just to save SSD space and never had an issue, I don't see the big deal in even debating about it, consider it personal preference.
Last edited:
Deders
Platinum Member
- Oct 14, 2012
- 2,401
- 1
- 91
Are you saying running a page file on an SSD is slow?
I'm sure I've read several articles that have proven that not having a pagefile makes windows a bit slower in some tasks than even just having 100MB.
HeXen
Diamond Member
- Dec 13, 2009
- 7,832
- 37
- 91
He means if you don't have much ram and an application needs to page, then it's slower. Not many apps these days cause much issue if you have a lot of ram and of course games don't even come close as most are 32bit anyway but if you do a lot of photoshop and heavy video editing, those can push a lot of ram.
window is broken so a small page file (16MB) is advised to fool window into running optimally.
as for the ssd vs ram topic. that is a given. ssd is piss poor slow when compare to ram.
if you need more ram. buy more physical ram.
Something is seriously messed up with your browsers then.
My Opera never exceeded 1GB of used memory with 10+ tabs open after three days of running.
Uh, what? Are you even aware how pagefile works, and that the IO operations are small enough so it doesn't matter at all?
I think it's a good moment to enlighten some people on the memory subject under Windows.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/07/21/3092070.aspx
http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter