Hey Whitedog, that disabling virtual memory trick is working for me too!!

[KDOG]

Lets spread the word!! I think I'll pick up some more mem, maybe a 256 M stick!!!

 

[office boy]

What trick?

 

[KDOG]

This one, courtesy Whitedog(for bringing it up) and Need4Speed for the solution. Makes better use of memory...

There is an very simple solution for this problem....

Here is what windows does in normal mode, it uses some ram and BEFORE IT RUNS OUT OF RAM, IT STARTS USING THE SWAP FILE. This is bad because the swap is slower. What you want, is to use all the ram first, then use the swap. But how do u tell windows to use all the ram first without turning of the swap? Easy...open your system.ini file and add the follwing under the [386enh] section


ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1

Leave the swap file settings at auto, ie let windows take care of it. This switch will ensure that all the ram is used before using the swap...enjoy

 

[Howard]

office boy, here.

 

[office boy]

ohh ohh I did it and it works

 

[JaiKnight]

Will actually having a static swap file in place degrade performance any, once you have that tag in place? I've got a static 200MB swap and 384MB of RAM right now.

 

[Jonny]

In what ways do you see a performance increasment?

Any words of caution?

 

[wyvrn]

Hehe I tried it with my 64MB laptop and got a small 2MB swap file on bootup. As soon as I loaded once session of IE, it went up to 26 mb. ouch!

 

[KDOG]

I even played Microsoft Flight Simulator 2000 and no problems....and that program is a resource hog!!!

 

[PCAddict]

I'm running 384MB. I am going to try this...

 

[Dulanic]

This is a trick that has been around for a while. I used it for months with Win98. What it does is cause windows to always use your hard RAM before VM. With 192MB I very very rarely ever used my swap file. And yes a static VM setting is still better.....

 

[SpeedGod]

i have 128mb running win2k. Will this trick work for me? Let me know. Thanks.

 

[PCAddict]

Anyone have suggestions for a static VM setting? I currently have this line added to my config sys. I am running Win98 SE with 384MB.

 

[KDOG]

SPEEDGOD: YES!!! DO IT!!!

 

[Killer Ape]

The rule of thumb for Win95/98 was your static swap = 2X your RAM, but not to exceed ~256MB. So 128MB RAM = 256MB swap file. Unless you get error messages telling you you're running out of VMM, you shouldn't need to increase beyond that, or go back to dynamic sizing.

So for 384MB RAM I would try 256MB first, rather than 768MB, which definitely seems excessive.

It also depends on what apps you run as some page like crazy. Remember also that some programs have their own VMMs, AutoCAD and PhotoShop spring to mind, so you also have to babysit them as well.

 

[Wingznut]

So, if I were to put my static swap file at 500mb (which is where I have it), would I actually have any performance loss? Or am I just wasting a couple hundred megs of HD space (which I have plenty of)?

 

[Wingznut]

Oh, another helpful tip...

Start a static swap file on a freshly defragmented drive.

Set your VM to 0. Restart. Defrag. Reset your VM to whatever you'd like. Restart again.

 

[Killer Ape]

Wingnut: You're absolutely right about the defrag thing. You also probably are wasting some HDD space with a 500MB swap file. You can try going back to dynamic sizing and run through a battery of your typical apps to see how big it grows, then adjust it accordingly. There's probably a VMM monitoring app somewhere, I just don't know where off the top of my head.

I've never run into problems with a static 256MB swap.

 

[Killer Ape]

Oh, there's no perceptible performance loss in a mildly oversized swap file unless it's smeared all over the disc and therefore inefficient for the heads to access. The defrag trick you mentioned fixes that problem.

 

[NicColt]

wow, I noticed a difference right away. thanks guys.