Will adding 128mb of memory increase my sysyem resources free?

[Virgo]

I just installed (phew) a 128 mb of memory to my computer which already had 128mb of memory on it.When I started up my computer and looked at my systems properties it does show that there is now 256mb of ram but it shows my system resources as being only 92% free which is the same as it was before I added the 128mb of memory.I defragged ,and rebooted but it still says I'm only 92% system resources free. Shouldn't I have more system resources free after adding that 128mb of memory?

 

[DN]

No, it won't change your system resources, but your machine won't "swap" (usage of hard drive swap area) as much as in the past which is a big difference as you have a lot more "real" memory..

 

[AndyHui]

Please read the FAQ: I added more RAM, why don't I have more system resources?

 

[Mavrick007]

Wow, you have 92% free resources? I'd like some please! Hehe I never have anything over 70something% free.

It's like DN said, it's not going to change resources but now your disk should not have to swap as much so programs will run smoother since the program won't have to go back to disk as often to read more data into memory.

 

[Virgo]

Thanks for replying .I'm a newbie with computers and well , what you said really doesn't make sense to me.I would appreciate if someone might be able to explain it a little better.Whats the difference between hard drive,swap, and memory?

 

[Virgo]

Actually Mavrick007 , I only have 72% system resouces free at the moment being online.But before I went online I had 92% resources free.I'm sure I'll have even less about 15 minutes from now as I do a lot of multitasking.

 

[Pariah]

You added 128MB of RAM to your system which is very fast memory your computer uses to store data used by your applications and other items that it frequently accesses. Your hard drive is where all your data, files, applications, OS, etc are stored permanently. A hard drive is mechanical and very slow compared to RAM. Everything in RAM has to be loaded from the hard drive first. The reason nothing is stored permanently in RAM is because it is volatile, ie, if you lose power to your computer, everything stored in it is wiped out. Also, HD's give you multiple GB's of capacity where typical PC RAM amounts are measured in MB's. Because RAM is so much faster than a HD drive, you always want the data you are working with to be in RAM. However, if your system runs out of RAM, it stores additional data it is working with in a swap file on your hard drive for easy, but slower retrieval. All of these things are memory, just different types.

The short answer to your initial question is that system resources is not a measure of free RAM in your system, so adding or subtracting RAM will not affect your system resource levels.

 

[DN]

Virgo,

Simply put, when an OS like Win9x is running, it'll make use of a combination of two types of "memory" - real memory and virtual memory.. Real memory is, in your case, the 2 sticks of 128Mb (total 256Mb) that you have in your PC.. Virtual memory is a portion of your hard drive that the OS will use to swap in/out data.. It ACTS like real memory, but it is virtual, in that it actually doesn't exist as a stick of ram, but instead exists as a "file" on your PC.. The more real memory you have, the less virtual memory your OS will require/demand.. Real memory (your sticks of ram) is a lot faster than virtual memory (hard drive), so your overall performance goes up as more real memory is made available to your machine.. The main resource area within Win9x doesn't increase with more real memory as you've seen -- it's just the way it is -- blame MS.. However, 92% after booting isn't too bad -- you have a pretty clean system which is a good thing and now with that extra stick of ram, you will "swap" less to virtual memory which is also a good thing..

 

[Virgo]

Thanks guys. I understand a lot better now.I am curious though , you say that the hard drive is where Virtual memory is stored, so do people ever replace their harddrives with bigger ones to have more virtual memory?

 

[Mavrick007]

System resources take everything into account, including ram. If you exit a program, your resources might go up(MS screws it up most times so that it doesn't though), and I have been able to get ram back when it's leaked over time with some utilities. This has increased my system resources, but the best way to get them back, especially if you are using Win9X, is to reboot your machine.

It's definitely better for you to have 256Megs than your old config with 128Megs though cause of the reasons given by the others above. I don't think adding more ram for everyday tasks will really help much(unless there's alot of graphic or video editing work). 256Megs should do you well.

 

[Mavrick007]

<< Thanks guys. I understand a lot better now.I am curious though , you say that the hard drive is where Virtual memory is stored, so do people ever replace their harddrives with bigger ones to have more virtual memory? >>


Virtual Memory is just an area of the hard drive that Windows uses to swap out program info to be used in actual ram. If you wanted more virtual memory, you can adjust the size that Windows uses in the properties. You don't need to buy a larger hard drive to access more virtual memory. Using alot more virtual memory really won't help your machine out anyway, all you should really do is ensure there's a few hundred megs free at anytime so that your windows doesn't slow down alot(this would be where your virtual memory is being accessed, which for most people is a directory on the C: drive).

 

[Pariah]

"System resources take everything into account, including ram."

No, they don't. Each system resource that win9x keeps track of is simply a small stack of a few KB's, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Mavrick007]

<< "System resources take everything into account, including ram."

No, they don't. Each system resource that win9x keeps track of is simply a small stack of a few KB's, nothing more, nothing less. >>



If that wasn't the case, then why would my system resources go up 10% or more after running a Ram recovery utility?

 

[AndyHui]

Mavrick007: read my FAQ that I linked above.

 

[Virgo]

Ok, right now in my Virtual memory settings it is set to "Let Windows manage my virtual memory settings".
Below that is an option to "Let me specify my own virtual memory settings."
And then it has drop down menus beside the following allowing you to change the numbers.
Hard disk: C:\18473MB Free
Minimum: 0
Maximum: 18473

Is there anything I can do to the above settings to improve anything?

 

[Mavrick007]

Thanx Andy, I'll check into it.

Virgo, just let windows manage it. You have like 18Gigs free so running out of space or virtual memory isn't a worry for you.

 

[CQuinn]

Yes Virgo,

First run a scandisk and Defrag (again) of your drive to get the files better organized before you make changes to the swap settings.
(This will give a better chance of creating a "mostly" contiguous swap file - one that is easier for Windows to work with).

Then change your virtual memory settings to something more like:
Minimum: 512
Maximum: 18473 (or set the max to 2.5x the minimum = 1536)

The problem with letting Windows manage it, even though newer versions of windows do a good job, is that Windows
has to use extra CPU time to periodically check to see if it needs to resize the swap file as the PC usage changes.
By setting a minimum well above the amount you actually expect to swap out, you make it easier for Windows to
manage than just letting it start at zero.
Also, letting windows use too large a space to create a swap file in will affect performance, because then it has to
search more of the drive to find the memory that it had mapped out previously.

And to answer your side question... It is not a good idea to get a bigger hard drive just so you can use a bigger swap file.
Swap files were "invented" back when real memory (RAM) was much, much more expensive than it is now. It was considered
more efficient then to use some of the hard drive as a type of temporary workspace instead of paying thru the nose for
more memory. Even though memory is relatively cheap now, the idea of virtual memory was carried over as there are
still some task (professional graphics and video work for instance) that can still use up RAM very quickly. For the
rest of us, buying more memory is a better option than trying to buy a bigger drive as a substitute.

 

[Virgo]

Thanks CQuinn, that makes sense to me.I will try it out.

 

[Pariah]

"First run a scandisk and Defrag (again) of your drive to get the files better organized before you make changes to the swap settings.
(This will give a better chance of creating a "mostly" contiguous swap file - one that is easier for Windows to work with)."

You should create your swap first, then defrag. That will give you a contiguous swap file. If your min is set to 512MB, it is very unlikely the average user will exceed that amount requiring an increase in swap size and creating fragmentation.

 

[MikeyBaby]

I thought the best solution was to select "Let me specify my own virtual memory settings". Then select to Disable the Virtual Memory altogether.

Although Windows will warn you against it, continue anyway.

Reboot the PC, you won't have your Swap File on your Hard Drive any more and will be running entirely on RAM. Be careful what you load here!! If you run out of physical memory you wont be ABLE to use Virtual Memory and you'll get an error message saying that you ran out of memory.

Anyway, now is when you want to Defrag your Hard Drive - fully.

Reboot, then re-enable Virtual Memory and again select "Let me specify my own virtual memory settings". This time set your minimum and maximum settings to the SAME value. The rule of thumb is to go for APPROX (and here is a hot topic of debate - everyone thinks differently!) 2.5 times the amount of physical RAM in your system. e.g. if you have 128Mb RAM set both Min and Max settings to 320Mb. If you have 256Mb RAM set both Min and Max to 640Mb.

The theory is, that because you specify and fix the swap file size, Windows never has to worry about dynamically resizing it. Thus you claim back the time that the CPU might spend deciding how much to use.

A more accurate reading of how big you need to set your swap file to, can be achieved by loading and running the Performance Monitor, and adding information about your Paging / Swap file to the chart. Keep it running for a few days, while you use your PC normally, and you can see exactly how much you are using. Add 10% to that and enter that in the Min and Max values if you want...

Hope this helps,

Cheers,

Mike.

 

[DN]

IMO, do yourself a big favour, let Windows manage the swap file.. You have 256Mb of RAM, you are OKAY..

 

[Pariah]

"IMO, do yourself a big favour, let Windows manage the swap file.. You have 256Mb of RAM, you are OKAY.."

I agree, you really shouldn't worry too much about the swap file, optimization won't improve performance much. With 256MB of RAM, you'll rarely be hitting the swap file in win9x anyway.