close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

RAM/page file in Windows XP/2000

Discussion in 'Tech Talk' started by pyblood, Jun 1, 2005.


  1. pyblood

    pyblood
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    499
    0
    Location:
    Mississippi
    When you do a memory upgrade to a Windows XP/2000 computer, how many of you actually change the page file settings? I am just wondering, because I sometimes forget to do it. The default is 1.5 times the amount of installed RAM. Do you think that it actually matters if the page file is/is not increased when you add additional memory to a PC?
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Jtemple

    Jtemple
    Expand Collapse
    Geek

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    788
    0
    Location:
    NE
    Set the min size to 1.5 times the RAM, set the max size to 3 times the RAM.
     

  3. fastvfr

    fastvfr
    Expand Collapse
    Ancient Tech

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2001
    2,344
    0
    Location:
    SW Oregon
    FWIW, I always set BOTH the Min and Max to 1.5X the amount of RAM installed if the amount is under 1024MB, and I set both to 1GB if the physical RAM is at or over 1024MB.

    That way Winblows can't overwrite vital files with virtual RAM data as easily...

    YMMV.
     
  4. Toyman

    Toyman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    2,597
    20
    Location:
    West Michigan
    Can you explain what you mean by this?
     
  5. mitchshrader

    mitchshrader
    Expand Collapse
    Deceased

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    8,672
    2
    Location:
    Tulsa
    Setting the min & max ram identical prevents fragmenting of the page file. Given there is only one hard drive, I set both to 2x ram, up to 768 megs ram, and leave it at 1536 for 1024 megs.

    Works for me.

    IF there is a 2nd hard drive, I "ALWAYS" make the 2nd hard drive a master drive (jumpered that way + on the end of the 2nd IDE cable)
    and install the page file/virtual memory on that drive.

    Same protocol. 2x ram for less than 1024, 1536 for 1024. Max & Min both.

    The test of a configuration protocol is uptime.

    If the system "just works" then you're not wrong.

    If Any windows system can run satisfactorily weeks at a time with no freeze-ups, you got it right.

    Anything less, continue to tweak.
     
  6. RaiderRodney

    RaiderRodney
    Expand Collapse
    Just Win Baby

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    504
    0
    Location:
    North Carolina
    I agree with mitch and fast, but I do set mine at 2048 min & max because of the game I play. Star Wars Galaxies is very memory intensive and it seems to help to have it just a tad bigger. I also have it on my 2nd hard drive.
     
  7. mitchshrader

    mitchshrader
    Expand Collapse
    Deceased

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    8,672
    2
    Location:
    Tulsa
    Have you considered boosting your ram up some, while it happens to be cheap? Right now I'm sort of amazed at how long it's been reasonable, can't last.

    I'm running a couple machines @ 1.5 gigs, and while for everyday use that's pointless, those two comps (m' kids gamers) do seem to be a bit happier with an oversufficiency.

    In personal testing, with what *I* do on a comp, I gain no real benefits by exceeding 768, but it was about as cheap to run 1024 dual channel considering the deals I got.

    Just a thought ;Q

    Oh, and btw, reminds me.. there's an easy way to tell a good tech, from a bad one..

    The bad ones know everything.