Computer memory problem - This one is bugging me

[arcorob]

I have 1 gig of memory (PC2700 DDR) on a Dual channel memory board (ASUS)

My problem is not LACK of memory but the way it is used. Specifically, IT IS NOT used much even in the most intense convesrions, etc.

Right now I am converting a 1 hour avi file with TMPG to Mpeg 2. I am properly using 99% CPU on the task BUT memory Committ is 147M. I never get this puppy up over 240 meg. What gives ? Should I follow the tweaks on this to force it to RUN in memory instead of cache ? I mean, I would THINK I would get quite a boost if I use memory instead of cache/page yes ?

Most people have low memory errors...I have too much to spare,,,,LOL
'
Help appreciated

[Solarjetman]

I don't think its possible. The amount of memory used is dertermined by the program, not the user. If it needed more to go faster, it would take it.

If you have a 5 gallon bucket to carry 3 gallons of water, using a 10 gallon bucket won't get the job done any faster.

what is that tweak you are talking about?

[arcorob]

Heres the tweak...I am using a ton of cache

http://www.tweakxp.com/display.aspx?id=1509

[rallynavvie]

So if it's encoding to RAM what happens when you fill out the RAM and have to start dumping that data back to the HDD? Wouldn't it still be limited by the hard drive's speed?

I have 2GB RAM but have never thought to do this. I've always thought encoding is all processor between hard drives (i.e. data goes from one HDD to the processor(s) to encode then to another HDD) and that RAM was just there for the software data (like variable bit rate data and the like).

A friend of mine once told me that with enough RAM it would be possible to load your whole OS into memory. That idea has always intrigued me.

[pixel]

It probably will be possible to have the OS in RAM, but would be impractical, due to the fact that the RAM is flushed on startup.

I hope you don't mind me asking this question here, it isn't really worth starting a new post for. Whilst we're on the matter of memory, I have 512MB DDR, 1 stick (should I have at least 1 or 2 sticks for DDR?) and my computer constantly slows down, and I know it isn't my processor. It happens mainly when burning with nero. Would upgrading to 1024MB solve my problem?

[SLICK RICK]

Pixel,

My old system started off with 256 and a few months back I added a stick of 512 to that for a total of 768. The increase in the performance speed of my system was incredible. So, I say go for it.

Good luck,

SLICK RICK

[Solarjetman]

Pixel,

I would have to dissagree with Slick Rick, I am certian that going from 256MB to 768MB would be a great improvement, I doubt in your case you would see much. And I don't think your Nero problem is due to RAM. I have never used more than 400MB at one time. So, anything over 400MB is a waste.

If I had 256MB it would be prudent to upgrade, but like you I have 512MB and would see little boost from getting more.

In order to tell how much you are using, press Ctrl+Alt+Delete and go to the performance tab. Your RAM is the physical memory.

[pbhalerao]

Beyond 512 MB, there is very little benefit. You will be left with a lot of unused memory. In those old days of DOS 3.xx with a PC/AT at 1MB, we still could access 640KB; so we used the extra 384 KB for RAMDRIVE. Now this option is obsolete.

A jump from 128MB to 256MB is radical, 256 to 512 is impressive, but anything above 512MB will be superficial. More memory will be required only if you are running memory intesive applications such as RDBMS's, e.g., Oracle or MS-SQL Server.

But coming back to the original query - TMPGEnc is basically doing encoding task which is processor itensive and that requires CPU power. Hence CPU will shoot to 100% while encoding.

[pyrate83]

I have 1GB RAM and Solarjetman is absolutely right. I never use that much RAM, only when I play SimCity4 but I still have some left even when the prgrm is running. So I would say you wouldn't notice much of an increase in performance from 512 to 1GB. But if you come across a great deal...rebates and stuff on memory, go for it because it won't hurt to have more. :P

[arcorob]

So many factors to guage here.

First, I know my PAGE file allocation is too big..I use the algorithm of 1.5 times memory so 1024 X 1.5 or 1.5 gig , plus the physical means virtual 2.5 gig.

The problem is WINXP will use that page file even when it doesn't have to as in the case of having enough physical memory.

Now encoding does in fact use memory , not just CPU. And of course , I/O but not as intensive IO as capture.

As to ram and ddr two sticks, it will only benefit you if you have DUAL CHANNEL as on my asus board.

I think I am in the following boat. My 1 GIG is not buying me anything(heyt, I have had it for a year).

I would probably see better results getting a matched SPD set of DDR 256 X 2 but in the PC3500 instead of the PC2700 I have. Fatser timings, and make better use of my board. I will never see that one gig used.

I did apply the tweak and have seen no difference so......Hmmm

I just dont believe what TASK manager is telling me. YES, i have many unecessary processes shut down in WIN XP but only 147 meg used during encoding ? Come on..I thought winxp alone used more than that.

[rallynavvie]

I have 2GB ECC RAM and I do utilize it quite often when doing design and layout. With all that RAM I can keep open InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Streamline. This way I can scan to TIF in Photoshop and make the needed clean-up there, use Streamline to vector the TIF, than use Illustrator to make adjustments to the vectored art and layer it with other pieces, than move it to InDesign for publishing. When I'm really rolling I'm operating 2 programs almost at once so that while Streamline is doing it's thing I'm already scanning the next piece. I tend to see just over a GB used with all the windows open. So if you're not planning on running a bunch of apps simultaneously like that you won't need much beyond 512MB.

I wonder what happens when I throw Premiere and AfterEffects into that fray

I do think 147MB utilized is a bit low. I'm running almost 200MB on my Dell with only Norton and Netscape really taking anything up. I just reimaged that machine too so it should have any bizarre extraneous stuff on it. Maybe Tweak also messed with how the RAM is utilized?

[pixel]

Checked the memory usage and it is just a little over 300MB.
That is with having ATI MMC previously running, an audio editing program currently running, multiple web pages, plus all the background programs (spystoppers etc.)

Thanks for your help. I will stick with my 512MB right now.

I will buy another 512MB if there is a sale on it. (UK websites have sales on 512MB/2x256MB all the time.)

Hopefully hyper threading should boost performance when burning with nero when I get my new P4.

[SLICK RICK]

So, anything over 400MB is a waste.

Well, now I feel like I wasted my money starting off with 1GB PC3200 for my new system.

SLICK RICK

[pixel]

arcorob, my motherboard has dual channel, so are you saying it works better to have 2 sticks of 256MB DDR, or one stick of 512MB DDR?

[SLICK RICK]

2 sticks of 256.

SLICK RICK

[pixel]

Damn! Could that be what is slowing me down?

[flaninacupboard]

acrobob,
there is an option in the environmental settings in TMPGenc, don't remember the name, but if you turn on multi pipelines you can set a size in megabytes. This has something to do with 2pass encoding (don't remember it's exact function off the top of my head) but set this to the same amount as your free ram, to see an increase.

Using more ram won't really make it faster, nor will a larger cache in the CPU. for video encoding, Mhz counts and that's really it. that's why a celeron at a given clock will perform pretty much the same as a P4 with the same clock.

[pixel]

Just a thought:

would buying a stick of 128MB/256MB and adding it to the 512MB make the system work better.

(basically, is it OK to put a stick of 512MB and 128MB to make use of dual channel, or is it better to have 2 stick of 256MB?)

So for dual-channel you definitely need to have 2 sticks?

[arcorob]

Dual channel requires 2 EXACT same sticks.

Same MEG, SAME brand , SAME specs. Thats why compnaies like GEIL and OCZ to name two, are pushing their DUAL DDR kits(two tuned sticks of whatever)

I am still not satisfied. It was posted that someone saw 300meg. Well, I can run NERO, VEGAS, all my stuff and surf the next and have never seen higher than the 240 range. Has to be a way to better utilize memory and to get a better report on REAL time memory usage.

Hey guys, remember the old days of pre-loading items in memory to ge the programs to run in the UPPER range (faster) I think it was to get it above 32meg or some such ...LOL ..couldnt have been meg, was it ?

My dad still has my old PC jr, A PS1 and a PS2. Smithsonian, eat your heart out. What is the half-life of a DOS 2.0 disk ??? LOL

[pixel]

It was me that said I saw 300MB used. It was probably because I had been doing a lot.

Now I'll have to buy either another stick of 512MB, 2x256MB, or 2x512MB.

I guess it will have to be 2x256MB because the 512MB is from a 2x512MB in my dad's PC, so I should really give it back to him for his PC to work properly.

I even debated with him the fact that I had 4 RAM slots, and they were set in coloured pairs so I should have 2 sticks, but he told me it didn't matter.

Does anyone know the best manufacturer?(I use PC3200)
Are Crucial probably the best?

That's a real b*****d because a website was advertising an offer on 2x512MB of TwinMOS memory not that long ago.

[Solarjetman]

Well, now I feel like I wasted my money starting off with 1GB PC3200 for my new system.

Not necessarily. Its jsut I never have gotten over 400, I have no idea how much memory you tend to use. Plus, PC3200 will probably be around for awhile, odds are you will eventually use it. You just bought the memory sooner than other people.

[SLICK RICK]

Solarjetman,

OK, I feel better now.

SLICK RICK

[pixel]

One more thing, whilst I am blowing money on new memory , should I get standard PC3200, or overclocked 3500?

Basically will PC3500 damage my motherboard in the long-run?

Thanks for everyones help so far. It is greatly appreciated (up until the point I found I had to buy new memory ...LOL).

[SLICK RICK]

arcorob and I both have the same Mother board, He is the one that suggested this memory for me. So that is what I have.

SLICK RICK

[pixel]

Thanks for the link. I have never heard of that memory in the UK and haven't found anywhere that sells it.

At the moment a 1GB (2x512MB) Kingston HyperX heatsinked memory looks pretty promising and not too pricey

[SLICK RICK]

That was my other option if I did not buy the Geil, I think that would work out really well for you.

Good luck,

SLICK RICK

[Solarjetman]

I guess it will have to be 2x256MB because the 512MB is from a 2x512MB in my dad's PC, so I should really give it back to him for his PC to work properly.

I don't know the circumstances that your dad gave you the sticks, but if he gave you it outright, why not ask him if you could replace his 1x512, with 2x256. Then take both 512 sticks for yourself. He would end up with the same amount of memory, and you would save money on the cost of new memory.

However, if he only loaned you the stick, this would be a very rude thing to do.

[pixel]

No he gave me it outright. I'm only a teenager and he didn't think he needed the full 1GB.

It's because I am now the only one who builds my PC from scratch as he buys the Shuttle models.

In fact that would be by far the best idea, as my sister will be getting the PC those sticks came from, and her idea of an intensive program is winamp and MS word , so she could have the 2x256MB.

I believe the memory was samsung, if this is good, but I would probably prefer the Kingston.

[The village idiot]

I have 2GB ECC RAM and I do utilize it quite often when doing design and layout. With all that RAM I can keep open InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Streamline. This way I can scan to TIF in Photoshop and make the needed clean-up there, use Streamline to vector the TIF, than use Illustrator to make adjustments to the vectored art and layer it with other pieces, than move it to InDesign for publishing. When I'm really rolling I'm operating 2 programs almost at once so that while Streamline is doing it's thing I'm already scanning the next piece. I tend to see just over a GB used with all the windows open. So if you're not planning on running a bunch of apps simultaneously like that you won't need much beyond 512MB.

I wonder what happens when I throw Premiere and AfterEffects into that fray

I do think 147MB utilized is a bit low. I'm running almost 200MB on my Dell with only Norton and Netscape really taking anything up. I just reimaged that machine too so it should have any bizarre extraneous stuff on it. Maybe Tweak also messed with how the RAM is utilized?

I seem to recall that Photoshop likes to have something like 5 times the image size for ram. So if you have a 30+MB picture file (a 35mm scanned at 2400dpi) it would want 150 MB of free memory. As a side note, I know photo shop has a setting for the amount of free memory it will use. This setting is a percentage of free. I've seen an entire GIG used while working on photos when I have it set to use 80 or more percent of free. That was when I had a machine with 1 GB installed.

[arcorob]

On the ram, Kingston is pushing the HYPER X but if you look at the TIMINGS they are not that great.

For a good explination, look here.

http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20030701/index.html