My system:
WinXP PRO SP-2
P4 2.4GHZ 400MHZ FSB
768MB RDRAM (Rambus) 400MHZ
GeForce4 Ti 4200 128MB AGP 8X
Seagate IDE 120GB + 200GB HD 7200RPM
What’s the ideal size for the swap file of the virtual memory for my rig?
Should I set it to “System Managed”, or 1536MB – 2304MB & why?
Also, should I place the swap file into the “C:” partition where the OS is, or should I place it into one of the “outer” partitions?
Primary Master 120GB HD is divided Into:
C:\ 15GB (OS WinXP partition)
D:\ 40GB
E:\ 65GB
Secondary Master 200GB HD is divided Into:
H:\ 100GB
I:\ 100GB
Thanks in advance.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11
-
-
Firstly you have Windows XP so why are you running all those partitions? Partitions are for old-school PCs. Now we just add a ton of hard drives to the system and give them different drive names.
Secondly I thought RDRAM systems had to have memory installed in pairs with CRIMMs to fill the blanks slots. Or perhaps I am mistaken. We have a few RDRAM systems at work and I've never really taken the opportunity to mess with them.
As for your pagefile I would just match it to the size of your current memory and put it on the inner part of the platter on your secondary drive.FB-DIMM are the real cause of global warming -
Partitons are still very useful for running multiple OS's and writing images to.
My setup is very similar. I have 4 partitions on my 1st HDD.
HDD-1:
Part-1 > XP Pro (NTFS)
Part-2 > Win 98 (FAT32)
Part-3 > Ghost Images and Pagefiles for XP and Win 98 (FAT32)
Part-4 > Storage (NTFS)
HDD-2 > Single partition (NTFS)
I set the size of pagefile to a fixed size equel to the ram.I stand up next a mountain and chop it down with the ledge of my hand........ I'm a Voodoo child.... Jimi Hendrix, -
Originally Posted by rallynavvie
Some people have suggested that I set the swap file to 1.5x or 2.5x the size of my physical RAM & set both the Min & Max at the same size.
So that would be 1920MB min & max virtual memory...
I'm trying to make some basic preparation for the upcoming Quake 4! -
Microsoft recommends 1.5 times the amount of RAM for your pagefile.
rallynaive, your right about RDRAM. He probably has a pair of 128MB and a pair of 256MB. Most boards won't have a problem POSTing as long as they're installed right, which they should be given he was able to boot and make those partitions. As for the paritions, you're right, he'd be much better off in terms of I/O speed with separate drives. -
I agree with rallynavvie about the partitions with XP, to me a waste of time and energy. I gave up on partitions when I gave up on W98. If you have the space in your PC case, just add another drive. I run 4 HDs in two different computers, just single partitions on each drive, even the 300Gb drives. Keeps the desktop uncluttered if nothing else.
I let XP manage the swapfile. Works good for me. -
I've seen some XP tweaking sites recommend making the pagefile+physical memory = 2048MB. I'm not sure why you'd want to aim for 2GB but then again pagefile is utilized differently than physical RAM.
I actually run 1024MB of pagefile space. I don't know how I arrived at that number but I didn't feel like matching my memory and to equal 2048MB with my physical would be 0kb pagefile and Windows won't let you run without a set pagefile. I think I compromised between the two.FB-DIMM are the real cause of global warming -
Secondly I thought RDRAM systems had to have memory installed in pairs with CRIMMs to fill the blanks slotsrallynaive, your right about RDRAM. He probably has a pair of 128MB and a pair of 256MB.
-
VenGeance, I'm not sure what you mean by the hub being reduced. I haven't had a computer at work that has used RDRAM for almost 3 years now (I get a new one every six months, at least), so I'm kind of rusty remembering it. The only reason what little does stick out in my mind is because of the requirement for the CRIMMS (blanks). Reminds me of the original Pentium days where you had to install memory in pairs, but for a different reason. I think, and it wouldn't surprise me if I'm completely wrong, but my Intel rep from work told us that it is sort of like RAID-1 for RAM, i.e. the data is split between the two paired modules, hence the supposed increase in speed. If you can clarify your question, I'll be happy to do what I can to answer it, hopefully others will do the same.
-
Well if the pair of 128MB RIMMs are slower than the pair of 256MB RIMMs then it would slow down to the slowest of the two pairs. However I believe there are only two "speeds" available for RDRAM and one isn't compatable with the other IIRC. Unless you mean CAS latency in which case the first rule there would apply.
FB-DIMM are the real cause of global warming
Similar Threads
-
Ideal Size and Resolution HDTV for typical avi/mkv rips?
By Danteism in forum DVB / IPTVReplies: 3Last Post: 25th Nov 2011, 06:51 -
How do I get the exact file size I want with Virtual Dub ?
By Simmons in forum Video ConversionReplies: 3Last Post: 21st Jul 2011, 01:32 -
dvp5992/37 - USB memory stick movie file size questions........
By tracnet in forum DVD & Blu-ray PlayersReplies: 5Last Post: 6th Jun 2011, 15:58 -
how do you receive virtual memory?
By mvp in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 6Last Post: 2nd Aug 2007, 07:46 -
What file size can a USB memory handle?
By bacardi/avt in forum ComputerReplies: 7Last Post: 22nd Jul 2007, 13:07