Hi. I'm wondering what the recommended size of the swap file is for a system with 4 GB of ram & a AMD Dual-core CPU.
Hi truckerking and welcome to Windows 7 Forums 
Seeing as though I have the same CPU/RAM/OS combination as you, I figured I would show you what I have set for mine. Because Win7 does a much better job of memory management than its predessors, I recommend that you leave the setting as shown here as System managed size. If you wish to create a custom paging file, then untick Automatically manage paging file size for all drives and click on Custom size:. Using the values given below Minimum allowed: & Recommended:, fill in the appropriate boxes. For a fixed-size paging file, use Recommended: for both values. If you wish, you can instead disable the paging file by clicking No paging file although this is not recommended.
Seeing as though I have the same CPU/RAM/OS combination as you, I figured I would show you what I have set for mine. Because Win7 does a much better job of memory management than its predessors, I recommend that you leave the setting as shown here as System managed size. If you wish to create a custom paging file, then untick Automatically manage paging file size for all drives and click on Custom size:. Using the values given below Minimum allowed: & Recommended:, fill in the appropriate boxes. For a fixed-size paging file, use Recommended: for both values. If you wish, you can instead disable the paging file by clicking No paging file although this is not recommended.
i agree with dwarf windows 7 does a good job managing the page file one way to help is to leave the page file where windows installs it as default (c drive) if you have a large drive example 500GB partition 250GB and use this for all your data needs documents, pics, vids, etc 
Partition or Volume - Create New
Partition or Volume - Create New
thanks guys. I have heard that if you have more than 3 GB ram you do not need a swap file and that you should use a fixed size for the swap file because if you let windows manage it by itself it sometimes change the size and after some time the system will become slower because windows keep changing the size of the swap file all the time. But this is maybe just for xp.
i have 6 gig of ram but i still use the swap file i experimented by turning the page file off but windows changed it back so i let windows sort it if you have a decent drive with good read and write properties you will be ok
"quote" windows manage it by itself it sometimes change the size and after some time the system will become slower because windows keep changing the size of the swap file all the time.
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
go to system information to get yours and post it back
okey, that's just what i have heard
that looks good to me
what size is the hard drive?
what size is the hard drive? check this thread of mine and you can download a program to see what type ram you have
RAMMon provides a snapshot of the available data for each RAM module
RAMMon provides a snapshot of the available data for each RAM module
make sure you choose what bit size though for your system
Versions:
V1.0 (Build 1000)
32-bit (921 KB)
64-bit (940 KB)
Versions:
V1.0 (Build 1000)
32-bit (921 KB)
64-bit (940 KB)
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion 
that looks good to me what size is the hard drive?
what size is the hard drive?�� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking �� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion that looks good to me what size is the hard drive?
what size is the hard drive? �� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion �� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking �� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion that looks good to me what size is the hard drive?
what size is the hard drive?�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion check this thread of mine and you can download a program to see what type ram you have
RAMMon provides a snapshot of the available data for each RAM module
RAMMon provides a snapshot of the available data for each RAM module
Just let Windows manage the swap file itself. If you really feel that you have to set it to something, the old school recommendation was 2x the amount of RAM...thus in your case 8GB. If you have a large hard drive, this may be hardly noticeable.
If you're used to linux, which I'm guessing because you called it a swap file, it should be at least the same size as the memory in your system. You can get away with less than that if you don't plan to do any memory intensive applications, like multiple VMs, graphics music or photo editing etc..
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot If you're used to linux, which I'm guessing because you called it a swap file, it should be at least the same size as the memory in your system. You can get away with less than that if you don't plan to do any memory intensive applications, like multiple VMs, graphics music or photo editing etc..
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot If you're used to linux, which I'm guessing because you called it a swap file, it should be at least the same size as the memory in your system. You can get away with less than that if you don't plan to do any memory intensive applications, like multiple VMs, graphics music or photo editing etc..
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion �� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot If you're used to linux, which I'm guessing because you called it a swap file, it should be at least the same size as the memory in your system. You can get away with less than that if you don't plan to do any memory intensive applications, like multiple VMs, graphics music or photo editing etc..
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
Windows depends much more heavily on the pagefile than linux does on swap. I recommend 1.5x the actual memory for a pagefile, which is what I usually set as a fixed amount immediately after installing windows. Letting windows manage the virtual memory means the pagefile will become fragmented if you later decide to use Photoshop, Nero, or VMware... or even Winrar or 7zip, which can take a huge amount of memory during file compression operations.
great job! windows would let you no if there was a problem windows 7 is so much better than vista as you experiment you will find out
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion great job! windows would let you no if there was a problem windows 7 is so much better than vista as you experiment you will find out
64BIT machines work very well with windows 7 im really happy with mine i will be building my own soon from the motherboard upwards and i am going to make a megga fast one thanks to the knowledge of using so many systems it may cost a bit more than a stock one but i will be rewarded knowing i made it!
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion 64BIT machines work very well with windows 7 im really happy with mine i will be building my own soon from the motherboard upwards and i am going to make a megga fast one thanks to the knowledge of using so many systems it may cost a bit more than a stock one but i will be rewarded knowing i made it!
�� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking �� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion 64BIT machines work very well with windows 7 im really happy with mine i will be building my own soon from the motherboard upwards and i am going to make a megga fast one thanks to the knowledge of using so many systems it may cost a bit more than a stock one but i will be rewarded knowing i made it!
have made a bigger test now with the new virtual memory settings and it seems to work just fine. i can run many memory eating applications without the system feeling slow. I tested running a few diffrent programs. The programs I will list, I was running those at the same time.
1. Windows Media Player: playing a video
2. Windows Media Center: playing another video
3. Windows Live Messenger
4. Skype
5. Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended Edition: Editing a couple of pictures
6. Adobe Audition 3.0(Music editing software): editing some songs
7. OpenOffice Writer: Editing a document
8. Audacity 1.3 Beta(A free Music Editing Software, open source): Editing a couple of songs
9. VLC: playing another video
10. Spotify: Playing some music
11. Replay Music: recording music from spotify to mp3-files
And I had some folders open with some shortcuts I have placed there. So it's working pretty good. Could be a bit laggy somtimes when editing some music files and at the same time listening to music from spotify. It was the music in spotify lagging. But it wasn't much lag. So thats a setup I can recommend
1. Windows Media Player: playing a video
2. Windows Media Center: playing another video
3. Windows Live Messenger
4. Skype
5. Adobe Photoshop CS5 Extended Edition: Editing a couple of pictures
6. Adobe Audition 3.0(Music editing software): editing some songs
7. OpenOffice Writer: Editing a document
8. Audacity 1.3 Beta(A free Music Editing Software, open source): Editing a couple of songs
9. VLC: playing another video
10. Spotify: Playing some music
11. Replay Music: recording music from spotify to mp3-files
And I had some folders open with some shortcuts I have placed there. So it's working pretty good. Could be a bit laggy somtimes when editing some music files and at the same time listening to music from spotify. It was the music in spotify lagging. But it wasn't much lag. So thats a setup I can recommend
you can tell alot from task manager to
this is a better task manager go to this link>>>>> Extensions for Windows - The Unofficial Windows Upgrade
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion you can tell alot from task manager to
helpful for other versions of windows but its not for windows 7
To go to the OP's original post regarding paging file size on a 4GB system (CPU cores don't matter much for this sort of thing, really), it's probably useful to do some thorough testing going forward the next time you get curious. Windows does indeed do a good job of managing the paging file, but you can still do it better if you're willing to be up on it (and unlike previous versions of Windows, you don't really *need* a large paging file, in fact you can usually get away with a very small one if you're careful). I posted something previously that I come back to time and time again about how to test your virtual memory settings to see what will work best (as well as CPU usage, and I may add some disk usage perfmon steps once I get my hands on an SSD and a few more RAID setups to test with) under your workload. Windows is very conservative in it's paging file configuration, and while that may work fine, you still have the ability to push more data into RAM and keep it out of the paging file when not necessary. Technically these steps could be used for any version of Windows, but it's generally easier to do this on Win7 than it was even on Vista.
great info thanks
If I find the msdn blog on this topic, I'll post it for you. What it boils down to is to just use the Win 7 defaults. The blog post was esssential from Russonivitch (Of SysInternals fame) on paging files and his recommendation as to how to determine the optimal size of paging file for your system and the apps and load that you run. There was a length discussion there with contributors from people who had written the MS software related to paging.
Authoritative and debunks even many of the microsoft myths re virtual memory:
Pushing the Limits of Windows: Virtual Memory - Mark's Blog - Site Home - TechNet Blogs
Pushing the Limits of Windows: Virtual Memory - Mark's Blog - Site Home - TechNet Blogs
�� Quote: Originally Posted by truckerking thanks guys. I have heard that if you have more than 3 GB ram you do not need a swap file and that you should use a fixed size for the swap file because if you let windows manage it by itself it sometimes change the size and after some time the system will become slower because windows keep changing the size of the swap file all the time. But this is maybe just for xp.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion "quote" windows manage it by itself it sometimes change the size and after some time the system will become slower because windows keep changing the size of the swap file all the time.
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
�� Quote: Originally Posted by amorfati �� Quote: Originally Posted by brianzion "quote" windows manage it by itself it sometimes change the size and after some time the system will become slower because windows keep changing the size of the swap file all the time.
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
windows doesnt change the swap file. once it is set it stays that size, it does all the calculations for you
This is an area that leaves me scratching my head wondering why so many insist on overcomplicating a very simple concept. Windows XP is well over a decade old...which is absolutely ancient in regular terms. Windows 7 is a completely different animal, so I don't understand why so many try to apply old methods of rationale to it.
That being said, there's absolutely no reason and nothing to gain by altering the default settings. There's no logic behind making any changes at all, or creating special partitions. Just let Windows 7 manage it. Windows 7 is the first OS where Microsoft "got it" and listened to their customers. It runs efficiently out of the box.
The best advice for Windows 7 is and always has been: Leave it alone. If you really care about performance with virtual memory, go get an SSD and let that handle your OS. Make sure you have enough system memory, and then go on enjoying your computer, rather than finding new ways to waste time and effort for zero returns.
That being said, there's absolutely no reason and nothing to gain by altering the default settings. There's no logic behind making any changes at all, or creating special partitions. Just let Windows 7 manage it. Windows 7 is the first OS where Microsoft "got it" and listened to their customers. It runs efficiently out of the box.
The best advice for Windows 7 is and always has been: Leave it alone. If you really care about performance with virtual memory, go get an SSD and let that handle your OS. Make sure you have enough system memory, and then go on enjoying your computer, rather than finding new ways to waste time and effort for zero returns.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét