View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old April 16th 16, 10:37 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.windows7.general,microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default 3 data related questions. unrelated file in use, RAM, pagefile

In message , Micky
writes:
[Default] On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:01:49 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Wolf K
wrote:

On 2016-04-13 11:20, Micky wrote:
[...]
3) Anyhow, the computer is functioning well almost all the time, but I
see a lot of reading and writing that pagefile If I had two more
gigs of RAM, 4 gigs total, and was running the same number of programs
and the same OS, would I expect to see no use of the pagefile?


Based on my experience, you would see a lot less paging, and the overall
performance will be faster. If you do any kind of medium- to heavy-duty


To elucidate (based on XP): have a look at the amount of memory actually
being used, in task manager (is it still called that in Vista?). I'd say
if it's consistently below about three-quarters of the physical RAM
available, then adding more will make little difference. My brother's
laptop was really struggling, but then that only had IIRR half a meg -
putting it up to 1 made a considerable difference: it was literally like
a new machine, in terms of speed. _This_ machine (the one I'm typing on)
only came with 1M, and I'd bought a 2M module (the most it could take)
at the same time, being led to believe XP would be a lot happier with
that - but I didn't get round to fitting it for some time; at the time I
did, my normal use was showing as mostly 7xx in Task Manager. Sure
enough, changing the memory module, when I finally got round to it,
didn't seem to make a lot of difference. (FWIW, my memory usage seems to
hover around 1.2xG these days; I _think_ the increase is mainly due to
Firefox, and/or the way I now use Firefox.)

graphics/video editing, 6 or 8GB would be better. You should buy a 4GB
set from the same manufacturer to minimise odds of memory glitches such
as subtle mismatch in timing.


(We've already established that the machine - or, at least, the OS -
can't use more than 4G. [But Wolf didn't know that when he wrote the
above.])

I infer you have an older machine. Adding RAM is the cheapest upgrade
until you decide you need a newer machine.


Agreed, with the above proviso re amount that the OS can use (and if the
machine isn't so old that you pay a _premium_ for suitable memory, which
is unlikely).

This one was bought for a business, where it ran only 2 or 3 programs
most of the time, and it only has room for 2 gig, but I have 4 gig
bought for another machine. I just have to allot time to fix
everything up. Right now the space on the desk is being used for a


By "fix everything up", do you mean transfer the entire system - Vista
and all files - from the machine that has only room for 2G, to another
machine? Or do you mean that "This one" can _take_ that 4G, but you'll
have to take some modules out?
[]
Have a good day,


And you too.


From me to you both too.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Anyone can do any amount of work provided it isn't the work he is supposed to
be doing at the moment. -Robert Benchley, humorist, drama critic, and actor
(1889-1945)