64-bit RAM page file

K

kencheeto

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
2,851
Hey guys-

If I built a 64-bit rig with 8gigs+ of RAM, could I keep the page file in RAM? I briefly experimented with this but 4gigs wasn't enough, as running many apps would lead to crashes.

Also, is there a significant performance difference? Loading times, etc.. I did read a couple articles on page files but haven't seen anything conclusive.
 
From what people were saying over in my thread [about 6gb or 12gb] is seems the consensus is to let the OS manage the page file itself and not worry about it. the performance gains seem to not be worth the trouble and instability.
 
I run vista64 with 8Gb and turned the pagefile off when I installed the system sofar ive had no issues.
 
cytech said:
I run vista64 with 8Gb and turned the pagefile off when I installed the system sofar ive had no issues.
Click to expand...

There are lots of apps that need to have the page file available to operate correctly (photoshop, for instance, won't run without a page file present). Turning the pagefile off is a bad idea.
 
Perhaps I'm getting swap file and page file confused. Or scratch disk, w.r.t. Photoshop.
Also, I've heard about using RAMdisks to speed up day to day tasks and googling doesn't lead me very far. Sorry i'm a little clueless here :(
 
Your hurting yourself by disabling the page file, geeze. You think Microsoft designed the page file because they hate you? Having a page file means that the system can write unused data to disk and use the fast memory for programs you are actually using, and need the memory for. Putting the page file INTO ram does nothing because writing/reading from the page file is so insignificant when compared to other i/o operations. Plus that's just that much less memory your system can use when a program needs it. Instead of buying that extra 4 or 6 GB of ram, use that $100 or more for a faster CPU, your overall system performance will be better.

Page File will ALWAYS be a good thing.
 
Virtual memory and the page file is one of the most misunderstood concepts in Windows, if not THE most. I will not pretend to understand it correctly myself nor will I attempt to explain it.

Instead, refer to Mark Russinovich's explanation of virtual memory and how big the pagefile should be. Unlike everyone else who has ever posted on this subject, HE knows what the f he is talking about:

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/11/17/3155406.aspx
 
Some feel having no paging file results in better performance, but in general, having a paging file means Windows can write pages on the modified list (which represent pages that aren’t being accessed actively but have not been saved to disk) out to the paging file, thus making that memory available for more useful purposes (processes or file cache). So while there may be some workloads that perform better with no paging file, in general having one will mean more usable memory being available to the system (never mind that Windows won’t be able to write kernel crash dumps without a paging file sized large enough to hold them).
Click to expand...
bigdogchris said:
Your hurting yourself by disabling the page file, geeze. You think Microsoft designed the page file because they hate you? Having a page file means that the system can write unused data to disk and use the fast memory for programs you are actually using, and need the memory for. Putting the page file INTO ram does nothing because writing/reading from the page file is so insignificant when compared to other i/o operations. Plus that's just that much less memory your system can use when a program needs it. Instead of buying that extra 4 or 6 GB of ram, use that $100 or more for a faster CPU, your overall system performance will be better.

Page File will ALWAYS be a good thing.
Click to expand...
Strait from the horses mouth. Couple of pro's quoted here ...
 
Is it possible to put a page file on a RAMdisk? Yes, these days it is.

Is it advantageous to do such things? Not in every single situation with every single hardware configuration, no.

Can it be advantageous with 8GB of RAM and a 1-2GB page file that can sit on a section of RAM assigned as a RAMdisk? Damned right it can, in certain situations.

The issue here is that most people will go out and get a ton of RAM, install it, then get a RAMdisk application (my recommendation: RamDisk Plus from SuperSpeed.com), install that, then create a RAMdisk of a few gigs and then assign the page file to it and expect a miraculous boost in system performance.

While such a bare metal installation and default application can have some benefits, you will never get the actual long-term and even day-to-day benefits that such a potential configuration can provide because... you're using the defaults and keeping it simple. This is one situation where K.I.S.S. doesn't apply because it requires testing to find the best usage of the RAMdisk, the best configuration of the page file (based on size and usage), and other variables that 99% of the people doing this don't even consider when throwing all this stuff into the pot and expecting some magic to happen.

It is possible to get massive gains in performance system-wide using RAMdisks, on almost any hardware, as long as you've got RAM to spare for the purpose. Boxes with 8GB of RAM nowadays are prime candidates for such boosts. It gets complicated really really fast, and I can't get into it right now - we've got SNOW ON THE GROUND in Las Vegas... it's been snowing since the early afternoon here, unbelievable. :) Got other plans tonight.

As for running without a page file, it's never recommended - Windows was designed from day one long ago (as every modern OS is) to page data to the storage devices because of the original i386 processor's virtual memory extensions. That hasn't changed, so don't disable page files. Bad bad karma... there are things you can do to improve performance to some degree, but in general, let Windows handle things. Unless of course you've got 8GB of RAM and you're interested in a boost... :D

Someday I hope to get "The RAMdisk Manifesto" completed, which could become the end-all-be-all RAMdisk performance guide for anybody that cares to use 'em. We'll see what happens...
 
If the OS is willing to use all 8GB (like the 64bit editions of Windows are), I cannot possible see any gain in putting the paging file on a ram drive (you take away usable ram, to use it as a pagefile area...).

The story would be a bit different, if it was a 32bit edition, because then you wouldn't take usable ram, only nonused ram.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top