Page 1 of 1
Strange, XP won't allow for PAGE FILE under 4GB RAM
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:55 am
by kookatt
I've just upgrade my X61 to 4GB Ram (2GB+2GB) under XP SP2. After upgrade, I have change setting for page file to "system manage size". To my surprise, XP won't allow any page file. I can only set page file with manual setting. I think this is contrary to most believe that windows XP needs page file to be enable regardless of the size of RAM.
In the mean time, I'll continue to use my XP with "system manage size setting" which is no page file and see what will happen. Please let me know what you think.
BTW, I know that windows XP recognizes only 3gb of RAM. In my X61, windows can see 2.99GB RAM but BIOS show full 4GB of RAM. I only install 4GB since it is similar price to 3GB setting (only $10 different) and in the view that the future OS would be 64bit. I'm worried that once my X61 is old, it would be more difficult and expensive to get 4GB at that time (Legacy hardware is extremely expensive in Thailand, I've learned that the hardware). So I guess it would be wise to adopt 4GB even though windows can't utilize it fully.
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:23 am
by kookatt
Sorry I was mistaken. Once it was set for "system managed size", page file is created for 3074 MB.
My Mistake, sorry
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:14 am
by rhema83
With 4GB of RAM (or 3GB in practice) for XP, you rarely need to use the pagefile. If you are not using very memory-intensive programs, you can reduce the pagefile size manually to reclaim some hard drive space.
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:57 am
by kookatt
I've heard of RAM DISK software. I wonder whether I can use it to utilise the last GB of RAM. Any one has experience with RAM DISK?
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:44 am
by smvp6459
kookatt wrote:I've heard of RAM DISK software. I wonder whether I can use it to utilise the last GB of RAM. Any one has experience with RAM DISK?
My experience is about a dozen years old when harddrives were extremely slow and regular use of caches by programs (e.g. web browsers) was just beginning. The program takes part of your physical memory and fools the computer into thinking that the memory is a harddrive. When you reboot, you lose everything that was in the ram disk.
If by last GB you mean: I have 3GB of RAM, can it use the 3rd GB as a 1GB ram disk? The answer is: it is highly likely.
If by last GB you mean: I have 4GB of RAM, windows can only see 3GB right now, will the ram disk be able to use that 4th GB? The answer is: no. If your OS can't use the memory, a program or drivers (which is likely what the ram disk will involve) running in your OS won't be able to get at it either.
I suspect you'll find a ramdisk not particularly useful. It's has very limited use because everything in it is lost when the power goes off. Assuming you don't want caches hanging around, it would be very fast access for web browsers and similar programs that build a cache on each use but don't strictly need the cache to have information in it.
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:56 am
by kookatt
Thank you very much for clearing up the issue for me. Indeed I mean the 4th GB of my 4GB RAM. I've just curious whether are there anyway to use the 4th GB without upgrading to 64bit OS.
Actually, I'm now very tempted to move to 64bit OS but still concern about compatability and driver avialability. But I can see that it is the way of the future. May be I have to wait for Windows 7 then.
Thank you again for all your reply
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:28 pm
by smvp6459
You actually got me thinking about ram disks for my web browser (I've been trying to figure out how to get my system to access the HD less, allowing it to spin down longer). I may give it a shot. I found a few links: one to a free Vista ram disk program and one discussing how to use a ram disk...
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/05/2 ... 03-server/
http://www.surasoft.com/articles/ramdisk.php
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:08 pm
by kookatt
Please report the result of your finding. I am certain that many people are curious on RAM disk as well.
In the mean time, I'm running XP without page file. Will see what will happen. So far the OS seems to response quicker than having page file.