1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Paging File

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by binsky3333, Mar 8, 2008.

  1. binsky3333

    binsky3333 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    643 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    OK,
    I was reading around and i heard about if you turn off your paging file you will see preformance in gaming. Is this true. I assume it is true because then windows isnt writing anything to the hdd it is writing everything to the memory which is faster than the hdd.
     
  2. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    Windows always bitches if you turn off the paging file for me. Even though I have 2GB of RAM and it only even uses 1.5 at most, even in benchmarks and games it still bitches. I keep 512mb on my non-windows partition just to keep it happy.

    But it does add a bit of extra performance.
     
  3. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    Turning off the paging file is a BAD idea. Some say they've seen performance increases, but I guarentee there will be issues, even if not immediate, they will arise the longer the OS runs w/o the paging file it was designed to use.

    Keep it on...if you want, just set it's min and max to the same size. I usually remove it, defrag, then set it to 1.5 of my memory or so, for min and max. There are a lot of programs out there that utilize it for their use, and windows will get pissy without it. Not worth the hassle from what I've read over the years of people trying this...

    Hope that helps! :toast:
     
  4. binsky3333

    binsky3333 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    643 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Ok it did help. I do have 4gb i heard that is plenty to run without the pf. I will run windows without it for a while and see what happens.
     
  5. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    well works fine for me i turned it today off and it works faster now
    oh yea i got 4gb ram :p
     
  6. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    I hope it continues to Morgoth. I've read of dozens of people having issues afterwards though, so be forewarned that you may have some problems...really, if I had 4 gigs, I'd just kick the pagefile down to like 1-1.5GB or so and go x64 of course! :D

    :toast:
     
  7. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    ok this wierd i have pagefill of and my hdd stil runs?
     
  8. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    There's a reason for it...can't recall right now...but you can't completely defeat it...did you vairfy you gained the space back from that allocated page file? Windows was designed to use a page file man...things may get sticky to have it work right w/o it...I'll see if I can dig up some old articles I used to have...there may a solution in there too.

    :toast:
     
  9. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    i am noticing now that firefox loads webpages slower :S
     
  10. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    And it begins...

    Bummer man...how about other programs you use often? Still searching for that article btw. :toast:
     
  11. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    other stuff works great
    mediaplayer with 1500 songs works good
    msn works good
    games runs fine
    gona try to render somthing
     
  12. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    Found some interesting information, opinions and other people doing this very thing. This article originated in 2005 and people are still posting on it...so check it out! See if disabling the PF is worth it or not for your application!

    http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000422.html

    It's not quite the article I remember, but this is a pretty decent read for those interested. I still recommend using a PF, even if reducing it's size. When MS can design windows to not depend on PF being there, and programs designed for Windows stop looking for it, then I think we'll be better off...of course that'll be when 8-16GB of RAM is a common thing I'm sure!

    :toast:
     
  13. Darknova

    Darknova

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2006
    Messages:
    5,037 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    535
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    You CAN turn it off, but like everyone has said you will run into issues.

    I have 4Gb, but I still have a 512Mb pagefile, doesn't make sense to turn something off that Windows was designed to use. I remember my old version of Paintshop Pro crashed without a pagefile, there are certain applications that do require pagefiles regardless of the amount of memory you have.
     
  14. trog100 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    4,420 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    237
    windows will only use its pagefile when it runs out of real ram.. with 4 gigs u can turn it off if u want windows wont "bitch". but u wont notice the slightest difference either.. there is nothing to be gained by turning it off.. period..

    most of what u read about windows and its pagefile is out of date nonsenes..

    dont add to it with this thread..

    trog
     
  15. binsky3333

    binsky3333 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    643 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Ok i think i am going to turn my paging file back on but only give it like 512mb to 1gb.
     
  16. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    The link I posted may be dated, but it's still XP based...but I do have some questions on some of the "facts" that are posted. In the end it comes down to people trying it out...but I've read more bad then good from users disabling PF in XP, not just articles. I still think the article I linked is a good read and worth it to those willing to take the time to read it.

    As far as only using the pagefile when it runs out of real ram, I doubt...nice in theory, but I think flawed in execution imo. I remember on an old system I had my PF on a seperate HDD to "increase performance"...it's been so long I don't remember if it actually did anything to help or hinder! LoL! I just lock my PF size to one variable so it doesn't thrash and resize a lot...that's how I've done it for years now, and I don't feel changing it from that method will hinder or help performance in any way...MS designed this OS to use the PF, so why not at least have it active for proper use of the OS, and those programs that require it even if they don't use it. I don't think this area of tuning will net the performance or hopes that people think it does, I've never wasted too much time with it on my newer rigs because from my experience, there's no reason to.

    :toast:
     
  17. trog100 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    4,420 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    237
    it dosnt use it take my word for it.. back in the old days when we didnt have tons of cheap ram it got used but not now.. it just sits there "in case"..

    but because it never gets used there is no gain from turning it off.. run your own tests it easy to find out.. i have..

    trog
     
  18. Kursah

    Kursah

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    8,032 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,800
    Location:
    Missoula, MT, USA
    That's cool if it doesn't, but I'm pretty sure it's gotta allocate something in that area as-far-as used information/pages/files...it was designed to use it. But I'm no software guru either, nor do I care to be. If my copy of Windows is running quickly and error free then I'm happy, which it is and I am. I have no interest in testing, but there are so many statements out there for different "theories" on the PF itself, I use the settings I use from the experience I've had with messing with it years back. I figure since I'm STILL using XP I might as well use the settings that have proven to work.

    On most systems I set-up for friends/family, I don't ever touch PF settings...whether it uses it or not with 1, 2, 4+ GB of RAM, I just don't feel there's reason to mess with it too much...like you said Trog, there's no performance gain or loss in reality. As to how and when it's actually used, that's for MS to take care of...it works and for me works well with my settings, it's not broken...so I'm not gonna fix it. :D

    :toast:
     
  19. trog100 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    4,420 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    237
    it has a prefetch folder for storing app names u often use.. but this thread is for more than me or u to read.. they can make their own minds up.. i have written tons on the subject but the same old out of date rubbish still gets passed around.. its how the internet works..

    trog
     
  20. AsRock

    AsRock TPU addict

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    11,230 (4.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,797
    Location:
    US
    Better to leave it on as some all ready said your likely to come across a app or game that will not like it..

    However you could try Tune XP 1.5 for some tweaks. And not to sure if this command in the system.ini file still works ConservativeSwapfileUsage=1
     
  21. Morgoth

    Morgoth

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,795 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    250
    Location:
    Netherlands
    bhe turned pagefill back on 100mb minium maxium 1024mb
     
  22. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,994 (5.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,085
    Location:
    Ohio
    No. Wrong. Always "lock" it at a specific value. Using the pagefile like that will cause it to constantly expand and contract, that alone will hinder performnce. Additionally the pagefile will get fragmented if you do that. I'd suggest 512/512 like some of the others who posted in here (and now me)
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  23. trog100 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    4,420 (1.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    237
    basically setting a very low minimum is one way of seeing if it gets used.. 100 meg is pretty small.. look on the root of C and u will see a pagfile.sys file of 100 meg in size.. windows set the minimum when it boots up..

    if windows uses it the file will grow in size.. it stays bigger till the next reboot.. it dosnt go up and down in size..

    set it as small as it will let u and check every so often to see if the pagefile.sys file alters.. u will find it never does..

    remove some real ram say till u only have 1 gig.. the small pagefile.sys file will instantly get bigger the first time a decent game is loaded..

    with 4 gig of ram onboard it will never alter from the minimum its set at..

    as i say window will only resort to its fake hardrive ram when it is forced to.. and this is good..

    the mistaken assumption is that windows needs and will always use a swopfile.. it dosnt and it wont..

    trog

    ps.. dont get me wrong here.. i aint advising it be turned off.. what i am saying is whatever u do with it dosnt matter a toss cos windows wont use it until it runs out of real ram.. which in the days of cheap ram should never happen..
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2008

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page