Virtual Memory

[GoFigureItOut]

This question has been answered before—but I can never really get a definitive answer. So here goes....

Currently, I have 12 GB of RAM in my machine. Windows, on its own, has made the page file the same size. From what I've read, people suggest the page file be either 1.5x-2x the amount of ram. My question... is there a sweet spot where you can disable virtual memory? Say like if you have 32 GB. Also, since paging happens quite often, it's a no-no to have the page file on an SSD, right? So, in a system with SSD and HDD, and say you still need virtual memory, it should be placed on the HDD instead?

 

[P4-630]

Do not disable the pagefile!
Are you on windows 7?

I'm on windows 8.1 and it's set to auto and uses only 2432MB , I have 16GB ram.

 

[alucasa]

Set it auto?

 

[_JP_]

Or just set it for the minimum allowed to create a dump file in case of a BSoD, usually 400~800MB

 

[GoFigureItOut]

Yes, I am on Windows 7, and it is set to auto.

Also, do some programs operate better with a page file? IE Photoshop, Lightroom, Adobe Premier, etc.

 

[P4-630]

Yes, I am on Windows 7, and it is set to auto.

Also, do some programs operate better with a page file? IE Photoshop, Lightroom, Adobe Premier, etc.

Well some programs will crash if you wouldn't have a pagefile.

I would set it to around 1800MB then on the SSD.

 

[EarthDog]

Don't eliminate it. Some people have success, others, not.

I set mine to 2gb static. This way, like on auto, it doesn't grow and take up space(does it shrink??).

 

[_JP_]

I used to set it 2048~4096MB static on machines with low RAM amounts. Now I just set it to 400~800 for diagnostic, just in case.
It will shrink if the initial size is lower than the maximum and Windows figures-out it won't be needing it.

EDIT: Auto setting will let the OS manage between the minimum and whatever it can use (above recommended), depending on need. From Windows 7 onwards, I've noticed it does manage it very well. If you have disk space concerns, I recommend to set it to a static value, otherwise just let it manage itself

 

[natr0n]

Anyone of these will be fine. I did a test last month with a spare drive and set 32gb it max used around 4gb ever.
1024,2048,3072,4096

 

[GoFigureItOut]

Don't eliminate it. Some people have success, others, not.

I set mine to 2gb static. This way, like on auto, it doesn't grow and take up space(does it shrink??).

I'm not sure if it shrinks, actually. I just noticed the size when I was playing around in Glary Utilities looking at their "Memory Optimizer". I wonder if it's so big because I started off with 4 GB then upgraded to 12.

 

[GoFigureItOut]

Well some programs will crash if you wouldn't have a pagefile.

I would set it to around 1800MB then on the SSD.

On your SSD? I thought that was bad for them. All of the reading/writing swapping in and out

 

[_JP_]

The thing is, there is no big performance difference either way in recent systems, maybe higher seek times, due to used disk space and how fragmented the data is (if it's an HDD)....

 

[P4-630]

On your SSD? I thought that was bad for them. All of the reading/writing swapping in and out

Because when windows needs it it's fast.
Have not tried it on a HDD when OS is on SSD though.

 

[Disparia]

On your SSD? I thought that was bad for them. All of the reading/writing swapping in and out

If you have an adequate amount of RAM for the applications you normally run then the amount of swapping is minuscule (this can be logged with Performance Monitor). The amount of swapping needed to concern me would indicate a lack of RAM, and the solution is simply to get more or reduce the load on that system.

Either way, I would want my swap on the fastest storage available to take advantage of the speed and especially in the case of NVMe, the technical benefits such as multiple concurrent command queues.

 

[HD64G]

I tried putting the page file on a HDD and result was for the OS and the programs to crowl down and the system to become unresponsive. When I put it back into the SSD, system begun running great again. I just have it between 1 and 2 GB for 12GB of RAM.

 

[EarthDog]

On your SSD? I thought that was bad for them. All of the reading/writing swapping in and out

it's been years/couple of generations since that was a worry.

The thing is, there is no big performance difference either way in recent systems, maybe higher seek times, due to used disk space and how fragmented the data is (if it's an HDD)....

you should try it on an ssd sometime..or compare. There are differences.

 

[GoFigureItOut]

Thanks for the all replies! Now, I know there's nothing wrong using the SSD for the page file. And it does make sense to use the fastest available drive.

 

[jboydgolfer]

Glary Utilities

A bit off topic but is that one of those "iffy" optimizing programs ?

The name sounds vaguely familiar but I've never used those types of things since they tend to do what you can easily (often)do on your own kind a like a download manager or something, or is it a legitimate non-scam piece of software?

Anybody can respond, i'm just sort of curious about the program

 

[GoFigureItOut]

Well, Glary Utilities is a legitimate program It's a program suite. But, not all of the tools I would use. Like the Memory Optimizer, Registry Defrag, etc.

The Memory Optimizer is supposed to free up used memory. I never used it. Just was curious as to what it does..

 

[P4-630]

The Memory Optimizer is supposed to free up used memory. I never used it. Just was curious as to what it does..

Oh ...Memory optimizers... Lol!
I had memory optimizer software back in the windows 98 days!

 

[Jetster]

You can make it smaller if you need the space but otherwise leave it alone

 

[Shihab]

Also, do some programs operate better with a page file? IE Photoshop, Lightroom, Adobe Premier, etc.

Depends on your definition for "better," but if you mean having an increased performance, then no. Most (all?) software will suffer extreme degradation (depending on how it works/what it does) in perf if its data is paged out. The point of paging isn't speeding up software, it's to make sure the software won't run out of it crash because computers aren't magically self-learning beings and code would stop dead on its tracks if it couldn't allocate that useless bool byte the programmer forgot to remove.
It would, however, enable said software to function to higher limits. e.g, on Photoshop, you can work on projects larger than what your RAM could handle alone. Do note that the performance WILL slow to a crawl (on HDDs. Dunno 'bout SSDs).

I vote for team stick-to-the-SSD.