PDA

View Full Version : Why is 'page file' a no-no in FB?



XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 06:53 PM
This all started out since I wanted to play some missions on the Gulf of Finland map and the game would stutter and lock-up when using that map.

Some replies I got where that using the 'page file' was a bad thing. Not being up on what exactly a page file was I did some searching on the web and got educated. It seems that this ties into the low virtual memory messages I was receiving. However, most of the articles I found state the page file is a good thing to have since it frees up RAM for other uses. The contention of the majority of the authors was that it's best to put the virtual memory to work rather than the RAM itself (even though all of the RAM gets used anyway)

I plan on upgrading from 512Mg of RAM to 1gig. (just got the chip at lunchtime). I'm going to see if this helps in the GoF maps when running missions.

But.....

I want to find out why there is contradiction of using the 'page file'. Should I turn off page file only when running FB and use it for other apps?

Or....


Should I shut off 'page file' for FB only and use it for everything else?

What are the ramifications of not using 'page file' at all?

When I play FB it's the only app running on my machine. I don't like to have other apps open since I know FB needs all the resources it can get.

Thanks for any opinions you can shed light on.

Johann


Horrido!
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid76/p1f0f308bee355fa7a1aba50e8d6381fb/fb4387a4.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 06:53 PM
This all started out since I wanted to play some missions on the Gulf of Finland map and the game would stutter and lock-up when using that map.

Some replies I got where that using the 'page file' was a bad thing. Not being up on what exactly a page file was I did some searching on the web and got educated. It seems that this ties into the low virtual memory messages I was receiving. However, most of the articles I found state the page file is a good thing to have since it frees up RAM for other uses. The contention of the majority of the authors was that it's best to put the virtual memory to work rather than the RAM itself (even though all of the RAM gets used anyway)

I plan on upgrading from 512Mg of RAM to 1gig. (just got the chip at lunchtime). I'm going to see if this helps in the GoF maps when running missions.

But.....

I want to find out why there is contradiction of using the 'page file'. Should I turn off page file only when running FB and use it for other apps?

Or....


Should I shut off 'page file' for FB only and use it for everything else?

What are the ramifications of not using 'page file' at all?

When I play FB it's the only app running on my machine. I don't like to have other apps open since I know FB needs all the resources it can get.

Thanks for any opinions you can shed light on.

Johann


Horrido!
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid76/p1f0f308bee355fa7a1aba50e8d6381fb/fb4387a4.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 07:11 PM
This is really a Tech forum question. I don`t know the techie ins and outs, but I`ll just say...

I have NO paging file at all. You need a LOT of memory for this, 1 GB is the amount I have and is advised. Finland runs better, very little stutter, no memory error messages.

I keep it on nearly all the while.

Programs I use with no problems...

Battlefield 1942, Medieval Total War, Morrowind, Neverwinternights. FB of course.

The one program that does refuse to work, though is Photoshop. I have to engage the swapfile for that.

It seems having no swapfile FORCES the comp to use ALL the memory without faffing around.

This is just my experience. It workd very well.

Remember you need lots of memory. Some adjustment in bios SDR/DDR memory settings may also be required.

Hope it helps.

"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.
(Spitfire & Escape Whiner Member).


Message Edited on 10/16/0306:12PM by SeaFireLIV

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 07:48 PM
Here's the quick-and-dirty on the pagefile: It's an area on your hard drive used for virtual memory, which means that nothing gets saved there permanently, and when a program needs more memory (RAM) than is available, it can use that chunk of disk space as it would use actual RAM. This is all fine and dandy. Problems arise, however, from the fact that disk access takes a LOT longer than memory access, so when your program is constantly having to go to the hard disk to read and write data, it's often going to have to just sit around and wait while the read/write process completes. This translates to serious stuttering from the user's point of view.

Provided the rest of your rig is halfway decent, you should see a marked improvement in gameplay after you upgrade from 512MB to 1GB.


---
There are 10 kinds of people in this world: those who can count in binary, and those who can't.
(If I knew who said that first, I'd give credit here.)

HL callsign: FruitPieJones, and why not?

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 08:03 PM
Realizing this probably belongs in the Technical forum, I'll be brief.

I also have a decent machine with 1 GB of Rambus memory. My experience playing with the virtual memory settings in Windows XP Home was that games generally ran fine, but having no virtual memory did cause the occassional problem for the OS and/or other programs.

If you spent the time researching this (as I did several months ago), you will discover certain programs prefer to swap some of their tasks/modules to virtual memory as the programmer felt the overall efficiency of program would be better served.

The bottom line is you can try this and see if having no virtual memory will work reliably for your particular machine and programs.

Microsoft recommends not disabling the virtual memory. I have my system manage it (though you could set a static size). Having virtual memory is added insurance that you'll "never" run out of memory, but more importantly for folks like us with 1 GB it will provide a more stable and expected environment for the various programs and games we use.

Enabling and disabling the virtual settings for a game or two is too much trouble, in my opinion, if it causes problems for you in other software.

By the way, you upgrade will definitely improve your IL-2 FB gaming experience. Have fun !

Regards

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 09:06 PM
Thanks for the info.

sorry for posting to the wrong forum. I wasn't sure where a question like this should go.

Johann

Horrido!
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid76/p1f0f308bee355fa7a1aba50e8d6381fb/fb4387a4.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-16-2003, 10:45 PM
Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

(Briefly)

Just let windows manage your swap/page.

Exceptions: (If you just have to 'do something'.

Setting it in, say, XP, for intitial size 768, maximum size 768.

Putting the swap/page on its on partition, even if it is on the same disk. If you have multiple HDDs, you can possibly help system performance by moving it to the other HDD. Basically, though, the other HDD needs to be at least as fast, and needs to be on its on channel.

Both of the above, at the very least, will help alleviate fragmentation of data.

NOTE: If you create a partition of whatever size, add at least 15% for 'free' space.

About not having it, and even having 'sufficient' RAM... sometimes an application will not 'let go' of memory. (That is 'another' issue.) This could cause a virtual memory error if the system needs to page and no resources are allocated.

There can be other 'issues'. (Not worth discussing here/now.)

And, yes, if you can stay off the page file, wonderful.

<p align="center">http://forums.ubi.com/i/icons/Symbols/symbol-us-flag.gif </br></br><font size="1" color="white"><u>RealKill</u></font></p><font size="1" color="#4A535C">