An exclusive gaming industry community targeted
to, and designed for Professionals, Businesses
and Students in the sectors and industries
of Gaming, New Media and the Web, all closely
related with it's Business and Industry.
A Rich content driven service including articles,
contributed discussion, news, reviews, networking, downloads,
and debate.
We strive to cater for cultural influencers,
technology decision makers, early adopters and business leaders in the gaming industry.
A medium to share your or contribute your ideas,
experiences, questions and point of view or network
with other colleagues here at iVirtua Community.
just called my friends at pc club where i buy all my parts from. They said it still defaults 333. Had what you have said been true i would be out the door buying another gig as we speak.
going down to the store to buy 1 gig more of the corsair XMS extreme. Word has it with a few bios tweeks it will run 4 sticks ddr 400 T1. They say no but 100,s of forums say yes.
will post back and tell you if it truely will run 4 sticks ddr 400 with the new venice.
Last edited by PCGEEK on Sun Sep 04, 2005 12:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
PCGEEK, what motherboard do you own? You may need to update your BIOS to a newer revision which may solve the problem also. If your board can run 240 HT stable then you shouldn't have a problem overclocking it back to 400. You do still have to run them at 2T though, but it really does not make a huge difference in performance and the extra RAM would be much more beneficial if you actually need that much.
Also, no offence intended, but you really need to try to use proper grammar and maybe even a spell checker. A lot of your posts on this forum are filled with poor grammar. It also says a lot about your credibility. I don't want you to take the wrong way, I just find it annoying.
Last edited by KoolDrew on Sun Sep 04, 2005 12:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
ok I now have 2 gig corsair XMS extreme pc 3200 ddr 400 running @ 460 MHz PC 3700 2.5 3 3 5 T2
The new Venice do work with all 4 sticks but you have to work with bios a little to make it. its very simple. Just set your memory speed to ddr 200 AKA ddr 400 manually. Then set Your command rate to T2 manually. Seems that if you let it auto detect it defaults ddr 333 every time. You can force it to run ddr 400 stable 100%. You loose some bandwidth and latency going from T1 to T2 but not much and the benefit to having 2 gig is you can now turn paging file off.
Also if I really cared about my spelling then I might check it. But I do not. I make over 150k a year doing what i do and I really don?t need to know how to spell. I really could care less if it bothers you. Last I checked your not my client and i doubt you could afford me. Ill also bet I have been doing computers far longer then you so I really don?t need or want the pep talk.
Last edited by PCGEEK on Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
How? Because I said disabling the pagefile is not a good idea? It is the truth.
First of all you have to understand that the pagefile is not the only file involved with paging. Every exe and dll is, as is every other file NOT opened with the cache bypassed. REALLY turning off paging would mean losing both per-process protected address spaces and protection of kernel mode pages from user mode access. (Those things can be done in other ways on the x86 architecture... but not under the NT/2K/XP OS's.) In other words, really turning off paging just can't be done on this OS.
So when disabling the pagefile you are not stopping paging. All you are doing is forcing the system to keep ALL \"private\" virtual memory in RAM; if there is more stuff in address space than there is RAM (and that is always the case), only code and mapped file pages can be paged, even if some of the \"private\" stuff hasn't been touched for hours and will never be touched again.
This means there will be MORE paging of code, for a given workload and RAM size. It also means that paging cannot be correctly balanced between code, mapped files, the file cache, and private data. That's going to be a bad thing in the long run. Crippling the file cache and slowing down code execution, among other things.
The balance set management stuff in the NT family was designed with the expectation that the pagefile would be there, and it works best when you don't violate its assumptions. Also many applications which create what are called \"pagefile backed sections\" will fail miserably if you don't have a pagefile.
Take the time and actually do some reading and you will learn something about the internals of Windows and why disabling the pagefile is a stupid idea. One book I will recommend is \"Inside Windows 2000.\" Nothing beats this book when it comes to the Internals of Windows. Here is some links for you too.
The bottom line is that shutting off the pagefile is a bad idea. You may THINK you want to do it, but you really don't. Also if you have enough memory the pagefile will not be used much anyway (the figure in Task Manager is deceptive). Stop reading stupid tweaking guides and crap that misinform you and give you bad advice such as disabling the pagefile. There always a practical need for a pagefile, because you can always use the extra RAM for other things (like a disk cache). It's not as simple as \"if I have enough memory, I don't need a pagefile\". It's a case of how to best use the finite resource (RAM) for many things.
Quote:
Kissing this forum off its a waste of my time. good bye
Kissing this forum off?
Last edited by KoolDrew on Sun Sep 04, 2005 3:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
i read that you can decrease the paging file to 200 mb if your having any gaming problems with the paging file. Thats what i did i have 200 MB paging file and 2 gig ram and now my games are smoother.
Last edited by PCGEEK on Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
i read that you can decrease the paging file to 200 mb if your having any gaming problems with the paging file. Thats what i did i have 200 MB paging file and 2 gig ram and now my games are smoother.
Reducing the size of the paging file will not give you any performance advantage and it is best if there is room to work with.
To find the optimal pagefile size for a given workload and RAM size run your most intensive applications. Have what you normally might have open and use the computer for a little while. After that you can either find out PF usage through perfmon or using this. The second option would be easier, so use that and note the PF usage. Take the amount of the PF being used and multiply it by 4. This is the number that will be set as your initial PF size. Then take the number you just calculated and multiply it by 2 and set it as your max.
i read that you can decrease the paging file to 200 mb if your having any gaming problems with the paging file. Thats what i did i have 200 MB paging file and 2 gig ram and now my games are smoother.
Reducing the size of the paging file will not give you any performance advantage and it is best if there is room to work with.
To find the optimal pagefile size for a given workload and RAM size run your most intensive applications. Have what you normally might have open and use the computer for a little while. After that you can either find out PF usage through perfmon or using this. The second option would be easier, so use that and note the PF usage. Take the amount of the PF being used and multiply it by 4. This is the number that will be set as your initial PF size. Then take the number you just calculated and multiply it by 2 and set it as your max.
I think you should listen to PCGEEK, he has experience in this. Though, I would like him to show some numbers to support his view on it.
PCGEEK said that he read that reducing the size of the pagefile would increase performance. Saying \"I read\" IMO implies that he was unsure, so I answered it. The fact is that reducing the size of the pagefile will not improve performance.
Just as yourself this. How would reducing the size of the pagefile help performance? It wouldn't.
Last edited by KoolDrew on Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
was still having glitching in games with any paging file . Turned it off again and its gone. 100% smooth again. despite what you say i see the performance difrence. its faster in games with out it.
was still having glitching in games with any paging file . Turned it off again and its gone. 100% smooth again. despite what you say i see the performance difrence. its faster in games with out it.
Digg Topic
Tag topic on On del.icio.us
Technorati Search
Post to Slashdot
