Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Moving page file to Ram memory-Benefits ?

Last response: in Storage
Share
September 4, 2012 2:17:13 PM

Hi,I have ASRock B75M-GL motherboard and tweak utility for this Motherboard called ASRock eXtreme Tuner inside there is ASRock XFast RAM ,It can move Page file from disk C: to created disk from physical memory RAM ,from what I know RAM is faster than any SSD ,but what actually I gain from it for example in Games,can my textures load faster etc ?
here some videos from developers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLibusBEr_g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0amR2ruwNVo
in second video just skip everything except XFast RAM .

Now I have only 4gb of ram,I've tried it but games are crashing because of low RAM memory ,I don't want to waste my money on RAM but if someone could confirm about performance gain then I will buy more RAM .
a b V Motherboard
a b G Storage
September 4, 2012 4:56:14 PM

These kinds of ideas surface every now and then, and they are completely without merit. All it takes is a few seconds of thought to start questioning it. The swap/page file is used when physical RAM, and the idea is that the HDD is an effectively inexhaustible supply of temporary storage (when HDDs are now almost all in the hundreds of GB, and RAM is still barely cracking double digit GB) compared to RAM.

So what would you have to gain by carving out a chunk of physical RAM to use for the swap file? Wouldn't you be better off just having that RAM in the primary pool so that there would be less need for swap space in the first place?

Another way to look at it would be the difference between a video card with its own dedicated memory compared to one that allocates some of the main system RAM for its purposes. Which would you buy?
September 4, 2012 5:29:24 PM

cl-scott said:
These kinds of ideas surface every now and then, and they are completely without merit. All it takes is a few seconds of thought to start questioning it. The swap/page file is used when physical RAM, and the idea is that the HDD is an effectively inexhaustible supply of temporary storage (when HDDs are now almost all in the hundreds of GB, and RAM is still barely cracking double digit GB) compared to RAM.

So what would you have to gain by carving out a chunk of physical RAM to use for the swap file? Wouldn't you be better off just having that RAM in the primary pool so that there would be less need for swap space in the first place?

Another way to look at it would be the difference between a video card with its own dedicated memory compared to one that allocates some of the main system RAM for its purposes. Which would you buy?
I'm not very good on understanding how Paging works ,so you're saying that using Paging in Physical memory is useless ? and why ASRock developed this function if there is no benefits ? I heard something that Windows 32bit versions can take advantage of this because they can't use more than 4gb .
Related resources
September 4, 2012 5:37:02 PM

If your system was to run out of ram and paging wasn't available it would simply crash. Paging was designed so that should a system be low on memory, it could swap some of the data in memory to a file on the hard disk. The system could then load the program/files it needed into memory and continue operation. When the program in question is shut down or no longer needed, the paging file could then be written back into ram and eventually out to disk.

With computers normally coming with 8-16 gigs of ram these days, it is less and less likely that you'll need paging files but it is always important to have it. I have a story for you, I have a 40tb file server at work running linux with the XFS filesystem on it. A bug in the 3ware 9650se series raid controller's older firmware release has been known to cause corruption. I eventually became a victim of this, any-who long story short, i had to do a filesystem check and repair after I updated to the new firmware.

It took so much memory to run the filesystem check that I had to create a 90GB swap space (paging file) in order for it to complete.
September 4, 2012 5:40:00 PM

laimis911 said:
I'm not very good on understanding how Paging works ,so you're saying that using Paging in Physical memory is useless ? and why ASRock developed this function if there is no benefits ? I heard something that Windows 32bit versions can take advantage of this because they can't use more than 4gb .


Laimis, you're correct.

The only real use for moving the page file to a ram disk is if you're working in a 32-bit environment and have more than 4gb of ram.
That is, if you have a ram disk that is operating in addition to the 4gb of ram a 32 bit environment can access.

In a 64-bit environment, this practice is pointless because as cl-scott said, the only time you'd need the page file is when you ran out of physical ram, at which point you'd just be trying to use less effective vram on the already full physical ram.
a b V Motherboard
a b G Storage
September 4, 2012 5:41:14 PM

In a nutshell, yes, it is pointless. I'd have to look into it to be certain, but I'm highly dubious of the idea that a 32-bit OS could do this, because the OS would still need to be able to recognize that RAM is there. Granted Microsoft did something along these general lines back in the DOS days, and it plagued people for decades in the form of "System Resources". Originally DOS could only use 1MB of RAM, and then Microsoft created a system whereby the OS could use RAM beyond 1MB called himem.sys (which probably brings back memories for some people). So it's at least technically possible, but I'm dubious that anyone other than Microsoft could implement this, because it would likely require some extremely low level access to the core of the OS, and without the ability to modify and compile your own modified versions of key Windows files.... I won't say it's impossible, but I will say that it's highly improbable. Seems far more likely that's just how someone tried to justify it, or a comment based on an incomplete understanding of some of the technological underpinnings.

Either way... As for your other question... I am reminded of a quote from PT Barnum: There's a sucker born every minute. Which is to say that if someone will buy it, someone will make it. Doesn't matter one bit if whatever is being made has any actual utility.
September 4, 2012 6:07:36 PM

Thanks for the answers and explanations . Now I got it how Paging works :) 
September 4, 2012 6:08:39 PM

cl-scott said:
In a nutshell, yes, it is pointless. I'd have to look into it to be certain, but I'm highly dubious of the idea that a 32-bit OS could do this, because the OS would still need to be able to recognize that RAM is there. Granted Microsoft did something along these general lines back in the DOS days, and it plagued people for decades in the form of "System Resources". Originally DOS could only use 1MB of RAM, and then Microsoft created a system whereby the OS could use RAM beyond 1MB called himem.sys (which probably brings back memories for some people). So it's at least technically possible, but I'm dubious that anyone other than Microsoft could implement this, because it would likely require some extremely low level access to the core of the OS, and without the ability to modify and compile your own modified versions of key Windows files.... I won't say it's impossible, but I will say that it's highly improbable. Seems far more likely that's just how someone tried to justify it, or a comment based on an incomplete understanding of some of the technological underpinnings.

Either way... As for your other question... I am reminded of a quote from PT Barnum: There's a sucker born every minute. Which is to say that if someone will buy it, someone will make it. Doesn't matter one bit if whatever is being made has any actual utility.


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-memory-upgrade,...
a b G Storage
September 4, 2012 6:43:33 PM

Having enough RAM chip capacity is a big plus. I run an older system with XP on it with only 256mb memory (which is insufficient these days) & it's not enough to multi-task with. With XP i average about 450MB of RAM usage. It's always a good idea when checking out a new computer how much memory it has and how much it can be upgraded to. I have a laptop with only 1GB of RAM that has Win7 on it & again it's not enough to multi-task without it using the page file. I have a 3GB RAM system that i can watch movies while checking the internet flawlessly.

My newest build has 8GB (upgradable to 16GB) and even with that i still have a page file with a minimum of 6GB in case i ever run into memory problems. I would rather have a bit of a slow down rather then system instabilities.
!