If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
Hi, i have 128MB on my PC, which says alot of when it was
purchased!! Only recently i have installed a meter, which measures CPU usuage and displays memory information. I noticed just by switching on my pc, and running the meter that about 70% of my memory is already gone. Within about 10-15 mins, i only have about 5-10% of my RAM left. This may explain why my pc freezes now and then. is this true? I do understand the best way to solve this is to install more RAM (hoping to buy a new PC in 6 months). Is there anything that i can do to maintain more RAM - instead of alot of it being used during the start up process. please advise regards iqbal. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
"Iqbal" wrote:
Hi, i have 128MB on my PC, which says alot of when it was purchased!! Only recently i have installed a meter, which measures CPU usuage and displays memory information. I noticed just by switching on my pc, and running the meter that about 70% of my memory is already gone. Within about 10-15 mins, i only have about 5-10% of my RAM left. This may explain why my pc freezes now and then. is this true? I do understand the best way to solve this is to install more RAM (hoping to buy a new PC in 6 months). Is there anything that i can do to maintain more RAM - instead of alot of it being used during the start up process. Adding more memory can noticeably improve performance only if the added memory results in reduced usage of the virtual memory swap file. Therefore if the swap file is not currently being used to any significant extent then adding more memory will not provide a significant improvement. Before installing more RAM use the System Monitor utility that comes with Windows and use Edit - Add to set it to track "Memory manager: Swap file in use" for several days of normal to heavy usage. If "Swap file in use" regularly shows as 20 mb or more then the swap file is being used extensively and more memory would result in improved performance. This applies regardless of how much or how little RAM is currently installed in the computer. Also please note that Windows will always endeavor to find some use, anything that might potentially be of some benefit rather than just leaving the RAM sitting there doing nothing. And just as soon as some better use comes along for any of that RAM then Windows will instantaneously drop the more trivial usages so as to free up whatever is now required. So just the fact that most or all of the RAM is actually doing something is not in itself an indication that there is any problem. It is only when Windows is forced to move active memory content from RAM to the swap file so at to allow that RAM to be used for other, currently more important, purposes that there is a problem. And the "swap file in use" value reported by Windows System Monitor will show you this. Other reporting utilities use a different definition for "swap file in use" and their results may not be valid for assessing the potential impact of a RAM upgrade. Hope this explains the situation. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 14:21:32 -0700, "Iqbal"
wrote: Hi, i have 128MB on my PC, which says alot of when it was purchased!! Only recently i have installed a meter, which measures CPU usuage and displays memory information. I noticed just by switching on my pc, and running the meter that about 70% of my memory is already gone. Within about 10-15 mins, i only have about 5-10% of my RAM left. This may explain why my pc freezes now and then. is this true? I do understand the best way to solve this is to install more RAM (hoping to buy a new PC in 6 months). Is there anything that i can do to maintain more RAM - instead of alot of it being used during the start up process. please advise regards iqbal. While more RAM can decrease accessing of the swap file, too little will limit the ability to multi-task w/out crashing. If am am doing alot of tasks and decide to start MSWorks 7.0, I may get a not enough memory (that's with 380MB of memory), so I end up either defragging the memory with Mem Turbo and/or close applications not being used at tat second. Just because you may have an OS that can multi-task, doesn't mean you should. -- Sincerely, | (©) (©) | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------ Andrew H. Carter | /// \\\ d(-_-)b | |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
"Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)"
wrote: While more RAM can decrease accessing of the swap file, too little will limit the ability to multi-task w/out crashing. If am am doing alot of tasks and decide to start MSWorks 7.0, I may get a not enough memory (that's with 380MB of memory), so I end up either defragging the memory with Mem Turbo and/or close applications not being used at tat second. MemTurbo is pure unadulterated crapware that is totally incapable of providing any beneficial results for any computer under any circumstances. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:23:40 GMT, Ron Martell
wrote: "Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)" wrote: While more RAM can decrease accessing of the swap file, too little will limit the ability to multi-task w/out crashing. If am am doing alot of tasks and decide to start MSWorks 7.0, I may get a not enough memory (that's with 380MB of memory), so I end up either defragging the memory with Mem Turbo and/or close applications not being used at tat second. MemTurbo is pure unadulterated crapware that is totally incapable of providing any beneficial results for any computer under any circumstances. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada Well, it might depend upon one's software environment and the version. I didn't like version 3.0, so I went back to 2.2 Not all computers are the same, nor burners. What works for one may not work for another. Why is it that I made coasters of about a dozen CDs when I was endeavouring to burn an audio CD of some MP3s on my USB HP cdWriter ? Sure it would burn a couple of tracks, but that's it. The reason was that I had it set to no maximum speed, but when I changed the speed to 1x, I had no problem. Next occasion, I might try 2x. If RAM wasn't important then why do proggies state a minimum? With MSWorks 7.0 one time with about 50% system resources +/- I endeavoured to start it only to be given an insufficient memory message. So I closed out all my apps, then tried it again, still got the insufficient memory message. Then I defragged my memory and was able to run MSWorks. Dure didn't have those problems with 4.5a. -- Sincerely, | (©) (©) | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------ Andrew H. Carter | /// \\\ d(-_-)b | |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
"Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)"
wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:23:40 GMT, Ron Martell Well, it might depend upon one's software environment and the version. I didn't like version 3.0, so I went back to 2.2 Not all computers are the same, nor burners. What works for one may not work for another. Why is it that I made coasters of about a dozen CDs when I was endeavouring to burn an audio CD of some MP3s on my USB HP cdWriter ? Sure it would burn a couple of tracks, but that's it. The reason was that I had it set to no maximum speed, but when I changed the speed to 1x, I had no problem. Next occasion, I might try 2x. If RAM wasn't important then why do proggies state a minimum? With MSWorks 7.0 one time with about 50% system resources +/- I endeavoured to start it only to be given an insufficient memory message. So I closed out all my apps, then tried it again, still got the insufficient memory message. Then I defragged my memory and was able to run MSWorks. Dure didn't have those problems with 4.5a. MemTurbo and all other programs of similar ilk are pure unadulterated crapware. They are based on a totally false premise and can only hurt, never help, the performance of a computer. See http://www.radsoft.net/resources/sof...reviews/redux/ for a more extensive technical discussion of this topic. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:18:38 GMT, Ron Martell
wrote: "Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)" wrote: On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:23:40 GMT, Ron Martell Well, it might depend upon one's software environment and the version. I didn't like version 3.0, so I went back to 2.2 Not all computers are the same, nor burners. What works for one may not work for another. Why is it that I made coasters of about a dozen CDs when I was endeavouring to burn an audio CD of some MP3s on my USB HP cdWriter ? Sure it would burn a couple of tracks, but that's it. The reason was that I had it set to no maximum speed, but when I changed the speed to 1x, I had no problem. Next occasion, I might try 2x. If RAM wasn't important then why do proggies state a minimum? With MSWorks 7.0 one time with about 50% system resources +/- I endeavoured to start it only to be given an insufficient memory message. So I closed out all my apps, then tried it again, still got the insufficient memory message. Then I defragged my memory and was able to run MSWorks. Dure didn't have those problems with 4.5a. MemTurbo and all other programs of similar ilk are pure unadulterated crapware. They are based on a totally false premise and can only hurt, never help, the performance of a computer. See http://www.radsoft.net/resources/sof...reviews/redux/ for a more extensive technical discussion of this topic. Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada So what you are saying is that I am not freeing up memory when I defrag and free up the memory? Funny how after I defrag and/or scrub my memory, but it and my Taskbar clock TclockEx report the same amount of RAM. So it must work. *************** Frequently Asked Questions Here we answer some frequently asked questions from MemTurbo users. If you don't see the answer to your question here, please take a look at the more comprehensive online version of the FAQ. What does MemTurbo do? MemTurbo manages system memory, the paging file, and the way in which virtual memory is treated in order to maximize performance. It recovers RAM not currently needed by the operating system and applications, and recovers memory leaked by applications. It also can temporarily flush unused DLLs and libraries out to disk to make room for your big applications and games (these come back transparently when needed). On Windows9X, it also adjusts the system caching in order to better target the way you use your particular machine. This can improve disk performance, gaming performance, and can prevent buffer under-runs that interfere with, for example, burning CDs. I'm not a Technical person... save the geek-speak and just tell me how to use it effectively! Sure! Let it start from your Startup group so that it is running at all times. After exiting a memory-hungry program or before launching a new one, press the hotkey (CTRL-ALT-M) to recover and defragment your RAM. In a matter of seconds your system should have that "just booted" feel! How do I stop a RAM recovery in progress? When a RAM recovery is in progress, as indicated by the on-screen status display, just press escape. If a background recovery (triggered by your timer or a memory alarm level) is running, clicking on the MemTurbo tray icon will abort the recovery. Sometimes my system seems slower after recovering RAM... why? If you have your "Target" level of RAM to recover set too high, MemTurbo may reclaim memory from the file cache, or flush system DLLs (such as the shell and OLE) out of memory. When you flip to an application that needs these, they must be paged back in. Try setting your Target level to a lower level. Note that for games that do not use much of the operating system, a higher Target level is better, since more memory will be available to the game. Remember that too much free RAM is as good as RAM in your desk drawer: nice to own but unused! A good compromise takes a while to discover, but that's why we give you the control to adjust it! Can MemTurbo make my system unstable? No. If anything, because it increases the amount of memory available to applications, your system should become more stable. It installs no VxDs or drivers and does not modify your system files in any way. Does MemTurbo compress memory? Absolutely not; there is no performance-robbing compression at all. It simply causes what physical RAM you have to be used in a more efficient manner, and allows you to reclaim that memory from applications and the operating system when you need it most. Why does MemTurbo not always recover up to the Target setting? Because if you set the target too high, you've set an impossible goal! MemTurbo will recover as much RAM as possible, and can usually get up to your target level (though the higher the level, the more work MemTurbo must do, and hence the longer it will take). Note that on Windows NT, the kernel manages the memory in such a way that as soon as memory is recovered, it is used by waiting applications and the operating system, so the displayed value may never equal the target level. It's still doing its job, though, even if not apparent! Why can "Program X" seemingly recover more RAM than MemTurbo? MemTurbo tries to be pragmatic about its memory recovery. It doesn't just arbitrarily toss things out of memory to meet your goal if that means dumping code and data you really should keep in memory, like parts of the kernel and so forth. While it would be possible to recover more memory at times (and early betas of MemTurbo did so), it proved detrimental to performance, so we strove to keep the heuristics on how to recover more conservative. Why do I get "Low Virtual Memory" pop-ups under Windows NT? Your page file size is too small for proper performance. Take the system's advice, and increase your paging file size in your system properties. Can MemTurbo really recover memory leaks? While it cannot recover them from the address space (the application would fault if it did indeed try to use that memory at some point) it can recover the physical RAM leaked, making it available for use by the operating system and other applications. What is the Memory Load Index? This is a statistic provided by the system that serves as a general measurement of how much demand for RAM there currently is in your system, with 0 being very little and 100 being very much. If you find your system pegged to 100% shortly after startup, you should seriously consider adding more physical memory to your system (even MemTurbo won't be enough by itself in this case). Can MemTurbo improve gaming performance? Yes. Let's say you start a game, and part way in, it suddenly demands memory for graphics, etc. Without MemTurbo, your system would visibly pause as other applications and parts of the operating system were page-faulted out to make room. If you "Defragment and Recover" before starting the game, MemTurbo should make a noticeable improvement. How does MemTurbo prevent buffer underruns while burning CDs? In the Windows9X registered version only, it adjusts the system file caching to ensure that enough cache is set aside so that the data you are burning to a CD is available, rather than having to fight with the CD on the I/O bus for the next block of data. *************** For a system that is bloatware and a resource hog, from what I gather XP is moreso than 98/98SE, why isn't such a good thing? Also why does XP require a faster processor and more RAM than 98/98SE ? At best, unless I upgrade my MOBO, I can only get WindowsME. You'll have to do better than mentioning that such a piece of software is bad. That's like saying fire is bad. It is bad if uncontrolled, it is also required in some cases as in a forest fire to release the seeds from the pine cones. Without fire, there would be many a cold meal. -- Sincerely, | (©) (©) | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------ Andrew H. Carter | /// \\\ d(-_-)b | |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
There's nothing magical about two utilities reporting the same amount of
free memory - I hope that they would. But the false premise is that freeing up memory serves some purpose. Free memory is unused, wasted, memory. Freeing up memory will not improve the performance of the machine, and may harm it, for instance if it involves disposing of cache data which then has to be re-read from disk next time it's needed. For a proper description of why MemTurbo (and its ilk) are useless, see: http://www.radsoft.net/resources/sof...reviews/redux/ It sounds biased initially, but if you persist you will see that each point is fully and logically argued, based on the actual source code used by these programs. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (DTS) "Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)" wrote in message ... snip So what you are saying is that I am not freeing up memory when I defrag and free up the memory? Funny how after I defrag and/or scrub my memory, but it and my Taskbar clock TclockEx report the same amount of RAM. So it must work. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:05:25 +1000, "Jeff Richards"
wrote: There's nothing magical about two utilities reporting the same amount of free memory - I hope that they would. But the false premise is that freeing up memory serves some purpose. Free memory is unused, wasted, memory. Freeing up memory will not improve the performance of the machine, and may harm it, for instance if it involves disposing of cache data which then has to be re-read from disk next time it's needed. For a proper description of why MemTurbo (and its ilk) are useless, see: http://www.radsoft.net/resources/sof...reviews/redux/ It sounds biased initially, but if you persist you will see that each point is fully and logically argued, based on the actual source code used by these programs. But I often, depending on my operations, get down to 1MB (actually a directory comparison the other day brought it down to 60KB). So the RAM isn't wasted, rather money well spent. -- Sincerely, | (©) (©) | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------ Andrew H. Carter | /// \\\ d(-_-)b | |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
RAM
"Andrew H. Carter (Applied ROT 17 Left, for Email do 17 Right)"
wrote: So what you are saying is that I am not freeing up memory when I defrag and free up the memory? Funny how after I defrag and/or scrub my memory, but it and my Taskbar clock TclockEx report the same amount of RAM. So it must work. You have totally misunderstood the basic concepts of memory management in Windows. Free memory is more appropriately described as *useless* memory because that is what it actually represents - memory for which Windows has so far been totally unable to find any potentially beneficial use for. *************** Frequently Asked Questions Here we answer some frequently asked questions from MemTurbo users. If you don't see the answer to your question here, please take a look at the more comprehensive online version of the FAQ. What does MemTurbo do? MemTurbo manages system memory, the paging file, and the way in which virtual memory is treated in order to maximize performance. It recovers RAM not currently needed by the operating system and applications, and recovers memory leaked by applications. It also can temporarily flush unused DLLs and libraries out to disk to make room for your big applications and games (these come back transparently when needed). And when they are needed it takes up to 1,000 times longer for Windows to reload these items from the hard drive than it would to access them if they had remained in RAM. That is the price of useless////free memory - slows things down tremendously. On Windows9X, it also adjusts the system caching in order to better target the way you use your particular machine. This can improve disk performance, gaming performance, and can prevent buffer under-runs that interfere with, for example, burning CDs. That is pure balderdash, with a touch of hogwash and a bit of malarkey thrown in. Note that they do not provide any timed benchmark reports to substantiate their claims. The windows disk cache requires no tweaks, except on systems with more than 512 mb of RAM, and that tweak is a one time entry that takes perhaps 15 seconds to do. I'm not a Technical person... save the geek-speak and just tell me how to use it effectively! Sure! Let it start from your Startup group so that it is running at all times. After exiting a memory-hungry program or before launching a new one, press the hotkey (CTRL-ALT-M) to recover and defragment your RAM. In a matter of seconds your system should have that "just booted" feel! RAM fragmentation is another snake-oil myth. RAM is always fragmented, because Windows puts things where it wants to and there is no way to control or prevent this. Furthermore RAM fragmentation has zero repeat zero impact on performance under any circumstances. All addresses in RAM are equally accessible within the RAM chip access time, and there is no difference in the time required to switch from an address at the beginning of RAM to one at the upper end compared to that required to switch between two adjacent addresses. None. Zero. How do I stop a RAM recovery in progress? When a RAM recovery is in progress, as indicated by the on-screen status display, just press escape. If a background recovery (triggered by your timer or a memory alarm level) is running, clicking on the MemTurbo tray icon will abort the recovery. MemTurbo should be permanently and totally aborted. :-) Sometimes my system seems slower after recovering RAM... why? If you have your "Target" level of RAM to recover set too high, MemTurbo may reclaim memory from the file cache, or flush system DLLs (such as the shell and OLE) out of memory. When you flip to an application that needs these, they must be paged back in. Try setting your Target level to a lower level. Note that for games that do not use much of the operating system, a higher Target level is better, since more memory will be available to the game. Remember that too much free RAM is as good as RAM in your desk drawer: nice to own but unused! A good compromise takes a while to discover, but that's why we give you the control to adjust it! There is no need to compromise. Period. Just let Windows handle the memory management and forget about these snake-oil products. Can MemTurbo make my system unstable? No. If anything, because it increases the amount of memory available to applications, your system should become more stable. It installs no VxDs or drivers and does not modify your system files in any way. It will make your system slower in use, and that is enough to condemn it to the dust bin. And available RAM has zero repeat zero effect on overall stability. Does MemTurbo compress memory? Absolutely not; there is no performance-robbing compression at all. It simply causes what physical RAM you have to be used in a more efficient manner, and allows you to reclaim that memory from applications and the operating system when you need it most. More effecient? Slowing down the computer is more efficient? Why does MemTurbo not always recover up to the Target setting? Because if you set the target too high, you've set an impossible goal! MemTurbo will recover as much RAM as possible, and can usually get up to your target level (though the higher the level, the more work MemTurbo must do, and hence the longer it will take). Note that on Windows NT, the kernel manages the memory in such a way that as soon as memory is recovered, it is used by waiting applications and the operating system, so the displayed value may never equal the target level. It's still doing its job, though, even if not apparent! The target should be to get rid of MemTurbo. Why can "Program X" seemingly recover more RAM than MemTurbo? MemTurbo tries to be pragmatic about its memory recovery. It doesn't just arbitrarily toss things out of memory to meet your goal if that means dumping code and data you really should keep in memory, like parts of the kernel and so forth. While it would be possible to recover more memory at times (and early betas of MemTurbo did so), it proved detrimental to performance, so we strove to keep the heuristics on how to recover more conservative. Why do I get "Low Virtual Memory" pop-ups under Windows NT? Your page file size is too small for proper performance. Take the system's advice, and increase your paging file size in your system properties. Especially because MemTurbo is forcing the system to move a lot of stuff unnecessarily to the page file so as to increase the supply of *useless* RAM. Can MemTurbo really recover memory leaks? While it cannot recover them from the address space (the application would fault if it did indeed try to use that memory at some point) it can recover the physical RAM leaked, making it available for use by the operating system and other applications. All it does is force active memory content out to the page file, thereby slowing the system down because that memory content needs to be paged back in again when it is needed. What is the Memory Load Index? This is a statistic provided by the system that serves as a general measurement of how much demand for RAM there currently is in your system, with 0 being very little and 100 being very much. If you find your system pegged to 100% shortly after startup, you should seriously consider adding more physical memory to your system (even MemTurbo won't be enough by itself in this case). Can MemTurbo improve gaming performance? Yes. Let's say you start a game, and part way in, it suddenly demands memory for graphics, etc. Without MemTurbo, your system would visibly pause as other applications and parts of the operating system were page-faulted out to make room. If you "Defragment and Recover" before starting the game, MemTurbo should make a noticeable improvement. How does MemTurbo prevent buffer underruns while burning CDs? In the Windows9X registered version only, it adjusts the system file caching to ensure that enough cache is set aside so that the data you are burning to a CD is available, rather than having to fight with the CD on the I/O bus for the next block of data. *************** For a system that is bloatware and a resource hog, from what I gather XP is moreso than 98/98SE, why isn't such a good thing? Because MemTurbo is based on a totally false premise regarding the value of *useless* RAM. Also why does XP require a faster processor and more RAM than 98/98SE ? At best, unless I upgrade my MOBO, I can only get WindowsME. Because it is a bigger operating system with improved capabilities over Windows Me. It is based on the Windows NT kernel rather than the Windows 9x kernel used in Windows 95/98/Me, and the NT based versions of Windows have always been larger and more demanding than the 9x based versions. Windows XP is designed to use the higher speed CPUs, larger memory modules, and larger hard drives that were generally available in 2001, and many of the features and functions included in Windows XP require this higher performance and increased capacity. My first copy of Norton Utilities would fit on a single 360K 5.25 inch diskette. Today it requries several hundred megabytes of space on a CDROM. It is called evolution, and we are still only half-way through inventing the PC. You'll have to do better than mentioning that such a piece of software is bad. That's like saying fire is bad. It is bad if uncontrolled, it is also required in some cases as in a forest fire to release the seeds from the pine cones. Without fire, there would be many a cold meal. Fire has many redeeming features. MemTurbo has none. Good luck Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada -- Microsoft MVP On-Line Help Computer Service http://onlinehelp.bc.ca "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|