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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"98 Guy" wrote in message ... "Richard G. Harper" wrote: The default Windows settings, unless you experience problems. I find it hard to believe that the default settings are the most efficient when you have 256 or 512 mb ram. I say this because when 98 came out, the typical pc had 16mb of ram and 32 or 64 mb of ram was seen as the outer limits. So my perception is that given 10 to 20 times the amount of ram, there must be optimizations that can be made over the default settings. Here are some very informative and useful links: These are from a post by Jim Eschelman: " I have a series of optimization articles that might be a good start. May I recommend these? Computer Health http://aumha.org/win4/a/health.htm Win98 & Win ME Memory Management http://aumha.org/win4/a/memmgmt.htm Startup Program Loading http://aumha.org/win4/a/loads.htm Partition Planning http://aumha.org/win4/a/parts.htm Do You Have Parasites? http://aumha.org/a/noads.htm System Resources FAQ http://aumha.org/win4/a/resource.htm -- Jim Eshelman MS-MVP, Windows Shell/User http://aumha.org/ http://WinSupportCenter.com/ " I hope these links help clear things up for you. Buffalo |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Because some programs will not run without a swap file. There is no need to
tinker with it--there is no performance hit unless actual paging occurs and for most users with 512 mb, the swap file will not be used even though it exists. The performance tweaks that have existed for years are really somewhat useless as they were developed when computers were under powered (ram and CPU). There are some tweaks required when 768 mb or more of ram is being used. Here's some info on ram you might find helpful: 768 mb or more of ram: "Out of Memory" Errors with Large Amounts of RAM Installed 253912 http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=253912 This article contains instructions which basically say: add this line in system.ini, under [vcache]: MaxFileCache=512000 *************************** 1 gb or more of ram: Error Message: Insufficient Memory to Initialize Windows 184447 http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=184447 *************************** 1.5 gb or more of ram: Computer May Reboot Continuously with More Than 1.5 GB of RAM 304943 http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=304943 -- Regards Ron Badour, MS MVP for W98 Tips: http://home.satx.rr.com/badour Knowledge Base Info: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=kbinfo "98 Guy" wrote in message ... 98 Guy wrote: I say this because when 98 came out, the typical pc had 16mb of ram and 32 or 64 mb of ram was seen as the outer limits. So my perception is that given 10 to 20 times the amount of ram, there must be optimizations that can be made over the default settings. For example, if I have 512 mb of ram, why do I want *ANY* swap file? Don't I instead want to increase my vcache size? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Buffalo wrote:
1) In your System.ini file put in MaxFileCache= 70% of physical ram under the [vcache] header. ie: 256MB x 70% = 179200 so MaxFileCache=179200 ie: 512MB x 70% = 469763 so MaxFileCache=469763 Vcache - this is a hard drive virtual cache - right? Which means data that is written to or read from the drive is cached transiently by Vcache. Tell me - is the single largest cache-able item the swap file? If you were limited to caching only 1 item - would the swap file be it? What is the purpose of the swap file anyways? Is the swap file the place where virtual memory is stored? If so, then if I have 512 mb of ram, why on earth do I STILL want virtual memory? Don't I have enough freeking REAL memory? And if I DON'T need or want virtual memory, then I don't have so much hammering of the Vcache because (presumably) there is NO swap file (?!). Again, back in the "old days" when I might have had a PC with 32 mb of ram (maybe 4 of that used by vcache?) and maybe 128 mb virtual memory (all of which is stored _AS_ the swap file - yes?) then, what - I theoretically have a PC with 32+128=160 mb of memory? So now if I have 512 mb of REAL memory, then why on earth do I still need virtual memory (and the swap file that goes with it) ??? Wouldn't win-98 run faster if it didn't have to manage virtual memory and the swap file??? The other items you mentioned are not even modified unless you run pure DOS games or pure DOS programs. Windows98 does not need an AutoExec.bat or Config.sys file to run Windows. But doesn't win-98 still load (or need) himem.sys even if you don't have an actual config.sys? What about emm386? My current emm386 line is: DEVICE=C:\WIN98\EMM386.exe NOEMS D=64 A=15 VERBOSE Are you saying that EMM386 is irrelavent to the operation of Windows 98, regardless of the command-line options used? PS: What about the use of WinAlign to "align" all executable code (microsoft and non-microsoft) that can be aligned safely as a way to increase performance? I don't hear too much about that. Is there a master list of third-party software that has been shown to be "align-able"? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Max performace settings (swap/cache) with 256/512 mb ram?
Buffalo wrote:
1) In your System.ini file put in MaxFileCache= 70% of physical ram under the [vcache] header. ie: 256MB x 70% = 179200 so MaxFileCache=179200 ie: 512MB x 70% = 469763 so MaxFileCache=469763 Vcache - this is a hard drive virtual cache - right? Which means data that is written to or read from the drive is cached transiently by Vcache. Tell me - is the single largest cache-able item the swap file? If you were limited to caching only 1 item - would the swap file be it? What is the purpose of the swap file anyways? Is the swap file the place where virtual memory is stored? If so, then if I have 512 mb of ram, why on earth do I STILL want virtual memory? Don't I have enough freeking REAL memory? And if I DON'T need or want virtual memory, then I don't have so much hammering of the Vcache because (presumably) there is NO swap file (?!). Again, back in the "old days" when I might have had a PC with 32 mb of ram (maybe 4 of that used by vcache?) and maybe 128 mb virtual memory (all of which is stored _AS_ the swap file - yes?) then, what - I theoretically have a PC with 32+128=160 mb of memory? So now if I have 512 mb of REAL memory, then why on earth do I still need virtual memory (and the swap file that goes with it) ??? Wouldn't win-98 run faster if it didn't have to manage virtual memory and the swap file??? The other items you mentioned are not even modified unless you run pure DOS games or pure DOS programs. Windows98 does not need an AutoExec.bat or Config.sys file to run Windows. But doesn't win-98 still load (or need) himem.sys even if you don't have an actual config.sys? What about emm386? My current emm386 line is: DEVICE=C:\WIN98\EMM386.exe NOEMS D=64 A=15 VERBOSE Are you saying that EMM386 is irrelavent to the operation of Windows 98, regardless of the command-line options used? PS: What about the use of WinAlign to "align" all executable code (microsoft and non-microsoft) that can be aligned safely as a way to increase performance? I don't hear too much about that. Is there a master list of third-party software that has been shown to be "align-able"? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 01:37:58 -0400 There I was minding my own business
and then 98 Guy wrote : What are the optimal swap and cache settings given a pc with either 256 or 215 mb ram with a Celeron 2.6 Ghz CPU? What about other stuff like himem.sys, emm386 (and it's various settings), smartdrv, buffers=, files=, etc? Click here, http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/easy.html HTH -- Free Windows/PC help, http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html remove obvious to reply Free original songs to download and,"BURN" :O) http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Anorack Ted" wrote:
Check out :- http://www.outertech.com/index.php?_charisma_page=index Cacheman is pure unadulterated crapware that is totally incapable of performing any beneficial function 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." |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Max performace settings (swap/cache) with 256/512 mb ram?
"Anorack Ted" wrote:
Check out :- http://www.outertech.com/index.php?_charisma_page=index Cacheman is pure unadulterated crapware that is totally incapable of performing any beneficial function 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." |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Windows uses a virtual memory system that adjusts to the amount of memory
present and the use of the system. When more memory is available it will use it in preference to the swapfile/pagefile. It will cache more data from the hard drive (VCACHE) to speed hard drive performance. But if you load a large program or a large data set, Windows will re-allocate memory from VCACHE to the system pool, and if necessary, use swapfile/pagefile to expand physical memory. All this is done automatically, and works best if left alone. -- Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to. * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/ * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "98 Guy" wrote in message ... "Richard G. Harper" wrote: The default Windows settings, unless you experience problems. I find it hard to believe that the default settings are the most efficient when you have 256 or 512 mb ram. I say this because when 98 came out, the typical pc had 16mb of ram and 32 or 64 mb of ram was seen as the outer limits. So my perception is that given 10 to 20 times the amount of ram, there must be optimizations that can be made over the default settings. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Max performace settings (swap/cache) with 256/512 mb ram?
Windows uses a virtual memory system that adjusts to the amount of memory
present and the use of the system. When more memory is available it will use it in preference to the swapfile/pagefile. It will cache more data from the hard drive (VCACHE) to speed hard drive performance. But if you load a large program or a large data set, Windows will re-allocate memory from VCACHE to the system pool, and if necessary, use swapfile/pagefile to expand physical memory. All this is done automatically, and works best if left alone. -- Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] * PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups * for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to. * My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/ * HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm "98 Guy" wrote in message ... "Richard G. Harper" wrote: The default Windows settings, unless you experience problems. I find it hard to believe that the default settings are the most efficient when you have 256 or 512 mb ram. I say this because when 98 came out, the typical pc had 16mb of ram and 32 or 64 mb of ram was seen as the outer limits. So my perception is that given 10 to 20 times the amount of ram, there must be optimizations that can be made over the default settings. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Hi 98 Guy,
Ron Martell MS-MVP has an article that will answer most of you questions concerning memory management. http://onlinehelp.bc.ca/tips.htm#virtual -- Regards, Bert Kinney [MS-MVP DTS] http://dts-l.org/ How to Configure Outlook Express for Internet News: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=171164 "98 Guy" wrote Buffalo wrote: 1) In your System.ini file put in MaxFileCache= 70% of physical ram under the [vcache] header. ie: 256MB x 70% = 179200 so MaxFileCache=179200 ie: 512MB x 70% = 469763 so MaxFileCache=469763 Vcache - this is a hard drive virtual cache - right? Which means data that is written to or read from the drive is cached transiently by Vcache. Tell me - is the single largest cache-able item the swap file? If you were limited to caching only 1 item - would the swap file be it? What is the purpose of the swap file anyways? Is the swap file the place where virtual memory is stored? If so, then if I have 512 mb of ram, why on earth do I STILL want virtual memory? Don't I have enough freeking REAL memory? And if I DON'T need or want virtual memory, then I don't have so much hammering of the Vcache because (presumably) there is NO swap file (?!). Again, back in the "old days" when I might have had a PC with 32 mb of ram (maybe 4 of that used by vcache?) and maybe 128 mb virtual memory (all of which is stored _AS_ the swap file - yes?) then, what - I theoretically have a PC with 32+128=160 mb of memory? So now if I have 512 mb of REAL memory, then why on earth do I still need virtual memory (and the swap file that goes with it) ??? Wouldn't win-98 run faster if it didn't have to manage virtual memory and the swap file??? The other items you mentioned are not even modified unless you run pure DOS games or pure DOS programs. Windows98 does not need an AutoExec.bat or Config.sys file to run Windows. But doesn't win-98 still load (or need) himem.sys even if you don't have an actual config.sys? What about emm386? My current emm386 line is: DEVICE=C:\WIN98\EMM386.exe NOEMS D=64 A=15 VERBOSE Are you saying that EMM386 is irrelavent to the operation of Windows 98, regardless of the command-line options used? PS: What about the use of WinAlign to "align" all executable code (microsoft and non-microsoft) that can be aligned safely as a way to increase performance? I don't hear too much about that. Is there a master list of third-party software that has been shown to be "align-able"? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Money 99 and Regional Settings problem | David | General | 0 | October 5th 04 02:41 PM |
Importing (some) settings from 98 to fresh install of 98SE | Michele Dondi | General | 11 | July 24th 04 08:42 PM |
Importing (some) settings from 98 to fresh install of 98SE | Michele Dondi | Setup & Installation | 11 | July 24th 04 08:42 PM |
lan settings | joe | Networking | 1 | June 25th 04 10:50 AM |
Put Documents and Settings on D partition? | Clark G | General | 1 | June 11th 04 06:01 AM |