May 1, 2008 5:24 PM PDT

Quick Fix: Put your paging file to work

The all-singing, all-dancing embodiment of frustration is when my computer acts sluggish for no good reason. I know I've got plenty of RAM and a decent processor, so why won't the blasted contraption do as it's told? RAM boosting programs just never seem to work as well as they should, and so a few weeks ago I began digging into other possible sources of those embarrassing and annoying computus interruptus moments.

One possible solution is to manually adjust your virtual memory, stored in a paging file.

Make sure that your paging file Initial Size and Maximum Size are set to the same number to avoid serious defragmentation.

(Credit: CNET Networks)

Why do this? Isn't your onboard RAM enough? Well, don't take this the wrong way, but no. When your computer starts using large chunks of RAM, it looks to the paging file--also known as the swap file--for a vigorous back rub and comforting words of encouragement: in other words, the paging file offers relief. However, if the paging file isn't large enough, you'll start to see even basic processes take much longer than they should.

Getting your paging file into shape is a simple operation, if you're confident delving into submenus and manually making adjustments. In Windows XP, open your My Computer Properties, then under the Advanced tab click on Performance Settings, hit the Advanced tab in the new window, and click on Virtual Memory Change. The paging file should be set to at least 1.5 times the amount of RAM onboard. Many experts caution against any smaller than that. Set both the Initial Size and Maximum Size to the same level. By doing this, you prevent the paging file from growing incrementally and adding to disk fragmentation.

Vista users face a similar procedure. From the Start menu, hit the Computer button on the right, and then right-click on your C drive and choose System. From there, click on Advanced System Settings and under the Advanced tab, choose Performance Settings. Choose the Advanced tab in the window that opens and Change Virtual Memory. Vista users should follow the same guidelines as those with XP machines: keep the Initial Size and Maximum Size the same, but no less than one and a half times the amount of RAM you've got.

Aside from making sure that you fragment early and often, you should see a drastic reduction in your computer's sluggishness. Of course, if your computer hasn't been sluggish in the first place, you're not likely to notice much of anything.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) 13 comments (Page 1 of 2)
by Leria May 1, 2008 5:49 PM PDT
This is actually the exact OPPOSITE of what you should do. Actually, the best thing you could do is to MAX OUT your desktop or computers memory to 4GB's, and DISABLE the paging file. I did that on my parent's HP Media Center PC while it was still on XP, and the difference in speed was ASTOUNDING. It was even MORE astounding when Vista re-enabled the swap file, and I disabled it once again..... I got nearly twice the speed back out of my machine. People, simply put: if your machine has less than 4GB of memory in it..... UPGRADE THE MEMORY! Seriously, it costs anywhere from 60 to 120 dollars to fully expand a motherboard's memory, as long as your motherboard isn't using DDR3 memory (the newest standard). Not a big expense, even for the poor out there who can afford to have a computer.
Reply to this comment
by pongad May 1, 2008 7:17 PM PDT
@ Leria, It depends on how much RAM you have in the first place. If you only have 1GB RAM then setting the PF to 1.5GB shouldn't hurt, since Windows would probably need somewhere to store the files aside from the RAM. The best way to increase performance, like you said, is to upgrade the RAM, but for those who don't want to spend money, optimizing the PF is probably the best method. Note that I said "OPTIMIZING" not "INCREASING", if you have 2 GB of RAM, I think you'd need less than 3GB of PF, if you have 4GB of RAM, having no PF should actually increase the performance. Unless you are running a very RAM intensive program that is.
Reply to this comment
by mhinnewyork May 1, 2008 9:31 PM PDT
I disagreed with much of this posting too. See http://www.cnet.com/8301-13554_1-9933994-33.html Michael Horowitz
Reply to this comment
by davesfreedom May 2, 2008 12:10 AM PDT
I Found a New Quirk About The Pageing File Kanundrum , In The Performance Options Of MyComputer It Gives a Recomended Start Size But If Your Hard Drive Is More Than 1 Disk Like Mine , Its 4 Disks Side By Side You Shoud Times the Initial Size By X 4 or Youll Be Trying Atleast a Dozen Times Or So Rebooting Till You Figure This Out !
Reply to this comment
by tashfeen_m May 2, 2008 9:14 AM PDT
"RAM boosting programs just never seem to work as well as they should"... I think you should read this article: http://techqi.blogspot.com/2008/04/really-useful-stuff-rambooster-2.html I can't really come to a firm opinion on disabling the paging file completely, because both methods -- having a fixed paging file and not having a paging file at all -- has worked for me. Other reasons that could make your computer slowdown include viruses and RAM-hogging antiviruses (see http://avscan.blogspot.com), and junk files and redundant registry entries (see http://techqi.blogspot.com/2008/01/miscellaneous-security-software-part-1.html). I'm surprised these issues weren't mentioned at all; they ought to be in any discussion covering Windows performance tweaking. The maximum amount of RAM supported by XP is 4GB, as far as I recall. In the past I've erroneously pitched up my page file to 4GB (which was then within the 1.5 times limit), but I barely noticed any difference since when the paging file size was fixed at 3GB or so.
Reply to this comment
by tashfeen_m May 2, 2008 9:17 AM PDT
"RAM boosting programs just never seem to work as well as they should"... I think you should read this article: http://techqi.blogspot.com/2008/04/really-useful-stuff-rambooster-2.html I can't really come to a firm opinion on disabling the paging file completely, because both methods -- having a fixed paging file and not having a paging file at all -- has worked for me. Other reasons that could make your computer slowdown include viruses and RAM-hogging antiviruses (see http://avscan.blogspot.com), and junk files and redundant registry entries (see http://techqi.blogspot.com/2008/01/miscellaneous-security-software-part-1.html). I'm surprised these issues weren't mentioned at all; they ought to be in any discussion covering Windows performance tweaking. The maximum amount of RAM supported by XP is 4GB, as far as I recall. In the past I've erroneously pitched up my page file to 4GB (which was then within the 1.5 times limit), but I barely noticed any difference since when the paging file size was fixed at 3GB or so. PS: sorry for any double postings, but I'm having some server issues here.
Reply to this comment
by AntiOront May 2, 2008 11:11 AM PDT
I wonder at all the above posts, this is a simple matter, you go to Performance & Maintenance in XP, then go to System, then Advanced. Therein, you have the option of setting your page file,. Now, none of the above posts indicate they have any idea of what they are posting. Tasheen_m, whilst you are quite correct re the max amount of ram, you forget buddy, when the apps are writing to cache rather than disk, it saves wear & tear on your HD, system runs cooler, and if you have set it properly, frequently used apps run that much quicker.
Reply to this comment
by sallygray May 2, 2008 8:23 PM PDT
d
Reply to this comment
by BrianAbbott67 May 2, 2008 9:49 PM PDT
Okay so I gave it a shot on my old system, Asus A8V, 2.4Ghz OC to 2.6Ghz, 4GB RAM, XP x64, 2xWD RE1600 in RAID 0, paging file off, and my results are very satisfying. First I decided to run Process Explorer and monitor the memory usage. Windows really manages the RAM quite well with one app open, two apps, even several large apps open at one time including the follwoing: Dreamweaver CS3 FireFox 3.0b5 Adobe LiveCycle 8 Word 2003 Excel 2003 Avast Professional Window Blinds6.x Version Tracker Pro Windows Desktop Search Cacheman (a must have folks, get this it makes a big difference!!!) First thing I noticed is no grinding and churning, I like the WD Raid Edition hard drives a lot, I use them a lot a work but they are very loud. My computer hums and all I hear are then fans and no HD activity. Next the RAM stays between 1.1 and 1.4 GB remaining at all times with one app open or many apps open, the speed is amazing and all I can say is max your RAM, run Cacheman, turn off the page file, and if you don't mind having no fault tolerance then run a two drive RAID 0. My five year old workstation is simply more responsive and more of a pleasure to use than my much newer AM2 X2 dual 4.6Ghz machine at work -- this old tank is quicker (not faster but quicker).
Reply to this comment
by gachevsky May 3, 2008 8:54 AM PDT
Would there be any benefit to putting the pagefile on a different volume?
Reply to this comment View reply
1 | 2 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
On TechRepublic: Top 5 operating systems you never used
Visit other CNET Networks sites: