Windows 7: SSD and paging file(s).

So many different "recommendations" - which is best and why

1) Keep page file on C: drive system managed
2) Keep page file on C: fixed small size if you have lots of ram
3) Move page file to another drive, system sized
4) Set 2nd system managed page file on a second drive, small page file on C: drive
5) Keep 2 equal sized page files on two drives

And would this change if both the C: and Aux drive were both SSD's

So many options

I prefer one pagefile and I allow the system to manage it...so since I have 8GB of RAM, it's an 8GB file. I'm not willing to give up 8GB on my SSD drive to a pagefile...so I put the pagefile on my secondary spinner drive.

Hi Pparks1 - I Wonder is there's any way to empirically check the change in performance - in any event you've definitely gained disk space on your SSD !!!!!? - That's got to count as a Plus.
Then there are those that suggest that the page file could become fragmented - wonder if that's less likely to happen if the page file is on a second drive ???? I remember a long time ago (in XP) my page file got fragmented - I could see it in Diskeeper.

I move the PF off the Main OS SSD as well.

I do a bit different however.

I leave a very small PF on the OS drive, at 500MB fxed.
On my secondary drive I put the main PF.

My secondary happens to be a SSD as well, but I managed the PF the same way way, even before the 2nd SSD.


IMHO, moving the PF off smaller SSDs is just fine.
Just do not disable entirely to save space.

I doubt you'll tell any difference the overall performance,provided you arent short on RAM, whether the PF is on a spinning drive or SSD.

Windows doesn't access it that often anyway.

I'd say performance gains are non-quantifiable. My box very, very, very rarely ever hits the page file.


Don't see any reason why the page file would become more or less fragmented if placed on a secondary drive.