How can you make that assumption? Do you know exactly how all the 1000s and 1000s of programs Windows supports uses or needs memory? I think not.A program as such never needs a page file.
"Need" does not matter anyway. What matters is how the program is coded, and more importantly how Windows manages it, AND all the other tasks and processes running.
It is very simple. You cannot tell Windows to allocate memory in the page file. That is how I know. You can request memory to always be in physical memory, but that is different.How can you make that assumption? Do you know exactly how all the 1000s and 1000s of programs Windows supports uses or needs memory? I think not.
"Need" does not matter anyway. What matters is how the program is coded, and more importantly how Windows manages it, AND all the other tasks and processes running.
Who cares?
Have you been following this thread?
14 SevenGurus have come in to this thread to say do not delete the page file, providing MANY links to reliable sources like BlackViper (who mentioned several major programs that require PFs), LifeHacker, Microsoft, Mark Russinovich, SSD makers, and more - all supporting the same position.
NOT ONE recognized expert in this thread, and apparently, across the Internet too, suggests disabling the Page File. NOT ONE!
You cannot step into the middle of bunch of experts and tell them they are all wrong without something to support your stand. You've provided nothing. I have been pleading since February in Post #50, and countless times since for some shred of evidence - a link to ANY source to support your position. And you haven't done it. Because you can't. There just is none.
Clearly, pallesenw, since you have now taken the ball and are arguing the point, I will ask for the umpteenth time, show us just one shred of empirical evidence from a reliable source that suggests disabling the PF provides any benefit.
If you cannot do that, then step up and admit it. Don't just keep saying you are right, because contrary to what seekermeister said in Post #56 there is a consensus among the SevenForums experts in this thread and across the Internet; there is no benefit to disabling the page file.
There may be some advantage to moving it, or making it a fixed size, but those are different issues.
A guru said in this thread:
"MS recommends... as do I...
Amount of Ram x 1.5 = Min
Amount of Ram x 3 = Max"
Lets use Mark Russinovich again. In one of his webcasts he actually mocks people that says that (including a Microsoft employee)
I was convinced from one of my colleagues that with mine 6GB ram I can afford to minimize the size of pagefile to 16mb. He said "mate, you will have no problems".
And he was right, for about 2 hours after change. Then I decided to play some games and guess what - the framerate has dropped, actually in almost every game I saw strange freezing for about 1 second in every ~15s. It was impossible to play normal. It took me about 20min. of checking everything just to realize that the culprit was pagefile.
So I rised it to 1GB - almost same sh**, but 3GB do the job. /these games are almost every nfs from nfshp2 till last one/
Whats the conclusion? Pagefile is needed. And its better to be hosted in hdd other than system for good performance.
Belgarionbg, there might be something else wrong... anyways, it doesn't change a bit about what I said. If your commit limit needs to be bigger then obviously you need to make the page file bigger (or install more physical ram).
I've used my Vista 64-bit with 4 GBs memory, Windows 7 now has 8 GBs memory, and both had/has the page file disabled. In both cases, the main purpose of the PC is web editing with Adobe Web Premium, MS Office 20xx, and playing games such as Black-Ops, BattleField, etc. Certainly, there are other "stuff" on my PC, but these are the main ones.
Not even with Vista, much less with Windows 7, did I notice any performance hit. Nor did I notice any frame rate drop, but then again; does it really matter even if it did, when your machine hits close to a 100? Especially, when it is an online game...
As such, while I understand the "experts" advise against disabling the page file, I don't see the need for it and in my case set to disabled.
Thank you pallesenw for seeing my point that users should experience themselves on whether or not they need a Pagefile with a huge amount of RAM.
I can tell you that Microsoft will eventually come up with such a way that Pagefile will no longer be needed as PC's come equipped with 8, 12 16 Gigs of Ram or more. Technology will get us to that point!
This is related to ONLY 64bit users...
"In general, performance concerns related to pagefile access are much more effectively dealt with by adding more physical memory"...
Paging - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The way I see it, the more Ram you have..and I mean more than 6 or 8GB on 64bit, the CHOICE is yours. You the Windows 7 or Vista user, have the freedom and the choice to disable Pagefile IF you can accurately determine that your system is NOT USING more than 80% or Ram. Love those words...Choice and Freedom to do so as you wish!
I did not! Don't go making stuff up or twist my words around.pallesenw said:I said "some", and other SevenGurus provided examples.
Oh? Got a link to support that wild claim?medeiom said:
@medeiom and pallesen - Why do you continue to refuse to provide ANY, just one supporting link to your claims?
You guys are wasting everyones' time. Seriously. Provide some proof. 14 recognized experts on this forum had the professional courtesy to NOT expect you to automatically believe us. So we provided multiple links to substantiate what we claimed.
So have the same professional courtesy with us, and backup your claims with some documented evidence.
Quote