Out of RAM, what about HDD?

Is this how you did it?

Run cmd as admin:

Code:

bcdedit /set IncreaseUserVa 2600

restart PC.

If it fails, lower the value - experiment.

To remove it:

Code:

bcdedit /deletevalue IncreaseUserVa

If you used a 4GB patcher, there should be a backup copy of the game exe in game folder. Rename it back to original, and delete the patched exe.

Also, 5GB paging file (virtual memory) is enough for 3GB RAM. You don't need 9-16GB.

I did that as 2700 and after I set that as 4000 (I know 3GB is equal to 3072 MB but I wanted to program be at full capacity and to set maximum allocation.)
I used CFF explorer and developers of the game say that patching is needed. So it shouldn't be a problem.
Actually, I tried to lower UserVa value, but program has crashed faster while value is lowering.
So i'm going to lower the virtual memory, but isn't there any solution really?

To be honest:
- You need approximately 1GB memory for Windows itself
- That leaves you with 2GB memory
- x86 apps can only address 2GB memory (unless patched, but this is mostly for 64bit OS with more RAM)

I would just remove the patch, and remove the bcdedit entry (in my first post).

developers of the game say that patching is needed

Can you give a link to this? I bet they are talking about 64bit systems.

I understood how much virtual memory is used on the Processes>Commit. But it was 3 not 0, i was false.

GokAy, i did that already but still crashing. Yes it is for 64bit systems but there is also /3GB switch on 32 bit OS. So I tried this because here is saying later Windows model are be able to /3GB switch.

Problem is all about the virtual adress space, is it? So I'm going to change my windows to 64bit. Actaully my processor is 64 bit and motherboard also. But i have no more RAMs than 4 GB and my taiwan-made motherboard supports up to 4 GB though it is 64 bit. I didn't understand that situation. But I read something that telling about like "x64 OS hasn't got so many positive effects on 4GB or lesser memory systems."

What can I do, do I have to change my OS bit support?

Is my processor' effectiveness going to be lowered? (Actually its effectiveness have no big importance to me just for curiosity)

Another victim of Microsoft's word play:

swift31 said:

I read about something that uses HDD space when there is no more space in RAM called "Virtual Memory".

Microsoft seems to have invented this ruse in the mid- or late-1990s. I guess Virtual Memory sounds sexier and more attractive than Demand Paging, the latter being a correct description of what you're referring to, while the former is something else entirely.

Windows (and most GP operating systems) have both paging and VM. But they're two different things. Virtual Memory has nothing to do with disk storage. Yet a generation has grown up with the false notion that it does.

Any CS student knows better. So does Microsoft. Read the MS/Richter books from that era. He lays out the plain facts, with no mention of the ruse. (I don't think he's the perpetrator.)

carwiz said:

A 32-bit program on a 32-bit Windows 7 will get 2GB. A 32-bit program compiled PAE aware will get 4GB on a 64-bit Windows 7; Otherwise, it gets assigned 2GB.

With CFF Explorer, 4GB Patcher like programs, allowing more than 2 GB to use is equal to compiling PAE aware? So my games executable file has got non-2gb limit version, and is it true to change my windows up to 64 bit?

Edit: Actually, you're saying it is limited to 2 GB but I'm seeing that game is using 2.6 GB memory around right now. I guess, I didn't understand this memory stuff completely.

There is an important detail about these 4 GB Patcher utilities that is rarely mentioned:

By default a 32 bit process receives a 2 GB virtual address space. Note that this is address space, not RAM. They are very different but I won't go into that here. A 32 bit OS can be configured to increase this to 3 GB and a 64 bit OS automatically to 4 GB. But this is opt in for 32 bit processes. They must specifically indicate to the OS that they are prepared to accept this or they will receive the normal 2 GB of address space. The 4 GB patcher utilities sets the Large Address Aware flag in the application that tells the 32 bit application to request this. The problem being that you may be forcing the application to lie about it's capabilities. The application may not be able to function properly (or at all) in such an environment. The fact that the developer did not set the flag himself indicates that the application was probably never tested in this way and may have serious problems with it. This includes many popular commercial applications. Testing an application for this is very complex and may not be completely reliable. The results of improperly setting the flag are unpredictable but often nasty. And the problem may only occur under unusual situations.

Note that the flag is "Large Address Aware", not PAE as mentioned in a previous post. PAE is something very different and of no consequence to applications.

Memory management in a modern OS is VERY complex. I have spent considerable time studying it and make no claims of understanding it fully.