The memory is now very cheap, 2x2GB 800MHz CL5 only cost $46 here so I had
my computer upgraded few weeks ago. I created a RAMDISK of 2.5GB because PS
can easily write a temp file of over 1.5GB when you edit a single 120MB
file. Sometimes I need to work with even larger files so 2.5GB is more safe.
I don't see reserving more memory to PS will help here. Actually, I didn't
see my computer running faster when upgraded from 1GB to 2GB RAM some time
ago but I do see improvement when using the RAMDISK to save PS temp file.
I don't know how the RAMDISK software work, I just use PC Wizard 2009 to
check both my Seagate 500GB and the RAMDISK, the RAMDISK just run at least
12 times faster.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Lazzari"
> >
>> Yes, XP only addressable to 2GB, as I memtioned below I have assigned
>> 2.5GB
>> > as RAMDISK with Vsuite Ramdisk, the software can access to the hidden
>> > memory.
> I've thought about setting up a RAMdisk as I had on my old 8086 but
> don't see much benefit. In that box I had a big RAMdisk card full of
> memory which originally cost over $2k. Maybe I'm wrong about the current
> systems and should try a RAMdisk.
>
> First of all I thought that windows32bit could address something like
> 3.2gb? At least that's what my computer reports depending on switches
> set in boot.ini. I believe it reserves some of that memory for its own
> use, e.g. addressing the video. Maybe that's where you get the +/-2gb
> _usable_ memory. In any event the memory between the usable amount and
> the addressable 3.2gb would not be available for a RAMdisk. Or at least
> it would be counter productive as it reduces the usable amount addressed
> directly by windows for apps. Perhaps it would be beneficial if you had
> more that 4gb installed on a 32bit system.
>
> Secondly, How does windows address the RAMdisk? I assumed that it would
> have to page it in/out in blocks using available memory? If so this
> would increase the memory windows reserves and further reducing direct
> access memory used for apps. Also this paging would be a bottleneck
> slowing the RAMdisk memory. True, still much faster than a swap to hard
> disk but wouldn't it be faster to just let windows use the memory and
> paging block for apps? It seems to me that with 4gb of RAM on a 32bit
> system a RAMdisk would have to be smaller than 1gb and that seems hardly
> worthwhile. But my presumptions may easily be way out of date.
>
> Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|