Very interesting information you've written here. And I think I'm convinced
enough by it to do the same. Many thanks, CH.
K.
2009/8/15 C.H.Ling <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 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/
>
>
--
Khen Lim - Zone-10 LLC, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
"To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards of people” - Emily
Cox
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them" - Walt
Disney
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|