I have this extra stick on 512 RAM that I know works with my 2GB, running Vista x64, do you think I should install it (would make my memory single channel) or keep the dual channel 2GB?
Suggest you benchmark with and without. It's almost certainly going to slow things down - how bad, only expermentation can tell you that.
How about minimizing the pagefile usage? Right now Windows is using the same amount of physical ram as pagefile (1.02GB)
Apparently Dual Channel isn't as important on AMD CPU's (something to do with the Memory Controller being on the CPU), i don't know if it's true or not though. Never the less, most people would say it makes a difference of around 5 - 10%. Then you would have the Command Rate, although i am not sure about DDR2, i would guess that you are using two sticks of RAM with 1T, right? If you are then adding that third stick would almost certainly make it 2T as well as losing Dual Channel. Personally i don't think the extra capacity is going to outweigh that. I asked a similar thing myself, i had 2 x 1GB and 2 x 256MB and i decided against adding them, even although i would keep Dual Channel i didn't think the extra 512MB would be used. That said i don't have Vista and i imagine the extra 512MB would be used by your system, i would try what Pat the Cat mentioned, testing it out for yourself is probably the only way you will find out.
How would I test that? The most ram-using game I know of is STALKER (1.7GB with prefetch on the biggest level, 1.7GB pagefile), and I can play that on the highest settings with no stuttering......I wonder how much ram Crysis and Bioshock will use. 3Dmark would give lower scores since it doesn't use that much ram
Don't know really. I suppose you would just have to try it out with your normal day to day use of your computer. If you don't think you will use over 2GB then i don't see any point in adding it.
Well, can somebody explain the pagefile in depth, and why programs use equal amounts of the physical ram and the pagefile? And registery tweaks I could use to force more into physical ram?
I don't think the Page File and RAM are used in Equal Amounts, if the RAM is being used then it's being used and the Pagefile kicks in. To be honest i don't know much about it and i couldn't explain it in detail. I think you're getting this equal idea from looking at the Task Manager Performance tab and PF Usage, then you're saying that's how much RAM you're using. I have heard that it is an indication of how much RAM is being used, but it isn't completely accurate. As i said, i don't know really how it works. You could turn off the Page File and that will make you use the RAM, but that might cause more problems than it's worth. That said i have heard that some people do turn off the Page File with 2GB of RAM or more. Hopefully someone that knows about this will tell you how it works. I only have an idea of what happens.
Nah, I know that you can't turn off the pagefile, I even tried to limit it to 1024 and Vista just ignored me and made a new 2GB pagefile (Now taskmanager shows 3GB......)
Modern systems do not use the pagefile as if it were RAM (like the 9x series did). Similar but not the same, which is why you have to have some pagefile or you get massive slowdowns. Basically if you have 4gb of ram you need a pagefile of about 6gb (1.25 to 1.5x the amount of ram) and with 2gb you need a 3gb page file, 2.5gb 3.75gb. This is so Windows can move the stuff from the ram out of the way for the app you are currently using and back and forth. The xtra 0.25 - 0.5x is for if windows needs more ram than you currently have and for swaping.
