HTPC Rookie
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2004
- Messages
- 588
If this has been answered before, sorry, I did do a search on "pagefile" and came back with enough hits to spend months digging though them.
Sitting at work now with Task Manager open. This machine has 1.5GB of physical RAM in it. Looking at the Performance tab in Task Manager, it shows 774MB of Physical Memory available. But for some reason I'm still 743MB into my pagefile.
Same thing happening at home. Have a new machine running nothing more than two console threads of F@H (X2 chip). Machine has 2GB of physical RAM, shows nearly a gig available, but I'm still around 500MB into the pagefile.
Is Task Manager known to be wrong on reporting pagefile usage, or is Windows XP just very inefficient at handling memory? Maybe Windows keeps some physical RAM available if it needs it? I'd add up all the Processes memory usage to see what the true total being used is, but by the time I finished it wouldn't be accurate anyways.
Sitting at work now with Task Manager open. This machine has 1.5GB of physical RAM in it. Looking at the Performance tab in Task Manager, it shows 774MB of Physical Memory available. But for some reason I'm still 743MB into my pagefile.
Same thing happening at home. Have a new machine running nothing more than two console threads of F@H (X2 chip). Machine has 2GB of physical RAM, shows nearly a gig available, but I'm still around 500MB into the pagefile.
Is Task Manager known to be wrong on reporting pagefile usage, or is Windows XP just very inefficient at handling memory? Maybe Windows keeps some physical RAM available if it needs it? I'd add up all the Processes memory usage to see what the true total being used is, but by the time I finished it wouldn't be accurate anyways.