# Pagefile confusion. Windows 10.



## m6tzg6r (Feb 8, 2018)

My pagefile was system managed, it was set to 1GB. Using MSI Afterburner to monitor pagefile it reports usages around 10GB in some games. Is that an accurate reading?

So pagefile is set to 1GB but it uses 10GB? How is that possible.

When it says using 10GB, where is that 10GB being used? My system drive?


----------



## Komshija (Feb 8, 2018)

Who knows whether MSI Afterburner makes accurate readings or not. I never heard of such issue, but if it's automatically managed and since you have 16 GB of ram it shouldn't take so much space - at least not by my opinion.
Anyhow, it depends how much storage the system leaves for the certain amount of RAM. I can check my system when I got home from work and write it down. It's possible that the system reserved up to 10 GB of space for 16 GB of RAM. It shouldn't bother you much. If it does, try setting it manually (custom) somewhere from 2048 MB min to 4096 MB max.


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 8, 2018)

I have my Pagefile on an separate SSD and set to 16GB playing heavily moded Skyrim SE using 4K textures and a butt load of other look good mods I can use upto 8~9GB's so yeah 10GB's for some games is quite accurate for some games they'll load in alot of textures and stream them in when needed... you say that your's was system managed which means it will grow and contract as needed if you don't want it to that and prefer it to use more ram then set it to 8GB's


----------



## m6tzg6r (Feb 8, 2018)

I played Doom for 5 minutes.
Top picture is with Pagefile set to use initial 4GB and maximum 8GB. 
Bottom pic is with Pagefile off. 
Results are basically the same.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Feb 8, 2018)

m6tzg6r said:


> My pagefile was system managed, it was set to 1GB. Using MSI Afterburner to monitor pagefile it reports usages around 10GB in some games. Is that an accurate reading?
> 
> So pagefile is set to 1GB but it uses 10GB? How is that possible.
> 
> When it says using 10GB, where is that 10GB being used? My system drive?


If the page file was set to system managed, then it wasn't set to 1 GB.  What you were seeing was the amount of space Windows was using under those circumstances. 

System managed means it will change as conditions change, expanding or decreasing to use what it needs.


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

my pagefile is set to off..  does every one  know what pagefile is.. or what its purpose is.. ??

trog


----------



## qubit (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> my pagefile is set to off..  does every one  know what pagefile is.. or what its purpose is.. ??
> 
> trog


I know what the pagefile is and turned it off when I was running W7. With 16GB RAM I've never had a problem. For W10 I didn't bother and just let Windows manage it.


----------



## erixx (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> my pagefile is set to off..  does every one  know what pagefile is.. or what its purpose is.. ??
> trog



Shouldn't you have known what it is, before turning it OFF?


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

erixx said:


> Shouldn't you have known what it is, before turning it OFF?



i do know what it is and what it does.. which is why mine is set at off and it has been for a very long time..

basically if any system is actually using its pagefile it will run like sick pig.. windows pagfile is a relic of the past when memory really was expensive and not having enough of it was common..

virtual memory.. a combination of real ram and pretend swap file memory.. one is fast the other as slow as a sick pig but limited only by the spare drive space.. make sure you have enough of the real stuff so that you never need the sick pig stuff.. if you do need the sick pig stuff it will be very very obvious..

trog

ps.. i like a small operating system (C drive) which is why i turn mine off.. plus many moons ago on this very forum i did it just to prove it could be done.. many people think its essential.. it isnt..


----------



## m6tzg6r (Feb 8, 2018)

So it turns out when MSI Afterburner is reporting "pagefile" usage, its actually reporting the Committed value.
Whoever designed that in Afterburner is to thank for my confusion.

Committed memory is the amount of virtual memory reserved for a process and it appears Windows 10 is more greedy with committed memory than previous versions of windows.
The amount of virtual memory available is the sum of physical memory and the pagefile size.





What you set as Initial is what size the pagefile.sys file will be. And that adds onto however much physical ram you have installed, which then equals the Committed amount.

Sorry if i'm replying with solutions to my own questions, but that's why i come to this forum, to think about PC troubles i have and maybe even help someone out in the process to better understand our hobby.


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

how mine looks with the pagefile set to off..






trog


----------



## Nosada (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> many people think its essential.. it isnt..


Even worse, it can severely hinder performance and downright crash a system in certain cases. I've been turning it off for years and have solved issues with it in certain cases. There's some older software that for some obscure reason will not run without a pagefile, but there is absolutely no logical reason to have it in a system with ample RAM.


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i do know what it is and what it does.. which is why mine is set at off and it has been for a very long time..
> 
> basically if any system is actually using its pagefile it will run like sick pig.. windows pagfile is a relic of the past when memory really was expensive and not having enough of it was common..
> 
> ...




With the modern operating systems, most of this isn't true anymore.  Windows 10 is actually pretty smart about using the page file.  On systems with plenty of RAM, like you and I with 32GB of RAM in your systems, disabling the page file has no real negative affect***.

However, Windows 10 likes to keep about 1/4 of the system memory in use idle when possible, and offload the non-essential crap, things that aren't going to slow down the user experience but still need to be running, to the page file.  This is why if you ever really looked, an 8GB system will have about 2GB of RAM in use when the computer is basically idle, a 16GB system will have about 4GB in use, but a 32GB+ system will only have about 5-6 because at that point it has put everything in RAM and doesn't need anymore space.

At the same time, with SSDs, the virtual memory is not nearly as slow as it used to be.  So needing to use a page file is not as agonizing as before.  When the system used to have to constantly swap out to the hard drive, it was painful for sure.  But then again, if you reached the point of being out of RAM and had no page file, worse things definitely start to happen.  For example, I use Kodi(at the time this happened XBMC) a lot to stream media from my home server to HTPCs on my TVs.  It buffers all the content, there is a setting that lets you adjust the amount of buffering it does that you change by editing a text file, and it buffers directly to RAM.  On one of my PCs that only had 4GB of RAM, Kodi was crashing constantly and I couldn't figure out why.  Turns out, by default, it was buffering too much data, and when it filled up the RAM it would just crash because I had turned the page file off.

Finally, while most of the time you can get away without a page file, there are occasions where some programs(I've even encountered a few games over the years) that will not work without a system page file.  They just give some kind of error and either won't run, or will load to a point then crash.  It is for this reason that I always set a small constant page file on all my systems.  On my 16GB systems I make it 4GB, and on my 32GB systems I make it 2GB.  On my 8GB systems I make it 8GB, and I won't have 4GB systems anymore...  Really, I don't see a reason to not have a small constant sized page file.  And if you have more than one drive in your system, you don't even have to have it on your system drive, just set it to use the secondary drive in the system.  And 2-8GB really isn't a huge amount of space to be loosing.



Nosada said:


> Even worse, it can severely hinder performance and downright crash a system in certain cases. I've been turning it off for years and have solved issues with it in certain cases. There's some older software that for some obscure reason will not run without a pagefile, but there is absolutely no logical reason to have it in a system with ample RAM.



I've encountered far more problems with having it off than having it on, I've never really run into any time when the page file crashed the system.  And please don't say "what about page_fault_in_non_paged_area", because that isn't caused by having the page file turned on.

As for the hindering performance, no it doesn't do that either.  Anyone that thinks it does has no clue how modern OSes(meaning anything Vista and newer) handle the page file.  It isn't a indiscriminate shared memory space that the system has no clue is there and will just use like normal RAM.  Modern OSes are incredibly smart, and will only use the page file if it absolutely needs to(AKA system RAM it totally full) or if the process it is putting in the page file is a background process that doesn't affect the user experience.  And they have gotten particularly good about the background process management in Windows 8 and 10.



m6tzg6r said:


> So it turns out when MSI Afterburner is reporting "pagefile" usage, its actually reporting the Committed value.



Sorry for the long post, but this is exactly what I came here intending to say.  MSI Afterburner's pagefile reading is misleading.


----------



## m6tzg6r (Feb 8, 2018)

When i have it system managed it puts it at 1GB, so not a huge waste of space, and it can increase as it needs to, but i do not max out my Committed memory so the pagefile size does not increase beyond 1GB. So looks like leaving it system managed is the best bet.

I just loaded up multiple games at once and my pagefile increased from the Initial 2GB i set to 4GB which was the maximum i set. Once the total Committed amount was full my games asked me to close them due to low memory.

But Committed memory should be physical and pagefile combined right? But if lets say ram is using 4gb, and the pagefile is using 2gb, that should equal 6gb, but instead i see values of 8gb, so how is the other 2gb being used? Something other than physical ram and pagefile?


----------



## Jetster (Feb 8, 2018)

Your page file is not just for extended ram. Without a page file you have no options for a crash dump. So when you error, you lose everything in ram.  Having a page file does not slow your system down if you have enough ram. Windows 10 is very good at managing this. Windows 7 not so much

Trog
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us...opriate-page-file-size-for-64-bit-versions-of


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

left to its own devices window occupies or sets aside a given amount of drive space to use if it needs to..

this amount is governed by the amount of ram installed.. the more real ram the more drive space windows sets aside for pretend ram.. in my case 32 gig of ram windows will set aside another 16 gig of pretend ram.. back to front logic if ever there was..

windows sets aside drive space because its quicker than creating it on the spot... but it can and will create as much of it as it needs.

and however fast people think an ssd drive is its a joke compared to real ram.. make sure you have enough of the real stuff.. then windows will never have to use the virtual pretend stuff..

i have been ruining no swap file for the the last 15 years.. most of that time with only 4 gig.. and the comment that some software looks for a swap file and wont run without one is also part of the past..

there isnt anything to be gained (expect drive space) by turning the pagefile off but on the other hand being as 99% of the time its doing nothing there is nothing to be lost ether..

i have given my reasons for running without one.. my reasons wont apply to most people.. so they are better off just leaving it to windows..

the only point i am making is that unless people are running systems with very low levels of installed ram.. some tablets fit this description.. all pagefile talk is confusing waffle.. most people havnt a clue as to what it is or how it works..

trog


----------



## John Naylor (Feb 8, 2018)

I have tested it with page file on and off and found little difference in performance in everyday work... fact is ... if it's there and you don't need it, it's just as if it wasn't there.  I have also seen problems when page file is too small, but never on our own machines.  However many apps, workstation apps in particular, force writes to temp and page files no matter how much RAM is available.  The one thing you can do about page files that is productive, is to not let Windows manage it, at least long term.   We place the fixed size page file as well as all temp files on their own partition right "behind" the OS partition when on mechanical drives.  Our machines are all 16 - 32 GB and yes, we still see page file activity.  By keeping page and temp files on the outside edge of the disk which is twice as fast as the inner, it insures optimum performance.  Outside of that, I would recommend complying with app vendor recommendations.  On SSds ,many folks are concerned about the constant writes leading to excessive wear.   Others say it's ridiculous and that SSDs never die within thir useful life.  I have 3 bricked ones that counter that 2nd claim but they are from the days when 120 GB was all that was affordable.  In short, not seen data to justify an opinion either way.   I haven't had cause to worry about it.  Good reading here:

https://mcpmag.com/Articles/2011/07/05/Sizing-Page-Files-on-Windows-Systems.aspx?Page=1
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/motiba/2015/10/15/page-file-the-definitive-guide/


----------



## DRDNA (Feb 8, 2018)

Lots of good info gents! I feel when in an Enterprise environment it is wise to keep a page file and also smart to manually  manage the size (standard for myself)
curious John Naylor as to what app you guys are using to placement for Pagefile on harddrive ? I know Defrags often have an option to optimize or prioritize hard drives.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> basically if any system is actually using its pagefile it will run like sick pig.. windows pagfile is a relic of the past when memory really was expensive and not having enough of it was common..


Here we go again.  Sorry, but that is just not true! Just because something has been around a long time does not make it a relic. Contrary to what some what everyone else to believe, the developers at Microsoft are not stupid! One of their top priorities is for Windows to optimize the hardware's performance! It is silly to think otherwise. If for no other reason, they want that to keep the haters from bashing Microsoft - again! 

Why would any developer of any program keep code in their program if it caused the system to run like a sick pig? They wouldn't. They would get rid of it. Even bad developers know that.

To suggest the page file in W7, W8, and especially W10 are relics is suggesting they are the same Page Files used in XP and previous versions of Windows. That is simply false. The PF in these modern versions has evolved significantly since 15+ years ago, and continues to evolve and improve.



DRDNA said:


> it is wise to keep a page file and also smart to manually manage the size (standard for myself)


No it is NOT wise to manually manage the PF size, not unless you are a genuine expert at virtual memory management, you know how to determine "*commit levels*" and you totally understand how "*pool usage*" and "*memory mapping*" works. If you are not a real expert, you need to understand and accept that the developers at Microsoft who developed the memory management and page file code are! They have decades worth of experience and exabytes of empirical evidence and scientific data from 100s of millions of computers to draw from.

Those who claim the modern versions of Windows does not need or does not use the Page File if you have lots of RAM installed clearly are NOT experts! Because that is simply wrong!!!!!

Those wannabe experts who disable the PF because they think they are smarter than the Windows (and Linux, MacOS and other OS) developers just outsmarted themselves. A real expert would want to know exactly what happened to their system should there be a system crash so they can troubleshoot, learn and prevent recurrence. But guess what? Disable the PF on the boot drive and you get no memory dumps to analyze. 

A real expert would want Windows to optimize memory to improve performance. But guess what? Disable the PF and Windows fetch routines (used to speed up program loads, for example) are defeated.

And if you do know what commit levels are and how to properly set your PF sizes, contrary to what these wannabe experts think, it is NOT a "set and forget" setting! "EVERY TIME" there is any significant change to the computer's hardware configuration, major OS updates, major changes or additions in the programs the user runs, changes in the number and type of users who use the computer, page file requirements are likely to change and the PF size should be adjusted. 

Why do you think Microsoft made the PF size "dynamic" when it would be so much easier to just set some arbitrary size?

Even if you have 32, 64, or 128GB of RAM installed, Windows will still use the Page File. And that's a good thing, not bad! 

If you need the extra few gigabytes of disk space you get by disabling the PF, you as the user have failed to properly setup and maintain your storage requirements! Disabling the PF is NOT the proper fix. That's like putting a piece of black tape over the Check Engine light in your car. And yes, it is a few, gigabytes. Microsoft does not set your PF to 1.5 X RAM as some suggest. That is a stupid formula that means nothing. 

Here is the Speccy report for my system, which has 16GB of system RAM installed. 

Physical Memory​Memory Usage    24 %​Total Physical    16 GB​Available Physical    12 GB​Total Virtual    18 GB​Available Virtual    13 GB​
What does that show? It shows my Windows managed page file (and I do know what commit levels, mapping, and pool usage are) is currently set to just 2GB, not some massive size like 24GB (16 x 1.5 = 24).

So again, if you are not a virtual memory management expert, JUST LET WINDOWS MANAGE IT! If you are a true expert, it is NOT a "set and forget" settings. And if you are an expert, do NOT assume what is good for you is good for everyone else - it likely isn't.


DRDNA said:


> I know Defrags often have an option to optimize or prioritize hard drives.


Just remember, SSDs on  normal consumer computers don't need and don't get defragged - ever! And Windows will automatically defrag hard drives. So again JUST LET WINDOWS MANAGE IT! 

W7, W8, and especially W10 are NOT Windows XP. So we need to stop treating them like they are. The default settings in Windows most likely really are the best settings for your computer - regardless who you are or how you have your computer hardware configured.

If you want to set a manual size, fine. That is certainly your right. But don't let anyone on this, or any other site tell you that you don't need a PF, or what size to set it to. You need to calculate that yourself. Don't know how? That should tell you to let Windows manage it. But if still stubborn, do it right. Study Mark Russinovich's (the world's preeminent - I kid you not! - expert on virtual memory management) Pushing the Limits of Windows: Virtual Memory and learn about commit limits, pool usage, and memory mapping and do it the right way.


----------



## DRDNA (Feb 8, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> Here we go again.  Sorry, but .


Normally in an Enterprise arena the end users are NOT configuring their systems, the IT department is and the end users normally do NOT have Admin level rights to do so but the Tech in the IT department at Enterprise arena's do have the knowledge to understand how to and what size the page file should be with in the department of said computers.... but hey maybe your just trying to be funny.

Also worth a mention is Defrag tools will NOT even try and defrag a SSD so what are you on about here exactly? They will however Trim it


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> Here we go again.  Sorry, but that is just not true! Just because something has been around a long time does not make it a relic. Contrary to what some what everyone else to believe, the developers at Microsoft are not stupid! One of their top priorities is for Windows to optimize the hardware's performance! It is silly to think otherwise. If for no other reason, they want that to keep the haters from bashing Microsoft - again!
> 
> Why would any developer of any program keep code in their program if it caused the system to run like a sick pig? They wouldn't. They would get rid of it. Even bad developers know that.
> 
> ...




i have manged for a great many years without one on my main desktop machine bill.. can you please explain to me how i have managed to do this if having one is essential.. 

also if a swap file is essential why does windows give you the option to turn such an essential thing off.. 

i await your answer bill.

and you are right about the "here we go again".. swapfile discussions have been cropping up on this forum for more years than i care to remember.. taking part in such discussions was one of the reasons i first turned mine off.. its been off as my standard practice along with the hibernation file i never use ever since.. it saves me 30 gigs of disk space on my small easy to back up C drive..

trog


----------



## erixx (Feb 8, 2018)

How hard to wash of those damn snake oil stains!


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i have manged for a great many years without one on my main desktop machine bill.. can you please explain to me how i have managed to do this if having one is essential..


Where did I say it was essential for Windows to run? I didn't.

Why do you assume, "because it didn't break anything" is a valid excuse to disable it? That, to me, is like saying I got rid of my spare tire. I never got a flat so I guess I was right to get rid of my spare tire. Is a spare tire essential? Nope.

Why do you assume because you cannot "see" any degradation that disabling the PF is "better". 

Why do you assume just because Microsoft gives the option to disable the PF that disabling the PF is "better". They give the option to run without any security. Does that mean it is better? They give us the option change display resolutions to something other than the recommended setting. Does that mean it is better to change them?

Show us a real study - with scientific tests that actually measure results - that shows, for the majority of users,  disabling the PF is "better". 

Show us where running without a PF for years without problems is valid evidence and justification for running without a PF in Windows 10 to make it run "better".

Are you a virtual memory expert? Do you fully understand commit levels, pool usage, memory mapping? If so, great! But that again does not mean what works for you is best for everyone, or anyone else.



DRDNA said:


> Normally in an Enterprise arena


What does the Enterprise arena have to do with discussions in these forums where we have "normal" users in home environments? 

Using exceptions to justify a cause, as though the exceptions apply to the majority is just twisted. I really don't understand why some feel citing some unrelated example is valid rationalization to justify their position - especially in technical debates!



trog100 said:


> also if a swap file is essential why does windows give you the option to turn such an essential thing off..


Because (1) there is in some cases, reason to move the PF to a secondary and faster or larger drive. So you may want to disable it on the boot drive. And there are some cases, POS computers or "workstations" for example, where a PF is not needed. But again, those are exceptions, not the normal, home computer scenarios.


----------



## Jetster (Feb 8, 2018)

In the March addition of MaximumPC there is a good article on streamlining and optimizing Windows. What services, features. You can shut off. Nowhere does it sujest messing with the page file.


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

yes bill.. sorry i misunderstood you i thought you were saying it is essential.. now you claim you never said that.. he he

my mistake.. he he

trog


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> yes bill.. sorry i misunderstood you i thought you were saying it is essential.. now you claim you never said that.. he he
> 
> my mistake.. he he


"he he?"
Now I "claim"? You are welcome to show where I have ever said, or claimed it is "essential" - if you can.

For the record, just because something is not essential, that in no way suggests disabling it is optimal, better, desirable or right. 

Windows will run without page file. I have never, as in NEVER EVER said, "claimed", implied or suggested it wouldn't run. I have only said and suggested there is no evidence anywhere stating or claiming it is "better" to disable it, or that running with it makes Windows run like a sick pig. 

So you are also welcomed to show any study showing it is better to disable it too - if you can.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> yes bill.. sorry i misunderstood you i thought you were saying it is essential.. now you claim you never said that.. he he my mistake.. he he trog


He was like this in one of the other threads. Ignore him.
If you have had no ill effects from running without a pagefile, then turn it off. My recommendation, based on extensive and ongoing deployment practices, is that if you're going to turn it on, lock it down by setting the minimum and maximum to the same size.


----------



## trog100 (Feb 8, 2018)

bill i never said it it was better to disable it.. all i have ever said is that it isnt essential and windows will run perfectly fine without it and if it dosnt the system need more ram..

most people seem to wrongly think a page file is essential.. it isnt and i try and put people right on this widely held misconception.. 

the bottom line is pagfile on off or limited it dosnt matter a jot.. assuming the system has enough ram.. if it dosnt have enough ram the answer to that is easy..

trog


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> He was like this in one of the other threads. Ignore him.


And he was pretending to be an expert in that other thread too. 

He does not have the expertise, experience or years of empirical evidence or scientific data Microsoft has. Nor has he analyzed your system so he cannot recommend what is best for you.


trog100 said:


> bill i never said it it was better to disable it.. all i have ever said is that it isnt essential and windows will run perfectly fine without it and if it dosnt the system need more ram..


And I am saying "perfectly fine without it" is not the point. The point/question every one considering disabling their PF should be asking is, "_is it better to run without it?_" 

If there is no legitimate "exception to the norm" reason to disable it, don't! Especially if you don't know what commit levels, pool usage, and memory mapping is all about, or how to use them to determine the optimal size for your system.

And don't set your minimum and maximums the same size. That is just poor advice as its a needless waste of disk space. The only exception to that would be if you moved your primary PF to a secondary disk. Then setting a small fixed size PF for memory dumps on the boot drive makes sense.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 8, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> And he was pretending to be an expert in that other thread too.





Bill_Bright said:


> He does not have the arrogance, agenda or years of assumptive, profit focused data Microsoft has.


Fixed that for you. Microsoft does what it feels will make money. My job is to make systems run smooth and stable, long term.


----------



## erocker (Feb 8, 2018)

Leave it system managed and forget about it. There’s very little reason to mess with a page file in Windows 10.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Fixed that for you.


That's not fixing. That's intentionally misquoting another, and totally inappropriate. 

Arrogance is expecting others to take what you say simply because you said it. Arrogance is telling readers to ignore others. Arrogance is refusing to show any supporting evidence when asked then claiming you 





lexluthermiester said:


> Don't need to


. Arrogance is hiding behind an anonymous username while claiming the widely recognized, world renown real expert, Mark Russinovich is wrong and then claiming 





lexluthermiester said:


> I *am* an expert


 and telling others to make critical adjustments to their systems without even analyzing it first.  



lexluthermiester said:


> Microsoft does what it feels will make money.


Oh, you mean like developing an operating system designed to optimize the capabilities of the hardware it is running on? 

That comment, and the disdain for Microsoft you showed (and admitted to) in that other thread just illustrates YOUR biased motives, not Microsoft's. Microsoft is not a charity. They are a company. Of course they are in the business of making money. But to _imply_ Microsoft's motive to code Windows to manage virtual memory was done to make more money is just asinine.

Please, @erocker, shut this thread down.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 8, 2018)

What I see here is a bunch of members spouting off with no data on either side of the discussion!

If you cannot provide information, move along and stop arguing. Pretty simple!


----------



## natr0n (Feb 8, 2018)

Some programs need pagefile. It wont matter how much ram you have. Many paint.net/photoshop programs utilize page files. If a game needs more than you set it will overide whatever you type in.

You can set your pagefile on another drive if using an ssd to like 8-16gb and never worry about it.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

sneekypeet said:


> What I see here is a bunch of members spouting off with no data on either side of the discussion!


I hear you, but note Jetster provided a link in post #15. John Naylor provided two links in post 17. I provided a link to Mark Russinovich's tutorial in post #19 which was dismissed as just someone's opinion (indicating it clearly was not read).

And several others included links in that other thread here that either say to leave the PF alone and let Windows manage it, or explained in detail how to properly set it manually. 

Not one link to any source has been provided that says it is "better" to disable the PF!  Not one. 

Instead, we are told to be ignored and to just accept the opposing view because they claim they are the expert here.


natr0n said:


> You can set your pagefile on another drive if using an ssd to like 8-16gb and never worry about it.


Yes you can but not sure what you mean by "if using an SSD". Did you mean a small SSD? 

Note that SSDs are ideally suited for page files. As I noted in that other thread,


Bill_Bright said:


> To see why SSDs are ideally suited for Page Files, see Support and Q&A for Solid-State Drives and scroll down to, "_Frequently Asked Questions, Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs?_" While the article is getting old, it applies even more so today since wear problems of early generation SSDs are no longer a problem and each new generation of SSD just keeps getting better and better.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 8, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> With the modern operating systems, most of this isn't true anymore.  Windows 10 is actually pretty smart about using the page file.  On systems with plenty of RAM, like you and I with 32GB of RAM in your systems, disabling the page file has no real negative affect***.
> 
> However, Windows 10 likes to keep about 1/4 of the system memory in use idle when possible, and offload the non-essential crap, things that aren't going to slow down the user experience but still need to be running, to the page file.  This is why if you ever really looked, an 8GB system will have about 2GB of RAM in use when the computer is basically idle, a 16GB system will have about 4GB in use, but a 32GB+ system will only have about 5-6 because at that point it has put everything in RAM and doesn't need anymore space.
> 
> ...



Yup on mine i set 8192 and leave it at minimum and maximum, no ill effect. I still adjust services  too


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 8, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> I hear you, but note Jetster provided a link in post #15. John Naylor provided two links in post 17. I provided a link to Mark Russinovich's tutorial in post #19 which was dismissed as just someone's opinion (indicating it clearly was not read).



Post #15 says what it is, it does not state any data as to being better or worse outside of losing features by not having it active.  Post #17 describes how to manually set a page file in link one, link two is more of the same in more detail. No data on if it has to run or not. Even in your own link, there is no comparison to running with or without. Semantics man. Provide data of which is better with results showing why, not tutorials on how and why to have a page file.

I'm not for or against it, what I am for is proof of why you say what you do, with actual results on either side of the fence. Otherwise it is all just opinion on what you prefer to do.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 8, 2018)

If saving space on your SSD is really the only factor for turning it off just go into the options and put it on your HDD as I do, that way I have a pagefile "just in case/Windows recommends one" but it's not using space and constant writes on my SSD OS drive.

On a side note, I really feckin hate the way Windows 10 hides a lot of advanced user options like this when it was so easy to find with the old style (Windows 7 etc) control panel, becoming more like Apple everyday with their fancy looking icons and making everything "oh so easy" for users when it just makes it a pain in the ass for more advanced users, and don't even get me started on the quick access view when you open explorer, everyone knows it should open "this pc" as default.... I just reset my Windows a day or 2 ago so still kinda pissed I'm having to change all these things again just to get it to run like it should 



eidairaman1 said:


> Yup on mine i set 8192 and leave it at minimum and maximum, no ill effect. I still adjust services  too



Ha see the rest of my post, just popped mine back on my hdd 5 mins ago and set fixed 8192


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

sneekypeet said:


> Post #15 says what it is, it does not state any data as to being better or worse outside of losing features by not having it active.


So how is losing features _better_? That's what I am asking folks to justify.

You think people *telling others* to change default settings don't need to show cause or why that is "better",  but those recommending leaving the defaults as is do have to prove why leaving defaults is better? ???



> Post #17 describes how to manually set a page file in link one, link two is more of the same in more detail. No data on if it has to run or not. Even in your own link, there is no comparison to running with or without. Semantics man. Provide data of which is better with results showing why, not tutorials on how and why to have a page file.



My own link goes into detail about commit levels, paging pools and memory mapping - critical information needed to properly set the PF size manually. Are you really suggesting it is just fine to disable the PF even if you know nothing about those details?

I provided other links to other notable sites advising people to just let Windows manage it. Nobody has shown where changing the defaults is "better" yet you want me to prove leaving the defaults in place is better? Really?

Pretty sure unicorns don't exist, but sorry. I cannot prove it because there is no documented evidence they do or don't.

But it has been shown if you disable the PF, you don't get memory dumps to aid in troubleshooting. That's better???
If you disable the PF, routines that speed up programs loads are disabled. That's better???

https://lifehacker.com/5426041/understanding-the-windows-pagefile-and-why-you-shouldnt-disable-it
https://www.howtogeek.com/126430/ht...-windows-page-file-and-should-you-disable-it/

If you or others don't like those experts, can you please show us any documentation that shows disabling the page file is better for the normal, home computer users? Or are we just supposed to go by others saying, they didn't see any difference therefore disabling it must be better?


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 8, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> So how is losing features _better_? That's what I am asking folks to justify.
> 
> You think people *telling others* to change default settings don't need to show cause or why that is "better",  but those recommending leaving the defaults as is do have to prove why leaving defaults is better? ???
> 
> ...



You completely blew right past my point. On either camp, all you can do is say what it is for, nobody has yet to come in with any proof as to one working better than the other. (Sorry, but to me links you just posted which is tested in 2011 may not still ring true today)
For someone who is always poking at others about twisting words and comments you sure have a knack for it yourself. I am not one to argue with experts or those who write programs. There likely is a solid reason to keep it, but nobody has shown proof as to why, other than showing what you may lose by shutting it off. If you never use such features, is more features better than unused ones? Also I take what everyone says with a grain of salt. Realize man, there are people who swear the earth is flat, and at one time we were the center of the universe. All I am saying is stop bitching at each other, and rather than showing what the page file does, show charts/results/data in both cases where one is "better" than the other.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

NdMk2o1o said:


> On a side note, I really feckin hate the way Windows 10 hides a lot of advanced user options like this when it was so easy to find with the old style (Windows 7 etc)


Hidden? Okay, the Control Panel itself may not be readily seen but its not really hard to find. And once you find the control panel, the steps to manage the PF settings are exactly the same as W7. 

I do hear you however. The problem is, too many users dink with settings they really know nothing about - including the PF. Many do it because they did it with XP and therefore think it needs to be done with W10. Then Windows breaks and who gets blamed? Microsoft. 

Part of these decisions were pushed on Microsoft by the big builders too. Because Dell, HP, and the other big makes must provide 1 year of Windows tech support with all OEM/System builder's license, they too were getting flustered by having to spend so many resources (time, money and manpower) fixing users self-induced problems.

The fact is, if users leave their W10 systems in the default settings, W10s is more likely to keep chugging along just fine.


sneekypeet said:


> nobody has yet to come in with any proof as to one working better than the other.


I just showed you and there is lots of documentation showing that disabling the PF disables valuable features, can lead to stability issues and other problems.  So how is disabling the PF better? Why is there a double standard here? 

There is no documentation showing a Windows managed page file breaks Windows or any features. 
There is lots of documentation showing disabling the page file breaks features and can lead to stability issues. 


sneekypeet said:


> Also I take what everyone says with a grain of salt.


So do I! Which is exactly why I include links to sources and why I ask others to do the same.

So what are TPU readers supposed to do? Look for the experts, that's what. And we cited several who recommend  to just let Windows manage it. Not one souce was presented that recommends disabling it. Why is that not good enough for you?


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 8, 2018)

For one, it appears you want to argue for the sake of arguing, and picking only the bits from my post that fit your agenda.

A) The first bit you quoted, which is better. Showing me a link to some random guy doing testing in 2011 is not exactly relevant to today's systems, just saying as a doubting Thomas.
      Secondly, you glossed over the bit where I said, why are features I do not use or want better? This is by your own rationale!

B) Yes "looking" to the experts is fine. Blindly following them is something else.

As I said in my original comment, stop the moaning and prove what is better or move on. All I have seen is you relying on links to show why "you" use it. Not a single link has shown me in any recent testing, why I should go wither way.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 8, 2018)

sneekypeet said:


> B) Yes "looking" to the experts is fine. Blindly following them is something else.


Oh wow.

So blindly following the developer and multiple published and recognized experts is "something else". Yet following the advice of some anonymous forum poster who's only justification is that they didn't notice any different is fine to follow?



sneekypeet said:


> All I have seen is you relying on links to show why "you" use it.


Sorry, but that's not true at all!

I really don't want to argue - I am just trying to get people, including you, to accept the known facts that are already established.

I have my computers set to "windows managed" page files because nobody has shown me (this is that grain of salt thing) any supporting documentation that changing from the defaults is better. Why is that alone, not good enough?


sneekypeet said:


> Not a single link has shown me in any recent testing, why I should go wither way.


 Excellent point! I accept that. Then why change the page file settings then? Why should you (you being the crowd) think disabling the page file is better? Why do you, as a respected member of this site feel it is okay to have others tell readers to change/disable the page file when they have not presented any evidence whatsoever that it is better to make those changes, like you expect me to do?

What is best for the normal user? The user and TPU reader who does not know (and should not be expected to know) about commit levels, pool usage and memory mapping? Should they blindly follow the advice of an anonymous poster who offers no substantiating evidence but his own claims of being an expert? Or the advice of the program developer and multiple experts?

What is best for the normal user and reader of TPU? What is best for the OP? Because that is all that I want here. For the readers to get the best advice possible.

Again, I am not here to argue in spite of what you may want to believe. I am here to make sure users have the facts, all the facts they need to make an informed decision. That's it.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 8, 2018)

The reality is, if I do not use PF, I feel no pain as long as I do not need the features it offers. Two points to follow though. I do need enough RAM, and there are some applications which require a PF to run, more server/VM than not, but the issue is still there. Fact of the matter is, neither is faster or better, but without it you do get more free disc space.

Simply put, those experts are onto something if I am low on memory like in the olden days, but for most enthusiasts, which includes much of this site, the page file is not "needed!"


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2018)

Bill_Bright said:


> That's not fixing. That's intentionally misquoting another, and totally inappropriate.


It was a joke. Lighten up.


Bill_Bright said:


> Arrogance is expecting others to take what you say simply because you said it.


But that's not what happened. I expressed a methodology and logic behind it and qualified that the suggestions were based on a lot of first-hand professional, and personal, experience. That's not arrogance.


Bill_Bright said:


> Arrogance is telling readers to ignore others.


It was a suggestion based on observed behavior.


Bill_Bright said:


> Arrogance is refusing to show any supporting evidence when asked then claiming you don't need to.


I did, but it wasn't in response to you. And you effectively went on a rant about how wrong everything I said was. But I don't need to offer proof. It's easy to find. And it's arrogant of you to demand such. You see, there are search engines called google.com, bing.com, yahoo.com and so on that are extremely useful for finding more information. People ask questions of us techies, we respond and they then have more insight as to what to look up.


Bill_Bright said:


> telling others to make critical adjustments to their systems without even analyzing it first


The whole point of this thread was a request for advice and insight. I'm here to offer such.


Bill_Bright said:


> Please, @erocker, shut this thread down.


What was that about arrogance? You are trying to force your perspective on everyone and when we don't agree, you ask a mod to close the thread? 

The reality is, there are a variety of methods for managing a swap/page file. And each method has differing results. When people ask for advice about them, the perspectives offered will help them decide for themselves what will meet their needs.

EDIT; And to clarify; @m6tzg6r I advocate locking the size of the swap/page file by setting the min and max to the same size. On standard hard drives, not an SSD, this will limit fragmentation of the drive over long-term use. If you are doing anything on a regular basis that requires more memory than you have in physical ram, setting that size to 1.5x or 2x your ram will give a ton of virtual memory space, but at the cost of using up space on the drive. If you have a multi-TB drive this will not be a problem. With SSD's the fragmentation concern is not a problem. However, locking the size on an SSD still has a benefit as Windows will not be adjusting it constantly and thus leaving sectors all over the drive to be cleaned up by the TRIM functions of the SSD controller. This has the effect of limiting sector wear over the long term.

More details were explained in post #8 here;
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...disk-space-notification-in-windows-10.241267/


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 9, 2018)

There are two different virtual memory files one is called Pagefile.sys and the other is call Swapfile.sys you may find MSI Afterburner is looking at them as one and the same when they are not


----------



## DRDNA (Feb 9, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> What was that about arrogance? You are trying to force your perspective on everyone and when we don't agree, you ask a mod to close the thread?





sneekypeet said:


> For one, it appears you want to argue for the sake of arguing, and picking only the bits from my post that fit your agenda.


I agree that Bill has been VERY ABRASIVE in general and this is sad very sad! This is also a community of advanced users with many many IT Technicians, Managers, Coordinators and IT Procurement Specialist and some ordinary users too but this is TPU and we are advanced! Telling us to slow our roll is unwise in and of its self. I have now prepared my self for a response that is a wall of text going on about a lot of NOTHING!


----------



## m6tzg6r (Feb 9, 2018)

Seems the discussion about Pagefile has poeple on different sides of the fence, i say do as you wish, everyone knows how their computer operates and what they do on it, if a certain thing works for you then enjoy.


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 9, 2018)

NdMk2o1o said:


> On a side note, I really feckin hate the way Windows 10 hides a lot of advanced user options like this when it was so easy to find with the old style (Windows 7 etc) control panel, becoming more like Apple everyday with their fancy looking icons and making everything "oh so easy" for users when it just makes it a pain in the ass for more advanced users, and don't even get me started on the quick access view when you open explorer, everyone knows it should open "this pc" as default.... I just reset my Windows a day or 2 ago so still kinda pissed I'm having to change all these things again just to get it to run like it should



The page file setting is literally in the exact same place in Windows 7 and 10, accessed the same way through Control Panel -> System -> Advanced System Settings

It takes me about 5 minutes to get a fresh install of Windows 10 to the way I like it and almost running the same as Windows 7.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 9, 2018)

I apologize to all and especially to those who felt I've been too abrasive.

Please hear me out then I'll step out. 





> This is also a community of advanced users with many many IT Technicians, Managers, Coordinators and IT Procurement Specialist and some ordinary users too but this is TPU and we are advanced!





> everyone knows how their computer operates and what they do on it


I do agree there are many here who clearly are advanced users. And that is exactly why many come here seeking answers. But those who come seeking answers are NOT advanced users in that area of discussion - or else why would they be asking? And most who come seeking answers do not know how their computers work or again, there would be no need to seek help and ask the questions.

TPU is one of the top "technical" computer forums on the web with many users with advanced experiences from many areas within IT. That's why I come here! To help yes, but also to learn. I really don't care what other experts do their own system. They do (or should) know what is going on with their own computers and they already should understand commit levels, page pools, etc. in order to correctly set PF sizes, or whether or not disabling the PF is fine for them. And I am okay with that.

But again, TPU is a "technical" forum. So I care about what less experienced readers who come seeking advice about their computers are being told. 

I ask that you (speaking to everyone) do your own homework. If you are an advanced user, you should be an expert with Bing Google. Start by going back and look at the reasons given in the two threads people provided to justify disabling their page files.

You will find reasons similar to:
I disabled the Page File and noticed no difference.​I have lots of RAM so I don't need a Page File.​I don't want to wear out my SSD so I disabled the Page File.​I've been disabling the Page File for many years and never had a problem.​I don't want Microsoft telling me what to do.​
Does Bing Google support those reasons?

Now personally, I don't feel any of those reasons meet the criteria for being "technical" justifications. Do you? Do you see any "technical" reason for disabling the PF posted in either of these two threads?

I am not talking about personal "opinions". I am talking about technical "facts". Shouldn't facts outweigh opinions on "technical" issues?  Where are the technical "facts" that say disabling the PF is better? Or what are the technical "facts" that say letting Windows manage the PF is detrimental your computer's performance?

I don't want you to take my word for it! Look at all the links provided in these threads. Look at your own Bing Google search results. Do any recommend disabling the PF? Even with those that show how to properly set a manual size, do any recommend disabling it completely? Can you find one authoritative article (not just another forum poster) that recommends disabling the PF?

If you can, and it refers to a modern version of Windows - especially W10, please post it. If you can't, ask yourself why? 

And if you can't, is telling readers to disable the PF "technically" the right thing we, as advisers, should be telling readers?

Again, I am sorry for my abrasiveness. I can only tell you it is not personal but totally out of passion to ensure readers have the correct, and all the information they need to make informed decisions. Please do NOT use your personal feelings towards me to cloud your judgement over the technical facts your own research reveals, or the advise you give to TPU's posters.

Have a good day.


----------



## neatfeatguy (Feb 9, 2018)

I have had a few instances where if there was no page file set games would cause low memory issues; which in turn would cause the game to run sluggishly.

Last game I came into this issue was Shadow of Mordor. GTX 980Ti, 16GB RAM and I ran the game across 5760x1080. I could play the game for 10 minutes some days or hours on other days before the low memory issue struck. Sure, the game was utilizing all 6GB of VRAM, but only making use of 3-4GB of RAM.

Dinking around with settings in the game and so forth I found no solution. I eventually figured I'd check the pagefile - it was turned off. I turned it on and set it 4096MB. After that, no low memory issue with the game. I don't know why it was off for me since I never touched it before. Perhaps Windows 7 thought it was ideal to turn it off because I had just done a clean install of Windows on the new SSD I just installed.

So, in my opinion, I wouldn't recommend anyone to turning it off.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 9, 2018)

Am I the only one on this forum that just installs windows, lets it update and installs the basic drivers like Nvidia and then just uses the system normally for years? WTH does everyone seem to "fix" so much that isn't broken?


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 9, 2018)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Am I the only one on this forum ...


Nope, we just update graphics drivers more often


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 9, 2018)

newtekie1 said:


> The page file setting is literally in the exact same place in Windows 7 and 10, accessed the same way through Control Panel -> System -> Advanced System Settings
> 
> It takes me about 5 minutes to get a fresh install of Windows 10 to the way I like it and almost running the same as Windows 7.


Yea it was me being an idiot, I thought they replaced control panel with settings which does most of what control panel does though you cannot change pagefile from settings anywhere, also sure there used to be a link to cp with win+X though it's not the only way I could find control panel was to type it into start, needless to say I've pinned it to the task bar now


----------



## Bill_Bright (Feb 9, 2018)

NdMk2o1o said:


> I thought they replaced control panel with settings


They did, more or less. At least they are working their way towards getting rid of the CP completely. But it is still there. I created a shortcut to it and put it in my Quicklaunch tool bar - another well liked, but hidden feature from days past.

BTW, you can easily get to the Control Panel from within Settings by typing Control Panel in the Find a setting text box.





TheMailMan78 said:


> Am I the only one on this forum that just installs windows, lets it update and installs the basic drivers like Nvidia and then just uses the system normally for years?


No you are not. And actually, that is how most users do it because the default settings work.


----------



## Jetster (Feb 9, 2018)

That's the one thing I love about 10. Install it and forget it. Just works


----------



## Steevo (Feb 9, 2018)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Am I the only one on this forum that just installs windows, lets it update and installs the basic drivers like Nvidia and then just uses the system normally for years? WTH does everyone seem to "fix" so much that isn't broken?




I install windows, update, new drivers, disable a few services that I don't need, manually set pagefile to 2-3X RAM, and unless something major happens, I let windows do its thing.


----------

