Kind of. Can just speak for W2K right now, since my XP still waits, to be nlited. Windows suggests, as minimum, about 1.5 times of actual RAM-size for the pagefile. Have 3GB RAM now (just upgraded from 1GB), the minimum was suggested to be min and max 1.5GB before, it suggests 4.5GB for the pagefile now.. Never used more then 512MB though... (that´s, why I set it to 512MB and kept it) Waste of space ! That´s why I got RAM, so Windows shall use it ! Since I´m working with GIMP and Blender, there has to be a big temp-folder, of cause. (basically, half of my IDE-HDD, just for this purpose) The funny part about it is : It always worked without problems. (with more RAM, definitely faster, but same settings) But Windows increased the values dynamically, without any performance-gain ! (tested it, in several different setups, on my testpartition un-nlited) Same amount of pagefile used, same processor workload, same task, same speed... The only noticable (but neglectable) performance-gain was, when W98SE was installed on the IDE-HDD (C:), W2K and XP on the RAID0 (D:). The pagefiles were cross (D: for C: and vice versa). Agi