Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Get Windows XP x86 to recognize more than 4Gb with PAE?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#76
AnX

AnX

    Fighting for the right to OS since 2010

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 197 posts
  • Joined 20-June 12
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Thanks for all the help. I'll test all these methods in a VM.


Dual boot Windows XP SP3 x86 and Windows Vista SP2 x64.

AMD FX-8320 8-core CPU with Hyper 212 Evo, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, 8GB 1600 RAM, 60GB SSD (8.1) and 500GB HDD (XP), Sapphire R7 260X 2GB Graphics Card, 620W Seasonic S12II, CM HAF 912 case.



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#77
AnX

AnX

    Fighting for the right to OS since 2010

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 197 posts
  • Joined 20-June 12
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Installed this onto my machine and mother's laptop, hers is an Intel Celeron 1007U with HD graphics, both work just fine. My main system is an AMD FX-8320 with an AMD R7 260X GPU (gonna install a 750 Ti as radeon graphics support is mediocre).

A PSA: Hibernation does not work at all with PAE. Standby only works while using certain Radeon/Intel GPUs, and all nVidia GPUs.
If you can live without the above two, you're good.


Edited by AnX, 17 February 2015 - 07:42 AM.

Dual boot Windows XP SP3 x86 and Windows Vista SP2 x64.

AMD FX-8320 8-core CPU with Hyper 212 Evo, ASUS M5A99FX PRO R2.0 Motherboard, 8GB 1600 RAM, 60GB SSD (8.1) and 500GB HDD (XP), Sapphire R7 260X 2GB Graphics Card, 620W Seasonic S12II, CM HAF 912 case.


#78
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

What method did you use?  I'm about to take my first crack at PAE; I want to use the unallocated part of 8GB RAM for a pagefile.



#79
noric

noric

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 18 posts
  • Joined 08-December 14
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I suggest that you guys use the Chinese patch. It's straightforward and also does the best job, apparently.



#80
dencorso

dencorso

    Iuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 6,220 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

@bluebolt:

Fact is that the mods discussed in this thread remain unreliable.
 
OTOH, simply activating /PAE on boot.ini and adding a Gavotte ramdisk using PAE remains a good option for those using XP x86 and having more than 3.2 GiB RAM. If the resulting ramdisk is big enough, after setting DisablePagingExecutive=1, one can even put the pagefile in it, besides things like the Temporary Internet Files...
 
BTW: Gavotte Ramdisk Version History and Read Me in English.



#81
noric

noric

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 18 posts
  • Joined 08-December 14
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Indeed, but if you guys don't encounter critical (to you) problems with usb devices, you may be sure that it's worth it. PAE works quite well, better than a page file on a ram drive. For example, VirtualBox can't use page file, but takes advantage of PAE.

 

Ps: also, xp doesn't use the page file very well, imho, because it tries to avoid swapping data to the page file, so you will hardly benefit from your page file even if you put it on a ram drive. I know because I used that solution for a couple of years before trying the PAE patch.


Edited by noric, 17 February 2015 - 01:16 PM.


#82
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

@bluebolt:
 

Fact is that the mods discussed in this thread remain unreliable.
 
OTOH, simply activating /PAE on boot.ini and adding a Gavotte ramdisk using PAE remains a good option for those using XP x86 and having more than 3.2 GiB RAM. If the resulting ramdisk is big enough, after setting DisablePagingExecutive=1, one can even put the pagefile in it, besides things like the Temporary Internet Files...
 
BTW: Gavotte Ramdisk Version History and Read Me in English.

 

 

Thank you, dencorso, your post had caught my attention.

 

In regards to the “DisablePagingExecutive” link, I’m wondering whether that step is specifically required when using the Ramdisk for paging, or is it merely mentioned as a performance enhancement that should be used in any event?



#83
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

... xp doesn't use the page file very well, imho, because it tries to avoid swapping data to the page file, so you will hardly benefit from your page file even if you put it on a ram drive. I know because I used that solution for a couple of years before trying the PAE patch.

 

Were you using the page file in unallocated  RAM?

 

With 8GB RAM physically installed in a 32-bit system, I thought I needed PAE to “open up” (i.e. make available) all 8GB; from there the plan was to use 4GB for RAM in the conventional sense, and use Ramdisk to set up the other (unallocated) 4GB for the page file.



#84
noric

noric

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 18 posts
  • Joined 08-December 14
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

 

... xp doesn't use the page file very well, imho, because it tries to avoid swapping data to the page file, so you will hardly benefit from your page file even if you put it on a ram drive. I know because I used that solution for a couple of years before trying the PAE patch.

 

Were you using the page file in unallocated  RAM?

 

With 8GB RAM physically installed in a 32-bit system, I thought I needed PAE to “open up” (i.e. make available) all 8GB; from there the plan was to use 4GB for RAM in the conventional sense, and use Ramdisk to set up the other (unallocated) 4GB for the page file.

 

Yes, I was. I used Primo Ramdisk for that. It can create a ram drive in unallocated memory. No need for PAE if that's what you're after. But be aware that xp doesn't let programs swap very much.



#85
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,215 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag
And now, for NO apparent reason:
http://www.msfn.org/...and-contiguous/
http://www.msfn.org/...it-environment/
(and no, let's not start the usual discussion on pagefile size and *need*)

jaclaz

#86
dencorso

dencorso

    Iuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 6,220 posts
  • Joined 07-April 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

In regards to the “DisablePagingExecutive” link, I’m wondering whether that step is specifically required when using the Ramdisk for paging, or is it merely mentioned as a performance enhancement that should be used in any event?


By disabling the PagingExecutive one prevents the Kernel and all Drivers from being paged by Win NT. Other things continue to be paged normally. Now, since the Gavotte Ramdisk is itself implemented as a Driver (viz. rramdisk.sys), one cannot risk allowing the OS to try to move that driver to the pagefile, because it actually holds the pagefile in itself and, hence, the the system will crash on attempting it. However, there no sure way to prevent the OS from moving just rramdisk.sys... the best that can be done is to disable the PagingExecutive, and it works great.



#87
bluebolt

bluebolt

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined 11-March 13
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

Wonderful, thanks.

Next:  my understanding is that when one uses PAE on a 32-bit system with, for example, 8GB of RAM, the system can then use all 8GB, but there is a drawback (so-called PAE overhead) compared to a 64-bit system with 8GB of RAM.

 

Question:  if we only use 4GB of RAM as such (using the other 4GB for a pagefile), do we still encounter the overhead?

 

https://msdn.microso...6(v=vs.85).aspx

[“With PAE, the operating system moves from two-level linear address translation to three-level address translation.”



#88
TELVM

TELVM

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 337 posts
  • Joined 09-February 12
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag
... there is a drawback (so-called PAE overhead) compared to a 64-bit system ...

 

Yep the PAE overhead adds some drag, specially in floating point performance. See this comparison of Se7en x86 vs x64 running Linx, both on same system with 16GB of RAM:

 

http://www.msfn.org/...-3#entry1075735

 

That said, in typical use the 'seat of the pants' is very similar.

 

 

Question:  if we only use 4GB of RAM as such (using the other 4GB for a pagefile), do we still encounter the overhead?

 

Yes, plus the overhead from the ramdisk application. But you may not notice any extra drag. In fact if you move the pagefile, enviroment variables %TEMP% and %TMP%, etc. to ramdisk you'll most probably feel it faster.



#89
noric

noric

    Newbie

  • Member
  • 18 posts
  • Joined 08-December 14
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

As TELVM said, the PAE overhead isn't probably noticeable by the user.



#90
xrayer

xrayer

    RayeR

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Joined 15-May 07
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

However, there no sure way to prevent the OS from moving just rramdisk.sys... the best that can be done is to disable the PagingExecutive, and it works great.

 

I belived that windows (and other OSes) use non-paged pool memory for critical things like ISRs and drivers to prevent be paged out. What do you exactly mean by "disable the PagingExecutive"? You mean disable page file in control panels?


Win98(SE)CZ unofficial support site.
Running MSDOS 6.22, FreeDOS, Win98SE+KEX-4.5.2+nSP+nUSB, NT4.0-SP6, WinXP-SP3, Debian Linux
Gigabyte GA-P31-DS3L, Core 2 Duo E8600@3,6GHz, 4GB DDR2, GF7900GT/256M, SSD Samsung 840 Pro, WD1000FBYX SATA, SB Audigy 2


#91
jaclaz

jaclaz

    The Finder

  • Developer
  • 15,215 posts
  • Joined 23-July 04
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

 

However, there no sure way to prevent the OS from moving just rramdisk.sys... the best that can be done is to disable the PagingExecutive, and it works great.

 

I belived that windows (and other OSes) use non-paged pool memory for critical things like ISRs and drivers to prevent be paged out. What do you exactly mean by "disable the PagingExecutive"? You mean disable page file in control panels?

 

No, he means "DisablePagingExecutive":

https://technet.micr...y/cc959492.aspx

https://technet.micr...y/cc757875.aspx

 

 

jaclaz



#92
TELVM

TELVM

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 337 posts
  • Joined 09-February 12
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

While we're at it and just for the record I'd like to paste here the best info about DisablePagingExecutive and LargeSystemCache that I've ever found in my travels:

 

"I've been a certified MS Engineer since the late 90s.

 

DisablePagingsExecutive
On a desktop OS (which is really just the server OS with a features removed), turning on DisablePagingExecutive means:

 

The kernel will NEVER be paged out of ram. It IS acceptable to page the kernel! Why? the swap file is part of the memory management system. At first, it MUST be loaded to ram, but then it can be swapped out if the system NEEDS to memory, and it's NOT the last to go. I've watched with tools, and as memory use grows, it starts swapping out idle parts of the kernel along with other idle services, drivers, DLLs, exes, etc. Remember the paging file is part of the virtual memory system. So setting this to 1 SHOULD NEVER, EVER slow your system down. In fact on low memory systems, it will greatly speed things up. On high memory systems 4, 8, 16, 32 GB of RAM, the setting will have little effect, but it will NOT slow it, nor will it harm it. IMO it's best to PREVENT the kernel from EVER being swapped. That way if you do use up your memory, the system will be more responsive while under load, and once the memory is free and the system is loading things back in from the paging file(s). This way the kernel is right in memory and windows stays a bit faster.

 

LargeSystemCache
Yes this is the flag for servers, but it, in no way slow your system down, NOR will it give ANY CPU priority to background services, apps, tasks, etc!

 

Here is why the old way to get this was to be optimized for a server. If , on a server, you chose that the server would be mostly used for file access, etc, it would set this to a 1. This way you get a NICE, BIG HD cache to reduce thrashing of the HDD(s). It in NO WAY adjusts system priorities. There are other options where you get a small cache on a server. This is for databases that use RAM to cache themselves (MS SQL, Exchange, etc). I see no reason NOT to enable LargeSystemCache. This will cause Windows to use ALL of your available memory for the HDD cache, and I do mean ALL of it. There are pros and cons.

 

Cons:
1a) slower load times from login screen to desktop to when the HDD stops thrashing about? Why?
1b) This is because up SUPERFETCH AND the largesystem cache. Why?
1c) Superfetch keeps track of all your most run programs, and pre-caches their DLLs, exes, and even some data files. With Superfetch on and LargeCache on, once the system is at the login screen, Superfetch will keep pre-caching until 1) ALL free memory is cache memory, 2) There is nothing more to pre-cache in which case, you will have some cache and some free memory. As soon as you start using windows, the read cache will fill the rest up quickly

 

Pros:
1) Once superfetch has pre-cached things, programs, games, etc will load lightning fast
2) if you've have 8GB of memory, win 8 takes 2GB, the game takes 2GB, that leaves 4GB to cache the game... as the game plays, it will eventually no longer need to read the HDD (or very little)
3) if the system needs free memory, and all thats left is CACHE, a few things happen, and windows makes a few QUICK decisions
3a) Any idle programs, dlls, services, etc are IMMEDIATELY swapped to the page file (windows wants to preserve as much as the cache as it can)
3b) While 3a is going on, if the data can't be swapped out fast enough, the read cache is instantly wiped out (not all of it, but as much memory that is needed) and converted to free memory
4) this all happens in a few seconds
5) Once the program/game unloads, the stuff that was swapped out, ACTUALLY STAYS swapped out until it's needed, and superfetch kicks in and starts pre-caching again

 

If you have write back cache enabled on your drives, and lets say you are copying a 16GB file... ALL free memory will be used for that write back cache. Windows will write the data to memory cache, then to the HDD in the most efficient way.. but lets say you are copying that 16GB file, and while you are doing it, you fire up a program that wants 4GB of ram... Windows CAN NOT just wipe the cache part of memory like it does for read data! In this case, EVERY idle app, service, etc gets swapped. If that's not enough, then ACTIVE things get swapped, and the system gets VERY SLOW until that write operation finishes and the write cache empty... this is a RARE circumstance.

 

IMO the PROs far outweigh the cons. So I keep both DisablePagingExecutive and LargeSystemCache set to 1."

 

http://windowssecret...ll=1#post927812

 

 

 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users